Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1946 )


Menu:
  • Honorable J. A. Mooney
    County Attorney, Tyler County
    Woodvllle, Texas
    Dear Sir:                   Opinion No. O-6973
    Re: Where bonds were issued
    for the purpose of con-
    atruction,maintenance,
    etc. of certain deeig-
    nated state highways,
    which have since been
    abandoned by the State
    and have become county
    roads, may the money
    now be used for the
    maintenance of said
    roads? If not, for
    what purpose may It
    be used?
    We acknowledgereceipt of your opinion re-
    quest of Rovember 29, 1945, and quote from your letter
    as follows:
    "I enclose herewith a statement of facts
    and question addressed to you and handed me
    by Geo. R. Bcyd, County Judge of Tyler County,
    together with my opinion in answer thereto.
    "I would like to have your opinion one
    this matter."
    County Judge Geo. R. Boyd's letter of October
    10, 1945, reads as follows:
    "On June 14, 1930 an election was held
    that resulted In the iesuance of $300,000.00
    In bonds for the purpose of the construction,
    maintenance and operation of macadamized,
    graveled or paved roads and turnpikes, or
    in afd thereof, on the ortions of Highways
    numbered forty-five (45P , forty (40), and
    Honorable J. A. Mooney, page 2 (o-6973)
    one hundred and six (106) which lie In said
    road district No. 2 of Tyler County, Texas.
    “The bonds were sold and the proceeds
    placed on deposit with the Security Trust
    Company Austin, Texas, by sn agreementwith
    the State Hlghvag Department. The deposit
    vas secured with other bonds. The result
    was that Tyler County Road Bond DistrictNo.
    2 lost practically all of the proceeds of
    the $300,000.00 bonds sold due to having as
    securitybonds of other counties or cities
    that were practically worthless.
    “In the meantime the State Highway De-
    partment built each of the above mentioned
    Highways in Bond Dlstrlct lo. 2 In Tyler
    County, except about 12 mile6 of Highway
    Ho. 45 which has not been built to date,
    although the R 0 W has been purchasedfor
    this unbllt portion.
    “Out of the salvage of the securltles,
    several thousand dollars was recovered which
    Is on deposit with the County Depository.
    Tne County Treasurer carries It as a Road
    & Material Fund.
    “At the time of the Bond Election the
    above mentioned HLghways had been designated
    and were being maintained by the State Elgh-
    way Department. When the State Hlghway De-
    partment constructed them they vere reloca-
    ted and In some Instances several miles from
    the original locations. Since the nev ones
    were built the State Highway Department has
    ceased to maintain the original roads, there-
    by releasing them to the county.
    "Will you please advise whether or not
    this funds now on deposit with the County
    Depository can be used for maintaining the
    original highways that were beiF& used at
    tie time of the bond tiecZar.   IC not, for
    vhat purpose can the funds be legellg used?"
    Honorable J. A. Mooney, page 3 (O-6973)         ,,.     .i
    ** + * In .1930,the roads designated In
    paragraph 1 of your letter were .state hlg&       .:    .:f
    ways7a@ the purpose ,of the bond lssue.was.
    the building and Improving of them as such.,
    "Not ,lessthan two years ago and some .I '.i
    thirteen years after the bond issue was vo-'
    ted, .thesehlghways'werere-designatedond           :~ .i,
    built completelgby the State along new :~._:.(
    routes.     On-their aoceptance from the con-. .,'I~
    tractors, the old hlghvays were .released.to~:
    the countg,~thlsalso occurlng more than two :
    ~gearsago and some thirteen years after uls
    bond Issue was voted.
    "In some Instances,the old &itei Or _"
    ~:~1the3e!hlghways   are completelyabandoned``,ln-
    -.``the.lnstance  of Highway 45, the ferrycwhi'ch:':.:.~,
    connected with Its continuancein Jasper ~,I~,.~,.    ! ,.
    County.Easterly    has been abandoned,:and:.it.-:-
    .'~,'I.
    .~:'
    Is wholly In everg.scnsenow a c.ounty   ,road.,   ‘,.
    “Any of this money that might be spent            ~'
    upon the roads covered In your question would
    at this time be spent on more county roads
    and not upon 'PORTIONSOF HIGHWAYSNO. 45,..
    40 and 106’ as set out of paragraph one,.of
    your letter.                            :.
    "Under these facts and circumstances,
    I am of the opinion that the first part of ~.~
    _
    your question should be ansvered 'NO.1
    "As to the use which can be made of
    this money, I am of the opinion that a re-
    tirement of the obligationwould be the only
    use to which It can be put."
    We gather from the facts stated In the above
    quoted letters that the proceeds of the bonds voted
    on June 14, 1930, were ear-marked to be used on the
    . portions of Highways Nos. 45, 40 and 106, which lie
    In said Road District No. 2 of Tyler County, Texas.
    Based on the facts and circumstancesstated
    In your letter, we agree with you that the first part
    of your question should be answered In the negative.
    .
    Honorable J. A. Mooney, page 4 (o-6973)
    It has repeatedly been held by the Appellate
    Couzts of thin State that when a county commlssloners~
    court enters a pse-electionorder designatingthe road
    and specltlcallydeclaring the purpose for which the
    bond money Is to be expended, said commlsslonerstcourt,
    or subsequent commissioners1 courts   cannot change the
    designation of such road or expend the money for any
    other purpose than that speclflcallydeal nated In the
    pro-election order. Black v. Strength,2&6 5. W. 79,
    Fletcher v. Ely, 53 5. W. (26) 817, error refused,
    Moore v. Kaufman, 
    200 S.W. 374
    .    Any other rule would
    tend to undermine public confidenceIn the acts of
    public officers. See also Golden Gate Bridge and Hlgh-
    way District v. Filmer, 21 Pac. (2d) 112, Perry v.
    Los Angeles, 
    203 P. 992
    .
    As to the USC which can be made of this money,
    we also agree with you that a retirementof the obllga-
    tlons would be the only use to which It can be put.
    We believe that sold money should be placed In the
    sinking fund for the retirement of the outstanding
    bonds.
    APPROVEI,DEC 12, 1945                Yours very truly
    /a/ Grover Sellers            ATTORNEX GENERAL OF TEXAS
    ATTORNEY OENRRAL OF TEXAS
    By   /s/   Claud 0. Boothman
    Claud 0. Boothman
    CCBrEP:LM                                       Assistant
    APPROVED
    OPIXION
    COMKITTEE
    BY BWB
    CFJIRMAN
    

Document Info

Docket Number: O-6973

Judges: Grover Sellers

Filed Date: 7/2/1946

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017