. 

OFFICEOFTHEATTORNEY GENERALOFTEXAS 

AUSTIN 

GROVER 5ELIERS 

ATIORNCY oENER*L 

Iionorable W. P. RerDu, Jr. 

County Auditor, Wallsr County 

Hampstsad, Texar 

Dear Sir: QpInI0n No. 04971 

Rar Question8 oonoeming the 

iaruanoe of tine warranp 

and bond8 ior the ooqd.Suotion 

0r 00my 00~rth0~80 

t 

add 

jallr. \ 

(‘-4 ‘, 

We aoknowledge receipt of your oplni?m..requesik~or recent 

data and quot. froln your letter aa iollpwar 

A’ \ 

‘1, 

‘1. \\ \ 

U&r tha above oircumetanoes oan the 

Com&ionerel Court Ieaua tlm warrants against 

ruture inoome, promming 

VIrst: That the due date of suoh t1.m 

warrant 8, or part of aam, la In the year 

1946, ror which a budget has already bean 

adopted, but no provision la sade therefor. 

“Seohd: That the due date or euoh tIm 

warrant6 Is In so318 rutura year or year8 
beyond the period or the present adopted 

budget. 

“2. Under the abovo cIroumstanoea, does the 

Coamisaionera~ Court have the authority to refund 

such tIae warrants Into bonds? 

“3. In case bonds are Iasued or1 1~11 

without ftrst IssuIhs auoh time warrants --+%&nstruatlon 0r a new Court iiouaa, la ComIeaIoners~ court 

within Its authority to Iaaue such bonds and build 

auoh Court House, without first holding en eleotloa 

to determine whather auoh bonds shall be Issued for 

the purpose of constructing said Court House? 

"4. Xy Buty as County iudltor In reference to 

the above questions, and partloularlp In reference 

to lay signature of approval, aa kudltor, or the 

above aentloned tine warrants, 

n+ * * **n 

Prior to 1903 there ma no provision In our stctutes for 

the Isauanoo of bonds and the courts of this state held that counties 

had tha tiplied authority to Issue tI;m warrants for the construction 

0r pamanent tiprore:nenta. 

SometIm after thaaa dooislons, the Legislature authorized 

the laeuaaos of bonda for courthouses, jaila public roads, etc. 

Later, In the oasa oi Laaater v. Lopez, 21’1 &. W. 373, the Suprem 

court held that It was in the discretion or the oomIeafoners* oourt 

Whether thay Issue time warrants or bonds Por the oonatructlon of 

thee6 permanent Iinprove!nenta. 

In &Id&era v. The City of Lampaaaa, 249 S. N. 1083, error 

reruaed, tho oourt stated: 

*Third. It la well settled In Texas that oountlas 

have power to contract for the construction of courthouses or ror the I:a2rove~ent of pub11 

xi 

o roads, on t&z 

credit of the county. and to issue In evidenoe 

of the Iodebtedneaa thereby-. create?ITF n erss -0ear n 

wcxrahts 0r tr:e county, :laturing In after years. Lssater 

v. iouez. 110 Tex. 179. 217 A. .i. 273: Stratton -V. Xdnney 

COIL-~, lht~ (,kx. ,~_- CIv. ;,pp.j 137 5. ;Gi. 1176; Allen v. :,berzathy 

(Ter ,. V&I. ,-I- .,pp.) 131 A. 2. 349; San ?atrIoIo County 0. JOClae, 38 Tax. 243; Cowan v. ijugree (i’ex. Glv. .ipp.) 139 

La. i. 687." 
In visa of the foregoing decisions, it Is the opinion 

or this deptit;aent that Xaller County, subject to the exp-eas 

restrictions Imposed by the Constitution and general laws, has 

powor to Issue time warrants against the nature Incozie of the 

county and make same payable In part out of the 1946 taxes, In 

payment for the oonatruotlon or a oounty courthouse and jail, 

provided that the applicable regulations relating to the issuance 

of such warrants be observed. 

We partloularlp call your attention to Article 2362a, 

Vernon’s motated Civil Statutes, which provides generally that 

counties aaf Ieaue ~tIme warrants where oontraot Is entered Into by 

and betnoon the city or county and the contractor for the construction of public bulldIngs, or the prosecution and completion of any 

pub110 work where any oxpendituro la made In excess of $2,000, by 

first giving notice to bidders, which notloo muet also give notloe 

oi the Intention or such county to iaeue warrants In payment of all 

or a part of tho oontraot prlco, stating the maximum mount 0r the 

proposed time warrants, the rate of Interest such warrants are to 

bear, and the maximum maturity date thereof. This notice must be 

published In a newspaper published in such ooucty once a week for 

two oonsocutlve weeks prior to the the set for letting such oontract, the dato of the first publloation to be at least fourteen 

daye prior to the date set for letting said contract. If by the 

time set for letting the oontraot, as many as ten per cent of the 

quallrled voters or said county, whose names appear on the last 

approved tax rolls as property taxpayers, petition the oozvnIssIonerst 

court, In writing to submit to a referendum vote the question or the 

laeuanoe or bonds ior such purpose, then the oommIaaIonera* oourt 

shall not be authorized to award said contraot unless tho proposition 

to Issue bonds for suah purpose Is sustained by a majority of the 

votes cast at suoh election. If no such petition Is filed, then 

the CoamIaaIonera Court may proceed with the final award of the 

contract and with the Issuance of raid warrants. 

We further oall your attention to the faot that the 

total oblI@tiona to be paid out of the pemxment iaprovemnt run& 

muet not exoead the twenty-five oent constitutional provision In 

any given year. Of’ course, you should a.nend your 1946 budget. 

Replylug to your second question, tte Cotisslonsrs’ Court 

would &ve authority to rerund legally issued tline warrants Into 

bonds Rrovlded they rOllOW the provisions Or .ztiCle 2368a, yerzion*s 

zjnnotated Civil Ztatutes, by r~lvlng notice of intention to issue such 

iu;ldIng bonds by 9ublicatIon in a newspaper of :;ensrcl circulation 

at least once a :‘rees for three successive weeks, the (date of the ?kst 

publication being at least thirty days prior to the date on which It 

Is 9ro)osed to ?ass the ordlnacoe authorizing the bonds. If, at any 

the before the dote fixed for the issuance of suoh bccds, not lass 

than ton per cent of the qualifisd 9ro:Jcrty taxpaying voters of the 

cbaty, as shown by the records in the Office of County Clark, ?ray- 
ing the co.xnisalonera* oourt to order an sleotion for the purpose of 

subn?ittin$ the proposition to iaaus suoh bonds to a vote of the quallfled property taxpaying voter8 ol the county, suoh governing body 

shall order at ths next mmtlng thereor an election to Im held Sin 

detemuine whether or not suoh funding bond8 shall be ieeued.. In the 

event no suoh petition ia preeaated, withis the tiae hereinabove 

preroribed, no eleotion on the &moporition shall be required and such 

oonuniasioners~ oourt shall have the power to pass all neoessary orderr 

to provide for funding the indebtednear. 

Replying to your third question, you are advised that the 

oountr doea not have the authority to Issue bonda tor the oonstruotion 

of a new aourthouue and to build such oourthouee, without first holding an eleotion and eublnitting tke proposition to a vote of the qualffied toters in the oounty. 

Chaptera 1 and % of Title E-2, Bevlaed 'Civil statutes, provides generally for election8 and the issuanoe of bonds ior the pUrposes enumerated in Article 718. 

hrtiole 701 providea: 

Vhe bonda of a county or any incorporated city 

or town ahali nevar be issued for any purpose unless 

a proposition for the issuanoe of auoh bonda shall 

hero been first submitted to qualifted voters who 

are property tax papers of such oountg, ofty or town.* 

Artlole 718, among other things, provtdea that the Cozunisl foaers' Court of a oouaty may lawfully issue bond8 of a oountp for 

tb purpoue of ereotlng the county oourthouse and jail, or either. 

utiole 719 provides: 

"If a majority 0P the property taxpaying voters, 

voting at such eleotlon shall vote in fsvoT of the 

proposition and such bonds shall be thereby authorized 

and shall be insued by the Cosmlseionsral Court." 
Trusting t;.bt t&is answers your questions, ne are 

Your3 very truly 

Asaiatant