Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1974 )

September 11, 1974.
The Honorable William R. Pemberton Opinion No. H- 397
County Attorney
P. 0. Box 610 Re: May a county become a
Beeville, Texas 78102 dues paying member of a
chamber of commerce which
is a corporation.
Dear Mr. Pemberton:
Your request for an opinion explains that the Beeville and Bee
County Chamber of Commerce is a corporation, and that its Board of
Directors has asked Bee County, through the Commissioners Court,
to become a dues-paying member. You also advise that the purposes
and functions of the organization include promoting industrial develop-
ment in the county, the development of downtown Beeville, and the
promotion of the county-owned stadium. We understand that it also
supports other measures beneficial to its commercial members.
Specifically, you have asked:
May Bee County, through the Commissioners Court,
become a member of the Beeville and Bee County
Chamber of Commerce and pay dues, out of the
General Fund, in the amount of $1, 500.00 per year?
In a helpful. brief you have directed our attention to several Texas
Constitutional prbrisions bearing on the matter --among them, Article
11 $ 3 of the Constitution which reads in pertinent part:
No county, city or other municipal corporation shall
hereafter become a subscriber to the capital of any
private cor,poration or association, or make any
p. 1856
__._~
i -’
. ., I
The Honorable William R. Pemberton page 2 (H-397) ”
.
appropriation or donation to the same, or in
anywise loan its credit. , ..
In our opinion this provision of our Constitution prohibits Bee
County from becoming a dues paying member of the Beeville and Bee
County Chamber of Commerce, and Article 3 5 52 of the Constitution
prohibits legislative authorization of such a practice. Attorney General
Opinion O-6168 (1945).
The situation you describe does not, in our opinion, come within
the holding of Barrington v. Cokinos, 338 S.W.2d 133 (Tex. 1960). Nor
is it insulated from the abuses which those Constitutional provisions
were designed to prevent, as was the case in Brazes River Authority v.
Carr, 405 S.W. 2d 689 (Tex. 1966). It is an attempt to secure for the
community and its citizens by subscription to a private corporation general
benefits resulting from encouragement of private industry and business.
While this is a laudable purpose it is one to which Bee County is prohibited
by law from participation.
Although counties may not, in our opinion, become dues paying
members of private corporations operating chambers of commerce in
order to promote and advertise the area, the Legislature has enacted
provisions enabling certain counties to raise and spend funds for advertising
and promotion under certain conditions which include an authorizing elec-
tion and the establishment of a Board of Development. Articles 23528,
2352c, 2352d, V. T. C.S. And see Bland v. Taylor, 37 S.W.2d 291 (Tex.
Civ. App., Austin, 1931) aff’d 67 S.W.2d 1033 (Tex. 1934). Authority to
engage in such activities under such conditions, however, does not carry
with it other authority to join or make donations to private organizations
in order to achieve a similar end. Attorney General Opinions M-936(1971),
O-2629 (1940).
SUMMARY
A county may not become a dues paying member
of a chamber of commerce which is a corporation.
ery truly yours,
Attorney General of Texas
p. 185
-
r-
The Honorable William R. Pemberton page 3 (H-397)
APPROVFD : ‘. ’
I
LARRY F.\jY&
LL
DAVID M. KENDALL. Chairman
on Committee ,.
,
p. 1858