### 195

PRICE DANIEL Al-IO- GENERAL Februaw 20, 1948

_.. . ..~. : .- .._. lions;-John

A; 'Biimber~ Coimty.Attorney Gontile~~

coaiiity Gonzales, Texas _. . opinionNo. .+of

Re:. The autho&ty of the coIimLtssloners'

~Collrt to dlsitolve

a road district which has an authorlzatlofi

for the iixmanceof bonds and upon which n'o

action has been taken.

Dear Mr. Bombergi

Yak I'eijuest

for an cipinlbn

of this.

Department reUt.ting'~o'a

bond autlio~lzatlon'tid the dlssolutlon.of Boad.Mstriat No. 11 In your county Is, in part, as follows:

. "Bgorder Of the CoIsmissionerls Court Of Gonzal&w Couiit$, Texas, date&Jam&y lst, 1937, Rotid

District Hoi'll-was crest&d. This Rdad Dltitriot

No; 11 Includedthe.t'&rI.t6ry imiluded in Road Districts&a. liarid 

### 3 of Gonzales Cotity, both of which had been in exUt&nce for.- years prior to 1937. A road'bond eleotlenwas ordered-by.theCommlasloner's Court on January 27th, 1937 'to deter&n& whether or not the bonds of said Road Dl~trl6t~No.~liof Go&ales County; .Texas shall be issued in the aUOImt of F6@ty Thoueand:Dollare',

for the purpose of constiwct&m; maintenance and.operation of macadamiz- .ed, graveled, ompaved roads and ttiq&kes,
or in aid thereof, and whether'or not ad valorem taxes shall be-leviedannually on all taxable propertjwlthln said'RoadMstrict Ifow.ll,

of Gon%ales County,Texas for .the'purpose

of paging the intereston said bonda'and to proqide a sinkingfund for the reddption thereof at waturity. This bond election~barried

by the~~reqtisiti3

vote. The Road District Ro. 11 bonds have never beenHon. John A. Rquberg,page 2 (V-507)

issued and after the order of the Consuls-ConsulsslOner*sCourt canvassing the returns and slOner*s canvassing returns declaring the proposition carried,

no furdeclaring proposition carried, ther action was taken.

"At the time this bond electionwas petitionedfor, ordered,and voted on, both Road DistrictNo. 1 and Road DistrictRo. 3 had outstanding

bonded lndebtednessesaggregating In excess of $100,000.00.

"The Comndssion~r~S Court nowirishes to abolishRoad DistrictNo. 11, and dispose of the bond authorization, in order. that the territorycan be redlatricted more in line vith currentroad demands and a new bonded indebtedness on the new district can be created. : "QUl?&TLO& How can t&is authorization%o issue $40.000.00 bonds-cif

Road '. bistrht Nd. 11 vdted in 1937 be &et aside and the Road District 11 abol%shed?

"Now, l.Q.view

of thifact'that the'::. 1 -, purpose for which the bonds were voted no '. .:. .i longer exists,and.that the wording of tS viilldatiog

iAatute"(Aptiule

752Y-33 nierely authorizes

and empower% the Com-.~-. ndsslonerls

Court to proceedwith the'issuanoe of bonds not voted.in S;ccordam% wlththe Compensation Bond Title, ipnirl

tbat
over 10 years have pass&d since the bonds
were authorized,

would an ord&% of the:Comndss$onkr*s

Court, reciting such faots, and orderingand declaringth6 authcirBatb.ivoid and dis~olviug.the R&d District,be effetittil

and valid to the extent'that At. Would not be siecessary for a proposed Ma.4 .' ,dIstrlct

IneludIng

portloii:oS-R&ad

Diatiiet~ lVo.i-ll,-tp

admpl~~w%th

Bond .C~n@ensiPtlon - 3tatut~es.U

regard to the authorl~e~.bc@s of such'R6adDiitrlct 'll,i?hen sub& gro-:' posed Road Mstrlct votes new~bqxds?

- ThkC~esion6~~s Com.%& a c&r& of.lUdted juriad3.cticiti

and confined

%toth&authorlty conferredupon the court by the Legislature. '~.,

### :

Ron. John Ai Bomberg;. page.3 '(V-507) 

### 19’7

'8rticle

7&&a, Vernon~a'Clvil.Sta&tee,~'provides that in the evi%t any road~bondvoted oti leijtiedby

a county,po%iti&al aribdi~lsion or deflmSd &citpletremain uneold at the time of I&e passage of this A&; theh'the Commlsslonera~

Court may upon petitionorder an election to determinewhether or not sucfi road bonds shallbe Fevoked-mor

eancelled. .Rowever, the effecti*eiitateyof this Act was'.Septe%ber.22, 1932, &ml foti bonds-'were voted in 1937, n&d.ng the provlalonaof this.Actlnapplic8ble'lnasmuOh as it applies only to those Situations In effeot at the time ~ofthe.passage of this Act.

_ -~ in'the'caseof Orr v. Marrs, 47 8. W. (26) 440, the court stated:

. -%he bonds canaot"be'revokizid'o*cancelled by 8ny agency mess-the power.350 40. so la conferred~by

1e~Lalatlve

8uthoHty 8nd any doubt &~to the exlstence'of.suc~power is,-und~r~well

establ.Ssl&d~prlnclples,resolved against its existence.'

Y&r~'fim;t;u&l.situstio~ reflectsthsf'Rtid'Dl.strlct HO; ll;:liiclud& Road'MatrSOts R&S. 1 and.3 in Gon%al;es

Ceuuty,both-of'which had an outstimdlngbonded indebt&ine*s~

tiexcetiam‘of

#&OO,OOC~OO,

&id that-'iti th&ereiatioti~of

R&d DistrictNo. 11 the Conimlsifon6rir' Court failed to.oomply vith the Competiatioti-Bond.Act.

. '. 'Article 767d, V.-C. S.; providesas follows:

.~ .. .. %liere~any road dlstrlct-created under the proviai'6ns

of this-ActincludeswItbin. its llndts any previouslytieatedPOWI distrlct; okanji polltlcalsubtlivisi& or pre: cinct, havbg at such time road bo@debts outstandlug,,

such includeddistrict or.SubdlvQion.shall be fully and fairly competisated by the new district in tin amount equal. to the 8mount of the bonds'outatanding against such included subdivision or district,8nd which tihallbedone in'the formandmanner prescribed fo5 the lsimance.of'coimty bonds under Sectlon~ 25 to 27, intiluaive, of.this Act, except the petition sh&llbe signedby fifty or a majority of the residentproperty taxpa* voters of the new district,and the bonds:&roposedto be Issued shall be for the purehaae or construction of roads inHan, John A. Romberg,page 4 (V-507)

the included subdlviaons or districts and the further aoristructlou; maluteuauce aud operationof macadamlsed, graveled or paved roads and turnpikes; or in aid there;

%I 16, Sec. 26. Acts 1926 .Jgth

Leg., 1st C.S., p. 23,

In San Antonio &A. P. fry 'Co. v. State, (Con. App.) 95 3. W. (26) 6gO;the court said:

"Section

28 (Vernon*s'Auu.Clv. St. art. 767d 9

1 in connection

tith seCtIons 25 to 27 Vernon's Am. Civ. St. arts. 767aL767c , of said act provides that where any road districtcreatedunder the provisionsof said act includes one previouslycreatedaud having road bonds outstanding,

such included

district shall' be fully and fairly compensated by-the'new district in this'manuer: Au even exchange made with the holders of the otitstaudlng bonds, 'andif th+ cannotbe done, theh an equal .amotmt

of the new.bonds

marked 'nonnegotiable'shallbe deposlted'wlth the county treasurerfor the credit of the interest and sinkingfund as a guarantee for

_ the'payment~

of such outstaudlug bonds that have not been exchanged, after which no : levy shall be made under the orlglualbond issue, but ln.lieu thereof,fromthe taxes

. eolleoted on the new bond iasue.shall be passed to the-credit of such included dlstrlot the nesessaxysums (interest and sinking fund as so collected) to.be'used to gay In full the outstanding bonds thereof.

It will be seen from the foregqing that'the Commlssioriersl

Court of &Males Oouuty;-in ;dreatlng~ ..e Road'Dlstrict

Ho. 11 faiied to oemply~tith AMlcle 767d; supi-a, &nd it ls..the~opinion‘oS~this'De~tmeat~thst Road Mstriot Hd:~

il, although &Mated by,the Cotissioners' Court, dld not functionpursuantto~law; and
even though a bond issue wasauthorized in'said aistrict, the same is of no force aud effect.

Inasmuoh as no bonds wepe issued; it is aaswaed that no tax waa~levledin Road Distriot Ro. ll.for the indebtednessin Road Districts~Ros. 1 and 3. There-. . .

_.. ._

-. ..-_ k

. . II-99 - ., '-Hon. Jo& A. ~Rombetig,~

Gagi 5 ~(V-507) ,,,._:

,.. -
_ i

. ':

.
' fore,...it

follows that had.Districtk Boos. ~'1 &..3-were-' ' not.af'fected.~.&y

the:.imeakion-of

Road Mstrict X9,.11 on Jantm-y l,-.:l~~a%nce 't~~pnrpose-.for-~phich haid district was created.was nev6r put in exlstenee. The.district never,dSU.

fuuctlon as a district. .-' ~.

-. . _- . It'ls.trti~

'tlkt the.50th-Lsgialati@e (&it. 752y-3,V; C. S:) validated&issued bolid 1sSuijs of road dlstric$s,.

sncfi~&s

Road Mstrlbt Ro. Il. ,Valmsting acts, however, are.e'usually e&acted'for

the'piose of'

. curing matters,ofprocedure Or mechanics, alid it is oW opinion that by'necessa~y'impllcatlon the Act would apply only Eo bon&issues; 'the proceeds.of

which could be used. to caw:out the mandate of the voters. For instance,

mppoae'a situation @ere cOuntybonds.&revoted to'constmct a specificroad, and after the prdposition is voted upoti

bat b&fore the bonds Sir&-issued-aiid deUv-

. ePed,YtheStat6 Highk&y'Departmeiit deslgWteti'~tti

roadaa'k state.hlghmiy and full3 cotitructsths same. It- is clearlyevldent.ifi~sach a ;situation

that the @rpose.for .wbioh said l)onds

acre voted would cease to exist. .We do' ' not think that it c0ti.d be~the .leglslative intent in the enactmentof such's validatingact that said bbnds could ther&ftep.be issued and sold. The Act could apply only to.bmil IstiiPBs,

th~proceeds of which could~beused to .oamy out the bond purpose.

Based-uponyam factual situatLon;it is our ~oplni?n

that the road diat?ictnever cam& into active existence. Before a.n&w road dlstrlct, vhich includes 5 previouslycreated district vit&outstanding bonds,
can effectlv6lycome into eti&tence,ooapenqation bonds.~ bust be voted.',

CompBnsation-bond& were mever votad In the riltimtion

underSoonsideration; moreover, the p&pose fog whldhthe rogd bonifs fiere voted iri.DlatrIct~~No; '11 - no longer existii; We do note think that th& word "abolish" could tie

applied.to stich

a district,for fhe.same would necess&rilycontemplate prWloua ed actnsl'existence. We do l&L& t&at the Comisslonetist-Co&t,under the circu&stances;would,have the power, implied at lea&t, to rescind its former order; It passed an order purporting~ablish the district for the constitutional and statutorypurpose,but that purpose was not cem?iedout, and.has now ceased to exist. uithln its valid discretion,therefore,the court may determine to Pescind Its fdrmer order.H6n. John A, Romberg,page 6 (V-507)

After the Fescissionof such order, the Court may, If it so det&mines;' createanother road district under the statutdry procedme, which dihtrictwould lnelude part of the terrltorg which was purportedlywlthin the district, the order for the establishment of which was rescinded.

SUMMARY

1. The Ueation of a road district which Includesa previouslycreatedroad districtwith an outstaridlng bonded lndebteduess,

requirescompliance with the ijrovislons

of the Compensaticin Bond Act 'an&compensation

bo+ds must.bevoted.

_ I

2.. An Act which.validates~pi=evlous1s voted but unissuedbonds does not apply to bonds if the purposefor which they were voted no longer exists.


### 3..'TheConmdssloners' Cotirt of‘ Gonzales Comity, Texas, under the facts aubmitted,.may

by ap@ropriate

order. rescind Its previously' enacted'ordei.

. tatter ~%Xch Road'Dlsti.ict'N~. 11 was purP;ortedly

estibllshed,



### snd'may

thereupon establishanotherroad district ;' which would Include apart of.the terrl-

.. - :' to%y w&L@.i

*as purportedly

tilth%n said Road Mstrlct Ho. 11. ,~

Bti:mu 

# BYBiii%GllmFfaldrep~ Assistant '

,. . ’ APi'ROVED: ~' .: