. . *



## PRICE

**DANIEL ATTORNEY** **G!z:IIHXAL** February 21, 1947

Honorable D. D. Williams opinion NO. v-40 CountyAttorney Throckmorton County Re: Authority of the Throckmorton, Texas Commissioners1 Court of Throckmorton County to sell personal property such as worn out roadmachinery without first hevins aavertised the same for sale on open bids; and authority or the Tax Collector tomake summery levy on personal propertyas provided in Artiole 7268.

Dear Mr. Williams:,

In your letter of Feb. 4, 1947, you present ror the opinion of this department two questions. These are as

## r0ii0ws:

“1. Is the Commissioners' Court authorized to sell personal property such as worn out road repairmachinery and like itemswithout publicly edvertisin(Tthe same as being for sale and selling the same at public auction? (Each of the commissioners or this county have~in their'charge worn out _~ and uselessmaahinery and tools which theywish to dispose or immediately. They went to know the proper and legal~ procedure ior doing so.)

-2. Can the tax colleotor of the county levy on personal propertywhich is about to be removed from the **county** before he has completed his tax rolls under Art. 7268, Texas R. C. S. 1925, (Thereare several drilling rigs in the. -

Hon. D. D. Williams - Page 2 (V-40)

oounSywhiah lre 4uo to be mere4 in the near future. The taxes are not delinquent on them since they
are only subject tc tamtim rer the year 1947 in this aouaty. The tax collectorwould like to know **wkotimr** he would be premature in Lie sotion if he attempted to levy
en 8 rig now ii the owners bhereer sttrpt to mmove the same

## rmr this **ooaaty.** Please send lo sll epiniena whloh have been renders4 oenstwing tbs above statute.)"

10 ah811 **answer** these questiou in the order

. strted.

Tko ~urls4i0fien oi’the Comis810aers1 Ceurt isd*finti 18 tko lstter pert

## orsec. 18orArt. v0r .the fWi8titutlen in the tollowingwsr48:



### *T&r l ounty aonlssisner so chosen, wit& t&s couaty judge ss pmsldikg ottleer,shall oompese the aouaty 

### l ~srloners court, end shslf examleo suah powers aid jurlsdlotlon *I** a11 oetity businesjas is doehlne4 by this oonstitu%ionsn4 the lawa et t&a St&e, or my be horeaftor prwarlbod .v (Daphaaisoura)

It should be observed, hewever, that them is 

## an express

## l%BitatiOnupon the

## ~juriadiCti0Bthus conferre4, tlmt 18, it muet be noountybUine880w The term "oouatyb~lnesaa rhea14 be given s bros4 u&4 Llbenl construatlea 80 as net to .detertthe purpose of’the lsw. Glenn .v.D&G ~o;tyG~;is 4’Am Islsnd Levy District, (Cl+.A#p. o Moreover the ComwlssienersJ’ Courts lmr impliid iutkerity to dowkat may be necessary In the exeml8e of the duties or powers expressly oomrerred upon thus. City Nations1 Bank v. ?realdio County, (Civ.Appd) 86 S. W. 775.

In the osse of Stovsll v. Shivers (Corn. App.) 103 S. W. (2d) 363, Judge Germen, speaking for the Court, said:Hoa. D. D. Williams - rage 3 (V-40)

“The duty of the Commissioners **court** is to transact the business, protect the interests,and promote the welfare of the county as awhole, Among the powers conferred upon such oourt by Artialo 2351 are the following: Tha power **to** lay out and 

### l stabliak,,okaaee and 4iscontlnuo roads an4 highways, the power to build bridgas and keap tham in mpair, and tho power to exercise general control over all raads,highways, ferries,and bridges in their counties.n

Thus in the exeroise of the powers expressly coaierredby statute, lr by reasonable inference therefr&mthe commissioners*caurt undoabtedly has the power to purchase suoh roadmachinery and equipment as are raasonably nooe6aary to carry out the powers conferrhl upan it by Art. 2351, as suggested above. It does not nacasaarily rollan, howavor, tbt it has the sama power to sell suoh property, and such **powers** as it does have in thla respect must lrisa by necessary implication in transactlag “oounty business.” Is the sale or worn out and 

### l ntlqaat.4 parson81 property of the County by the Coniaaioners~ Court voouatybasiness”? If so, and wa **think** it la, than such powor is logally vested,in tha Commlarlonars’ Court,

Such propertywhon erlginally purchased becomes tha pmparty or the Ceunty, an4 not of the respective Commisaioaer~s precinct to which itnight be allocated. Tha Oouaty 1s la a sanse a pub110 corporation, and must, therafora, racalva all its powars from the Constitution **an4** statutos which gave it.l xistoaco. Tm the Commissioncrap Oaart, ua&er tho Coaatitutlaa aa statutes is committed “oouaty bualaass”e Tharo is an ‘ansoatlal dirreraace batwoon .tharig&s er such public dorporatians raspacting tim dispositloa or property and natural persons, the latter having ln inherent right in disposing of their pnparty, whllo pub110 corpomtions can saly acquire **and** dispose ai pmporty by vlrtuo of coma poaitlva law,
lr loeosa ary

irplicatian arising thorarram.

Therm will sot be found sny l xpmss statutory pnriaiom ooatarrlng upon the Coarissioaors’ Cmurt authority to 0011 personal prsperty bolongi&I to the County, bat wa think that by necessary implicatien from the posi-. -

EIon. D. D. Wllliama - Pa&a 4 (V-40)

tive law, which, under the Constitution and stetutes, is conferredupon the Commissioners~Court to transect the business of the County, to protect its interests1end promote the welfare of the County aa a whole, that sound public policy justiries the action or the conissieaersq Court in selling worn out roadmechinary when dotorioretion has reached the point where itwould no longer bo the exercise of sound economic principles to centlnue its use.

We are, thererore, of the opinion that it is within the inpllodpower of the Commlssioners~ Court to sell personal property, such asworn out roadmeohinery and likr items,when within the sound discretion ot the Court it no longer serves a sound economic usa to the County.

Since the stetute does snotspeoifioelly euthorize e selo of such property,but rests upon the implied powerswithin which the Court is letherized to act, It necessarily follows that no method Is provided as to themenner of disposing of suoh property. WI think this rests within the reesonablodiscretion of the Commissionrrsl Court acting as l whelm, to pursue the~methodthat will preduco the highost price, whether by private or public sale. We think either method would be legal if pursued in good faith end with

l view of prot,eoting the’.intarests

of the County end promoting its gonerel wlrare. .

Your seoond quastionhas heretoforebeon answored by this departmentby opinion No. O-3480, a copy of which is herrwlth enclosed for your inform&ion.

The Commissioners1Court has irplied authority to sell, eitherat private
or pub110 aelo, worn out end antiquated roadmeohinery, when in the sound disoretion of the Court suoh propertyne longer servos l useful purpose, consistent.I.

Eon. D. D. Willluw - Page 5 (V-40)

with the l

oenoaio interests O? the county.

Yours vary truly

ATTORN'SYGlCRE?&L OF TEXAS

AlPROVED

LPL: 

### jrb