E ATTORNEY GENERAL 

PRICE DANIEL 

ATT’ORNEY GENERAL 

Hon. S. 86. Pliler 

County Auditor 

Taylor County 

Abilene, Texas 

Q,F TEXAS 

Mey 28, 1947 

Opinion MO. V-223 

Re: Authority to create a road 

district embracine! a defined portion of a Commissioner’s Precinct, and use 

Proceeds of. bonds of such 

district to purchase rlghtor-way. 

Dear Sir: 

We refer to your Inquiry of May 6, 1947, rhiah 

is as follows: 

“Please advise me If a Specie1 Road 

District, for the purpose of issuing bonds 

to purchase rights-of-way for Few to Market Roads, may be formed out of a defined 

portion of a Commissioners Precinct by 

either the Commissioners’ Court or the Legislature .” 

We ere eseumlng that no “defined” road district 

has been created and carved out of the commissioner’s precinct to which you refer, and that the commissloner(s precinct has no outstanding bonds issued under the authority 

of the constitutional provision mentioned below. 

Section 52 of Article III of the Texas Constlltution provides that under legislative provision, any defined district, 

e 0 5 0 “upon a vote of e two-thirds majority of the resident property taxpayers voting thereon who are qualified electors of 

such district or territory to be affected 
, , .- 

thereby, in addition tc all other Qebta, 

may issue bonds or otherwise lend its oredit in any amount not to exoeed one-fourth 

of the assessed valuation of the real property of such distriot or territory. 0 D o 

for the f’ollewing ,purposea, to-wit, e .z* 

“(a) The oenstwation, maintenance 

and operation of maoadamized, graveled or 

paved reads and t'usgapikss, or in aid thereof.” 

The Ida@felature has the power to create and 

define road dietriots and may delegate that power to commiesioners’ co,urts) a8 was done by the enaatment of Article 752~ of Vernon’s Civil Statutes, That law authorizes 

aomm1saioners I courts to crdate road districts “by eateriu am order declaring such road district established and 

defining the boundaries thereof an Article 7526 prescribes 

procedure for elections to authorize issuance of bonds, 

In the case of Louisiana RyO and Nav. Co, v. 

State, 298 S, Wr. 462, the court quoted the constitutional 

;gv;;;n which authorizea the creation of roa.8 districts 

: 

“The language eunder legislative prcvision, t found in the section just quoted, 

committed to the Legfslabufe all queatfons 

relating to the oreation, the size, boundaries, eta*, of defined districts I The 

Legislature oould, have oreated districts 

outright, defined their baundaries, end provided for their organization and operation, 

or it could have authoriaed their creaMon 

by order of the commissfonersD court, wfthout petition or vote of qualified eleotors.” 

The language of the Constitution and statutes 

concerning the purpose for which road district bonda may 

be issued is broad enough to include the purchase of 

right-of-way wbfoh is not anly in aid of, but is eatential to the ocnstruotioa of a road, 

In 8titem ~4~ 8uttsa Ootmtltp (error rsfrrerd) 

272 5. W, 506, it is hehd that eemey arUin& f$Wa then 

sale ef shah bonds may be w’ed to pp fer righI;-sf-way 

ror madr. The Court 8aBd: 
Hon. S. Md. Pillar i Page~3 (V'223) 

‘Without the power to acquire and pay for 

gland neoeaaarg for then construction of 

roads, the power to construct such roads 

would amount to nothing, and the object 

of the constitutional and statutory provlalona be defeated.” 

In the Mae Of~Arenaaa County v. Coleman-Fulton 

Pasture Company, 1CS T%xas 223, 191 S. W0’~553, the Supreme 

Court said: 

*The term lroada,e in our opinion was not 

uaed~ ln any such narrow sense in this connection aa would prevent in the conatruction of necessary roads the necessary 

bridges for such roads. The broad scope 

of the constitutional provlalon when considered in the light of Its purpose compels the view that the term waa used in 

the amendment in such a sense as would 

make possible completed and continuous 

roada in fulfillment of the liberal policy to which the provlalon la due.” 

We are of the opinion that a defined road dlatrlct may be created within a Commlaaionerla Precinct by 

legislative Act or by the Commiaaloners~ Court by an order 

entered in its minutes, and that money arlalng from the 

sale of bonds issued by such district, “for the purpose of 

the construction, maintenance and operation of macadamlzed., 

graveled and paved roads and turnpikes, or in aid thereof” 

may be used to purchase right-or-way for roads in such dlatrlot. However, your attention la lnvlted,to that part oi 

Article 752~ which provldea: 

“e 0 .except aa herein speclflcally permltted, no fractional part of a prevloualy created road district shall be included 

within the limits of the road district 

areated under the provision of this Aot 

n 0 0 . 

This language imposes a limitation on the poueraof t& Commlssloneras Court, and the limitation has 

been aahutrued to apply to commlsaloneral preclncta aa well 

aa ,road d~atrlc.taO See Opinions Boa. O-7099 and O-11375, 

copies of which are enclosed hersurlth. 
. --- 

Honorable S. & Plfler - Page 4 

SUMMARY 

A defined road district may be created 

within a CommlaalonerPa Precinct by legislative Act or by an other entered by the CommlaslonersP ,Court, for the purpose of construatfon and maintenance and operatfon of macadamlzed, graveled and paved roaaa and turnpikes, 

and in aid thereof. Const:Art. III, Sec. 52, 

sub-section (o);'Art. 752~~ V. C. S., Anderson 

County Road Dfstrfct No, 8 vs. State, 298 S,. W. 

462, affirmed 7 S. W. Zd, 

Money arfsfng from the,sale of bonds issued for the purpose of construction and malntenance and operation or macadamfzed, graveled 

and paved roads and turnpikes, and in aid thereof, may be used to pay for right-of-way for 

such roads, Stites v. Sutton County (error refused), 272 S. W, 506; Aransas County vs. Coleman-Fulton Pasture Co,, 191 9. W. 553, 

Yours very txuly, 

ATTORNEYGENERAL OF TEXAS 

BY 

gczfs 

W. T. Wlllfama 

Assistant 

APPROVED 

2iiLkLJ 

ATTORNEP GENERAL