Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1949 )

PmmCE DANIEL AWESTEN nn.TEXAS
AFTDIlNEY ~x-z.TsI1IAI.
-
Februmy 23, 1,949.
_
Honorable Ralph Logan Oplaioa Ro.
_. v-779. __
District Attorney
5fat Judicial Dietrlat Rer Several queatioas regard-
San Angelo, Texas Lag the authority of the
CommW3loaer8' court of
Ooke County to isaus in-
tiirest bearing time war-
lv3at.s for the-jnarpose of
astablishing and equ&lng
__ a oounty hospital.
Dear Sir: __
Yorp~requiwtfor an opinionon the above rub-
jaot matter 113"-part a! follows:
"In behalf of Ehe CoPmieslonrra' court
of Coke County, TexaB, I detire to submit for
your opinion the queetioaswhioh will be set
forth below.. ._
"On llslroh
27, 1948, an eleotionwas bold
in COW County at which the following ques-
tioa was submItted
_. to the voters:
*Shall the CZimmlssloaere~ Coiirt of
Coke County, Texaa,*'laaue tim8-warrant8
of Coke County; Texas, to the'amount ‘df
$50,000.00, bearing iiiterest--at the rate
iiot to exoeed 4$ per eiinu.&; and maturing
at suoh time or times a8 may be moat eX-
pedieat by the Commiaf310aerst Court, Be-
riilly or otherwise, not to exceed ten
years from their date, for the--purpose
~of estiPblUM.ng and equip@ ~suae;C+itJi
Hospitsr and if there awl1 e Snnually
levied and coIleoted on all taxable
propeiitg in s&id CountJ~for the OuW@int
gijar--and annually thereafter while aald-
WariVtate or any of th6m are 0utatsndlllg,
a tax euffioieat'~to~'pay the ourrisnt in-
terest on said warrants and to pay the
Honorable Ralph Logan, page 2 (V-779)
-.
principal thereof ae the seme becomes
due o Q,
The CommisSloherst Court had pleas drawn for
the hospital and upon subtissloa .of the samq
ior blQs,the love,& bid was $67,000,00. A
htiapital’ bf the .typs which they ‘wished to eh-
tablish oannot be coastruoted So? the sum of
$50,000.00. Furt.hermore, they have found
that by lnoreaalng the amovlt whioh thii coiin-
ty vi11 put into the hospital, a substantla1
contribution oan bS obtained from the Federa
ffovernment thus enabling them to ooaatruot a
miiOh better county hospital. _
‘1. Does the oomlabloiieret courthave
@ha piiifer to issue time warrants with whlc&
to fin-ince the construction of the county
hospital? :. 0
-:“~2. Can a part. of the pPooeeds of s.uah
warrknts be us,ed In ,the purchaee of equipment
for aaoh.hospital? e o 0
.-Jo ‘plie proposition s’ubmltted to the
vote&‘on March 27, 1948, oarrled. The elea-
tlon vas held pursuant to the petltlon’of 301
persoiis prerented on FobNary 24, 1948. Does
the fact that the amouut approved In this
eleotlon was’the sUn of $50,000.00 preolude
the 00ml88loaera~ oourt;~frbn’lseulirg’t~e
warrants in excess of that amount? 0 0 (I
Article 4478 Va. C. S., provi+mn
“The dommiieioaers``oourt bf ‘my .oounty
~shaI1 have powei’to eBtabllsh a county hb‘e;-
pita1 and’to ;ehlarge~-any existing hospitals
ior the card and treatment of’pereoae auf-.
ferlag from any Illness, dlseaee or Znjuri,
subj&ct tii the provisions of this Chapter.
At $nte.%vala of not leas than twelve months,
tiin$iir cent of tlie quallfliid property tax
p&ylag voters of a county majr petition such
cbiurt to pravide for the establishing or en-
U&rglng of ,a oounty hotipital, in frhioh event
said court vithlii the time de,slgnated in -.
such petition shall submlt to suoh voterrs at
._ _.
Hoaoribl? Ralph Log& page 3 (vT’?79)
a epeclal or regular el*2351 Va. C. S. (setting forth the
general powers of the Commlsaioneral Court which ln-
elude the building of roads and bridges) rather than
Article 2368a V. C. S., which is a restriction or 8.
1imltatFon upon the authority of the Commissioners’
Court to issue such varr8nts. We quote the following”
“Appellant, in his briefs, concedes that
the Commissioners’ Court has authority to ls-
sue what Is commonly called ‘interest bearing
time warrants, I contending that such warrants
are authorized by the provisions of Article
2368a, Vernon”8 Ann* Civ, St., which ;;.pte
is known as “Bond and Warrant Law.”
this contention we are unable to agree. As
we understand the deoisioas, the authority
for a Commissioaers~ Court to issue interest
bearing time warrants is derived from whs.t
now is Article 2351, Vernon”s Ann. Tex. Civ.
St, San Patriolo County v. Jno. M&lane,
58 Tex. 243; Laaater vO Lopez, 110 Tex. 179,
217 S.W. 373. While Article 2368a,,Vernoa’a
Ann. Civ, St.,‘18 a restriction or limita-
tion upon the authority of the Commlssloners~
Court in lseulng such warrants Section 5 of
said Article provides that such Act does not
apply t;o expenditures payable out of current
funds.
In view of the foregoing, it is readily Seen
that where Commissioners @ Court is expressly authorized
to construct a building, it has the Implied authority
Honorable Ralph Logan, page 6 (V-779)
to issue interest bearln time warrants to pay for such
construction'. Article 4$ 78 8xpressly authOri88e the ee-
tablishment and maintenance of a county.&epital lnclud-
ing the equipping of said hospita.1 and all other neces-
sary permanent improvements in coi'inection therewith.
Therefors, it is oUr opihlon, in answer to your first
and second questions, that the Commlssioners'l~ Court of
Coke County has the power to issue time warrants with
which to finance the construction and equipping of a
county hos ital, provided, of course, that the terms of
Article 23 z 8a ar8 met,
There is no r4qulrement In laii that time war-
rant4 be authorized by a vote ol ths qua&Iii d proptirty
taxph;yihg votdrs, The speoifioatlcn of the 'jO,OOO.OO
of warrant0 in the el8CtiOn proceeding4 would, there-
fore, not restrl& the authiiritg of the Commlssii5ners'
COU??tto- iSSU8 WtWraiitseein aii nmOUXIt8XO88d%ng said
&O;f;OO if elioh WSrrants a1'4 Issued ia nOOordanb8
It Wa8 h4ld in Attorney ~4il8l'a~'8'opinion
Ho. V-72&that the Cosimission8Ps1 Court was authorirsd
to Issue additional WaFrants for ths purpo48 of improv-
ing the grounds of Bsxar County Agricultural and Live-
stack Buildin sUbj8Ot to th8 ri of r8fsrdndwD by
th8 VOt8rs. tfe quotr the Z
_.
"They have the right tmdsr kti.olb 2368a,
V"CS., to f118 8 l'8f8P8ndUIIl petition and--re-
qulre that the Question oi le4Ulng suoh war-
Z'8at8 br 8UbfSitted t0 the VOt8&8 Of the OOWI-.
fa. ThSF8 Va8 a0
at the filns the
of waWants w8r8 188ued bg the bornmissioners
Court: If suoh remedy Is not invoked within
the etatutory timb llnit; It ib OUI!opinion
th8t the additlcnal W4rl"aDtS raj be is4Ued
for th8 purpose of maklng suoh improvements
as submitted by you in your reguest.
.. If the prcoeedings authorielng the $67,000.00
of warrents are fa aocordanoe with the tsrms and condi-
tions of Article 2368a, and If no referendum jj;stItlon ~.
it4 filed in oonnrotion theretith, then euoh warrants may
lawfully be issued.
.
Roaorible Ralph Logan, page 7 (v-779)
The Commlssion8rs' court has aiithorlty
t0 iSSU8 int8P8St beariry tiQ8 WkUTfUlt8 fOl’
the pUl'pOS8 Of' 8stabli8hiag and 8qUippfllg Et
county hoepit@, provided th8 terne and con-
ditions of LLrtiole 2368a,V. C. S., ar8 nst.
k'tiOl8 4478; A. 0. Opinion Ilo. v-728.
Yours v8rJ truly,
QEIflPtALOF TBXAS
ATTORlt101
JR:bh
APIROVICD