## THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

November 4. 1971

Miss Nae#ni

Haney County **Attorney** Opinion No. **M-986** PotterCounty Courthouse RS: Does H.B. 646, **Acts** 62nd Amarillo,Texas 79101 Leg., R.S., 1971 (ch.513, p. 1751, codified as Art. 1581h,V.C.S.) authorize a county to contractwith a City within the county I to have the city tax assessor-collector to assess DearMiss Harney: county taxes?
You have requested our opinion as follows: "WhetherH.B. No. 646, passed March 20, 1971,by the 62nd Legislature, authorizes a county to **contract** with a city locatedwithin the county tohave the city's tax assessor and collector assess county taxes yearly?" The facts stated in your request are that Potter County (havinga population of over 10,080)wishes~toenter into a contractwith the City of Amarillo to have the city tax assessor and collector assess all property located in Potter County **for** purposes of taxation and that the County Assessor and Collector for Potter County shall continue to collect the taxes for the state, county and school districts. Article 8, Section 14, **of** the Constitution of the State of Texas provides:

"Sec.14. Except as provided in Section 16 [which covers counties of less **than** 10,000population] of this **Article,** there shall be elected by the qualified voters of **each county,**  **an** Assessor and **Collector** of Taxes, who shall hold his office for fouryears and until his successor is elected and qualified; and such **Assessor** and Collector of Taxes shall perform all the dutieswith respect to assessing property for **the** purpose of taxation and of **collecting** taxes, as may be prescribedby the Legislature."**-4809-**Miss Naomi Barney,page 3 (M-986)

In the case of Missouri, K. 6 T. Ry. Co. of Texas v. Shannon, 100Tcx. 379, 100 S.W. 138 .(1987) ofs interpretedSection 14 of Article'8the Supreme Court as follows: "Whilewe think that the Legislature could not strip the assessor of all authority, and probably that itwas intendedby the framers of the Constitution that all ordinary assessmentsof Froperty for taxation shouldbe made hy him, stillwe think it was not intended to deDrfVe the Legislatureof thepower of devolving the duty upon another officer, or board to assess property in some special case,where, as in the present instance, the county assessorswere clearly unable from the means at their disposal to ascertainwith any reasonabledegree of approximation the value of the intangible assets of the railroad company, and still less capable of making intelligently the apportionment due to their respective counties." (Emphasisadded.),
It is our opinion that the power to assesswhich your request contemplates is an ordinary assessment of property for taxation and therefore fallswithin the type of assess- -which framersof the Constitution intended should be made by the county tax assessor and collector. Missouri, K. c T. Ry: Co. of Texas v. Shannon, supra. In lightof this interpretationof Section 14 of Article 8 of the Texas Constitution, any authority given in House Bill No. 646 for someone other than the elected county tax assessor and collector.tomake ordinary assessments of property in the county for taxationwould be contrary to the Constitution and therefore void and of no effect. This result is in accordwith and follows the reasoning **and** holding of Attorney General Opinion No. W-70 (1967).
For the above reasons,Rouse Bill No. 646 does not authorize a county to contract away the duty of its elected tax assessor and collector to make ordinary assessmentsof property for taxationpurposes. A countymay, however, enter into a contract **for** services, such as the making **of** appraisal or assessment recommendations,thatwould not constitute an abrogationof the duties of the county tax assessor-collector

-4810-Miss Naomi Harney,page 3 (M-986)

grantedby the Constitution. Pritchard & Abbott v. McKenna, 162 Tex. 617, 350 S.W.Zd 333 1'1961).

SUMMARY H.B. 646, Acts 62nd Leg., R.S., 1971 (Article1581h,V.C.S.) does not authorize a county to contractwith a city for the city tax assessor and collector to assess all the property in the county for taxationpurposes but a countymay, however, enter into a contract for services, such as the making of appraisal or assessment recommendations,that would not constitute an abrogationof the duties of the county tax assessor-collectorgranted by the Constitution.

Preparedby Wardlow Lane AssistantAttorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE
Kerns Taylor, Chairman W. E. Allen, Co-Chairman
James Broadhurst Melvin Corley Harold Kennedy 0-1a-3Allen -.v-T.1.. SAW MCDANIEL Staff Legal Assist&t
ALFRED WALKER ExecutiveAssistant NOLA WBITE First Assistant
-4811-