-
January 28, 1952 Hon. Jack Y. Hardee Oplnlon No. V-1395 County~Attorney HehdersofiCcunty Re: Legality of purchasing a Athens,-,%xas computing machine and an addressograph for the Tax Assessor-Collector's Of- fice from the county per- Dear sir: manent improvement-fund. Your request for an opinion concerting the legality of purchasing a a*putlng machine and an ad- dresfil% machine for the Taj:,Assessor-Collector'sOf- fice from the county permanent lmprovement fund, In part, reads as follows: *Hexidetison~Countg Comm%ssl&ers de- slPe to purchase a Burroughs Tax Computing tichlne and an Address-O-Graph machine at a cost of.$10,000.00. These two machines are to be used in th@ Tax Collector's office and will provide a much more efficient method for tax,records and will also cut,down man hours. ."There is no ~money In the General Fund, however thei%ls~approxlmately ~$16,000.00in the P&rmanent;Imprbvement fund. The Commls- sidner's Cburt wants to'purchase the two ma- chines out of the Permanent Improvement fund. ~*The~two machines are ,lastlng in quality but require service with a servicing contract after the first .year. 'They are not attached to the floor or wall, however, they are seldom ever moved and will remain in one office at all times.' In Attorney General's Opinion No. V-808 (1949), It is stated: *Section 9 of Article VIII of the Con- stitution of Texas provides in part as follows: Hon. Jack Y. Hardee, page 2 (V-1395) *I . e . and no county, city or town shall levy more than twenty-five (25) cents for city or county urposes, and not ex- ceeding fifteen (15'icents for roads and bridges, and not exceeding fifteen (15) cents to pay jurors, on the one hundred dollars valuation, except for the payment of debts incurred prior to the adoption of the Amendment September 25, 1883; and for the erection of public buildings, streets, sewers, waterworks and other permanent lm- not to exceed twenty-five (25) e one hundred dollars valuation, in any one year, and except as is in this' Constitution otherwise provided; provided, however, that the Commissioners Court in any county may re-allocate the foregoing county taxes by changing the,rates provided for any of the foregoing purposes by either increasing or decreasing the same, but in no event shall the tot&l of said foregoing county taxes exceed eighty (80) cents on the one hundred dollars valuation, in any one year; . . .I 'The moneys accruing from taxes levied and~collected for each of the enumerated pur- poses are Constitutional funds. The lmme- dlate purpose of the above quoted provision of the Constitution is to limit the amount of taxes that may be raised for the several purposes. It is also~intended to require that any and all moneys raised by taxes for a p&rtlcular purpose shall be applied to that purpose and to~no other. Ault v. Hill %%% ~"',T"l~;a````1``6T``~'l````!%"z!t. 504 (19181." In order to answer your question, it is necessary for us to first determine whether, under the g:iVenfacts, these machines, when obtained and installed by the county in the office of the Tax As- sessor-Collector will become real property or retain their original status as personal property, for in Texas the law knows only these two species of property- Erwin v. Steele,
228 S.W.2d 882(Tex. Civ. App. 1950, error ref. n.r.e.). In that case at page 885, the Court said: . . Hon. Jack Y. Bardee, page 3 (V-1395) 'In a broad and general sense 'personal property' includes everything that is the subject of ownership not coming under the denomination of real estate. Black's Law Dictionary. 'Estate or property that is not real, consisting in general of things tem- porary or movable.' Webster's Mew Interna- tional Dictionary. "'Tangible or corporeal property Is either realty or personalty, the word "real' descr*lblngland and that which is anrexed thereto, and the term "personal" having re- ference to chattels, evidences of debt and chases in action.' 33 Tex. Jur., P. 937, Sec. 4. "'Although popularly the term *personal property" is used in a somewhat restricted sense to~lnclude only goods, chattels, tan- gible things, the subjects of personal use, in its broad sense it includes everything which is the subject of ownership not coming under the denomination of real estate.' 50 Cor. Jur., 760, sec. 36." In Crabb v. Keystone Pipe & Supply Co.,
177 S.W.2d 989(Tex. Clv. App. 1944, error ref.), the Court said: "There is a well-recognized rule whereby personal property can lose its character as such and become a part of realty. Such is the case when it is affixed to realty in such a manner as to become a permanent part thereof and cannot be removed without materially dam- aging the freehold.* It is the established law of this State that all county expenditures lawfully authorized to be made by a county must be paid out of the county's general fund unless there Is some law which makes them a charge against a special fund. Bexar County v. Mann,
138 Tex. 93,
157 S.W.2d 134(1941). Under the facts submitted and the authorities heretofore cited, it is our opinion that the character of the machines which the county wants to buy is that Hon. Jack Y. Rardee, page 4 (V-1395) ! of personalty and will so remain when Installed in the office of the County Assessor-Collector, for they will not be so affl.xed to the courthouse or freehold of the county as to become a permanent part thereof. There- fore, we agree with your conclusion that the permanent improvement fund of the county may not be legally ex- pended for the purchase of such machines. SUMMARY Tie Permanent Improvement Fund of Render- son County may not be legally expended for the purchase of a tax computing machine and an ad- dressograph machine for the use of the County Tax Assessor-Collector's Office when such ma- chinps will not be affixed to the courthouse or freehold of the County In such a manner as to become a permanent part thereof. Yours very truly, APPROVED: PRICE DANIEL Attorney General , J. C. Davis, Jr. County Affairs Mvislon E. Jacobson Reviewing Assistant Bruce W. Bryant Assistant Charles D. Mathews First Assistant BWBfwb;mh
Document Info
Docket Number: V-1395
Judges: Price Daniel
Filed Date: 7/2/1952
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017