## THEATTORNEYGENERAL
OF TEXAS

PRICE DANIEL ATTORNEY

GENERAL AUSTIN 11.TEXAS

October 19, 1948

Hon. Jean Day CountyAttorney Henderson County Athens, Texas OpinionNo. V-701
Re: Legality of paying for the constructionof sidewalks,driveways, a.ndlandscaping 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 Countyhas the authority to expend .aportion of the Permanent ImprovementFund for the construction of sidewalks,nccessary entrances and exits, driveways, and landscapingon the grounds of a countyhospital. We assume that this constructionreferred to in your request constitutesno part of the original constructionof 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 otherpermanent 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 landscapingof a cotnty hospital constitute 'otherpermanent improvements within the meaning of Article VIII, Section 9 of our State Constitution,

It is held in Attorney General's OpinionNo. V-518 that where the establishmentof a countyhospital WRS from current funds, the cost of the purchase would come from the Permanent ImprovementFund and the costs of the operationand maintenance from the General Fund.

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

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

was held: “Applyingthe 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 countyhospital comes from the permanent improvementlevy, Therefore the CommissionersB Court is without authority to appropriatehospital maintenance funds for hospital constructionpurposes, for such sppropria.tion would constitutean unlawful transfer and diversion of constitutional funds0” 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 constitutesa permanent improvementD Likewise the painting of a building and erection of partitions In some of the POOIXS have been held to be a permanent improvemento page 114, See Words and Phrases,Vol. 32,

In Attorney Generalus Opinion Bo. v-2.82,this officehad a similar question under consideration. It was held in this opinion that the constructionof prrking areas on the courthouse yard could be paid for out of the Permanent ImprovementFund of the county If the parking areas did not constitutea part of the street but actually comprise a part of the court house yard. We are herewith enclosing OpinionNo. v-282.

In view of the foregoing, It IS OUP opinion that the construationof sidewalks, necessary entrances and exits, driveways, and landscaping of a countyhospltal, being permanent improvements,may be paid for out of the Permanent ImprovementFund of the county. SUMMARY, The constructionof sidewalks,necessary entrances and exits, driveways and landscaping of a countyhospital may be paid for outHon. 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: ( ,

.