XI, of t'neCcnstituticnof TTW~, provibs im ~-~ p:trt: Bon. William .J.Gillespie,page 3 @w-281)
Vhe propertyof counties,citiesand towns, owned and held only for public plurposes,silohas public buildingsand the sites therefor,fire engines and the furniturethereof,and all propertyused, or intendedfor sxtinquishing fires, public groundsand all other propertydevotedexclusivelyto the use and benefit of the public shall be exempt from forced sale and from tsxation,*."
Article 7150, V.C.S. providesthat the followingproperty is exemptfrom taxation: n . . .
"Sec. 4. Al.1property,vhetherreal ar per- sonal, belongingexclusivelyto this State, or any politicalsubdivisionthereof,yy**"
You will note that Sec. 4, of k-title 7150, supra,purports to exempt all propertg,whether real or personal,beiongkg excln- sivelg to this State, or any politicalsubdivisionthereofend does not containthe restrictionthat sush propertyto be exemptmust be used for public purposes. Countiesand citiesare politicalsub- divisionsof the State. Eowever,Sec. 2 of Art. TIII, supra, of the Constitutiononly gives the Legislaturethe authori&:o~sxsmpt such propertywhen used for public purposes. ThereforeSec. 4 is inoperativeinsofaras it purports to exempt public propertyregard- less of its use in violationof said Sec. 2> Art. TII; of the IX&. stitution,but is valid insofaras it exemptsp?ubLiopropertynsed for public purposes. City of Abilene v. State, 113 S.W. 2d c
Sec. &a of said Artfzle 7150 (not listedabovejwhioh re- quires power districtssuch as the Lower ColoradoSiver Authority to oav certainamounts In lieu of tsxea is Colkc~addo River Authorityv. ChemiaalBar& and Trust Co., 39C ST 2d $8,
The Court held power districtsto be poEti:nl sub~.ivlsLons of the State and as the property~wasdevoted k.oa public use it was exempt from taxation.underSec. 9 of Art. XI of the Coustitution, supra.
County and city property B' actuallyheld for a future public use is exempt althoughtemporarilyrented or ieased. state v. city o? Eoustoc,140 S-W. 2d 277* County and sity propertyLT 'used or held for public purposes is exempt,althoughno% owned or held exclu- sivelyfor such p:urpose.Stats v. City of Beaumont,I.61S.W. 2d 344. .,
hon. WilliamJ. Gillespie,page 4 (-W-281)
The Test for determiniugwhether "publicpropert'J" is tex exempt is whether it is used primarilyfor the health, comfortor welfsre of the nublic. To be used for public purpoae6it is not essentialthat it be used for governmentalpurposes. A. & 14.Consol. Ind. Sch. Dist. v. City of Bryan, 184 S.W. 2d 914. That charges are made for useof public propertydoes not withdraw it from its public character,if'suchchargesiarean incidentto its use by the public and the proceeds inure to the benefit of the politicalsub- divisions. Id.
Land acquiredby a city for a public purpose,such as a site for a water reservoir,is tax exewt, althoughthe city temporarily leases same for agricultcal or older purposes,if the city has not abandonedits intentionto build such reservoir. City of Dallas v. State, 28 S.W. 2d 937.
You are thereforeadvisedthat if the City is holding tine property in questionfor a future expansionof the airport,or for other public purpose that it is tax exempt to the City.
Article 7173, Vernon's Civil Statutuesprovides:
"Propertyheld under a lease for a term of three years or more, or held under a contractfor the purchase thereof,belongingto this State, or that is exempt