THEATTORNEYGENERAL 

OF TEXAS 

PRICE DANIEL 

ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN 11. TEXAS 

October 19, 1948 

Hon. Jean Day 

County Attorney 

Henderson County 

Athens, Texas 

Opinion No. V-701 

Re: Legality of paying for 

the construction of 

sidewalks, driveways, 

a.nd landscaping for a 

County Hospital out of 

the Permanent Improvement Fund, 

Dear Sir: 

You have requested this office to determine 

whether the Commissioners D Court of Henderson County has 

the authority to expend .a portion of the Permanent Improvement Fund for the construction of sidewalks, nccessary entrances and exits, driveways, and landscaping on 

the grounds of a county hospital. We assume that this 

construction referred to in your request constitutes no 

part of the original construction of the hospital for 

which a bond issue was voted. 

Article VIII, Section 9 of our State Constitution authorizes a tax to be levied by the county for the 

erection of public buildings, streets, sewers, water 

works and other permanent improvements. It is well settled in this state that taxes levied for any specific 

purpose or class of purposes designated in Article VIII, 

Section 9, must be applied thereunto in good faith, and 

in no event expended for some other purpose. Carroll v. 

Williams, 202 S.W. 504. Your question, therefore, is 

whether sidewalks, driveways and landscaping of a cotnty hospital constitute 'other permanent improvements 

within the meaning of Article VIII, Section 9 of our 

State Constitution, 

It is held in Attorney General's Opinion No. 

V-518 that where the establishment of a county hospital 

WRS from current funds, the cost of the purchase would 

come from the Permanent Improvement Fund and the costs 

of the operation and maintenance from the General Fund. 

In Attorney General's Opinion No. V-567, it 
- . 

Bon. Jean Ray, page 2 (V-701) 

was held: 

“Applying the principles announced in 

this case to the situation about which you 

inquire, tax money raised for hospital malntenance purposes comes from the general fund 

levy, whereas tax money for the establishment 

and construction of a county hospital comes 

from the permanent improvement levy, Therefore the Commissioners B Court is without authority to appropriate hospital maintenance 

funds for hospital construction purposes, for 

such sppropria.tion would constitute an unlawful transfer and diversion of constitutional 

funds 0 ” 

It was held in the case of Holman v. Broadway 

Improvement Co, (Corn, App,) 300 S,W, 15, that the construction of a sea wall constitutes a permanent improvement D Likewise the painting of a building and erection 

of partitions In some of the POOIXS have been held to be 

a permanent improvement o 

page 114, 

See Words and Phrases, Vol. 32, 

In Attorney Generalus Opinion Bo. v-2.82, this 

office had a similar question under consideration. It 

was held in this opinion that the construction of prrking areas on the court house yard could be paid for out 

of the Permanent Improvement Fund of the county If the 

parking areas did not constitute a part of the street 

but actually comprise a part of the court house yard. We 

are herewith enclosing Opinion No. v-282. 

In view of the foregoing, It IS OUP opinion 

that the construation of sidewalks, necessary entrances 

and exits, driveways, and landscaping of a county hospltal, being permanent improvements, may be paid for out 

of the Permanent Improvement Fund of the county. 

SUMMARY, 

The construction of sidewalks, necessary 

entrances and exits, driveways and landscaping of a county hospital may be paid for out 
Hon. Jean Day, page 3 (v-701) 

. 

of the Permanent Improvement Fund of the Glftili-' 

tY* Art. VIII, Section 9, Texas Constitution, 

Yours very truly, 

* a ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

JR:mw 

Assistant 

APPROVED: ( , 

.