Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1977 )


Menu:
  • Honorable Joe Resweber                Opinion No. H-1059
    Harris County Attorney
    Houston, Texas 77002                  Re: Tax exemption for
    building to house the Courts
    of Civil Appeals in Harris
    County.
    Dear   Mr.   Resweber:
    You have posed a tax exemption question.
    A group of citizens in Harris County plans to form a
    non-profit corporation in order to acquire an old bank building
    in downtown Houston for use by the Courts of Civil Appeals.
    Under the plan, the building will be officially designated
    a Texas historical landmark by the Texas Historical Commis-
    sion; it will be used solely as a public courthouse.  Upon
    acquiring the building, the group plans to dedicate it imme-
    diately and irrevocably to public use, but title to it will
    not be conveyed to Harris County until after the long-term
    (30 years) purchase-money mortgage against it has been re-
    tired by the corporation.  In the meantime Harris County,
    under the plan, will pay rent for its use at a rate sufficient
    to discharge the mortgage but insufficient to afford the cor-
    poration a profit. You ask:
    Would the proposed Court of Civil Appeals
    Building be exempt from State and County
    ad valorem taxes?
    We cannot answer categorically because tax exemption
    questions turn on particular facts, and many pertinent facts
    are unavailable.
    The Texas Constitution authorizes the Legislature to
    grant certain statutory exemptions from taxation, including one
    for public property used for public purposes.  Tex . Const. art.
    8, 5 2. Article 11, section 9 of the Constitution automatically
    exempts by its own terms "[tlhe property of counties, cities
    p- 4349
    Honorable Joe Resweber       ,- Page 2   (H-1059)
    and towns. owned and held only for public purposes, such as
    public buildings and the sites therefor . . . and all other
    property devoted exclusively to the use and benefit of the
    public." For either of these "public property" exemptions
    to apply, however, it is essential that the property be
    used for public purposes; and wholly apart from its use, it
    must be publicly owned, not privately owned. Leander Ind.
    Sch. Dist. v. Cedar Park Water Supply Corp.,  
    479 S.W.2d 908
     (Tex. 1972).
    We do not believe that the proposed transaction can be
    structured to take advantage of the "public property" exemption,
    for if Harris County owns the property itself, it will have no
    apparent cause to pay rent for its use. -See Tex. Const., art.
    3, 5 52; art. 11, § 3.
    The Legislature is also permitted by article 8, section
    2 of the Constitution to exempt from taxation certain property
    of purely public charities.   In San Antonio Conservation
    Society, Inc. v. City of San Antonio,   
    455 S.W.2d 743
    (Tex.
    ‘1970)I the Texas Supreme Court upheld the exempt status of an
    historic property known as the Navarro House. The house was
    owned by a nonprofit corporation chartered for the purpose of
    preserving historical buildings and sites, and the corporation
    was operated as such in fact. It used the property exclusively
    as an historical site and museum for the benefit of all the
    public, and it never leased it or otherwise used it with a
    view to profit. The Supreme Court concluded that preservation
    of the house qualified as a "purely public charity" because
    the Constitution lays upon government an obligation to pre-
    serve the evidences of Texas' historical heritage: the pres-
    ervation of the house affected all the people by assuming to
    a material extent that which otherwise might become the duty
    or obligation of the community or state. Moreover, the duty
    to provide courtroom space for the First and Fourteenth Courts
    of Civil Appeals is a governmental obligation which is statu-
    torily imposed on Harris County. .V.T.C.S. art. 1817.
    If facts surrounding the building under consideration
    here meet the criteria set out in San Antonio Conservation
    Society we believe that the same reasoning would be applied
    to It. V.T.C.S. art. 7150, §5 20, 22. Assuming it acquires
    tax-exempt status as an historical building, the anticipated
    rental and use of the old bank building by Harris County need
    not destroy that status. The Supreme Court recently held in
    City of McAllen v. Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society,
    
    530 S.W.2d 806
    (Tex. 1976), that an exemption will not be with-
    drawn so long as the charitable requirements are met, even
    P- 4350
    .   .    .
    Honorable Joe Resweber             -   Page   3   (H-1059)
    though the charitable purposes are joined with other, non-
    charitable purposes. --
    But see River Oaks Garden Club v.
    City of Houston, 
    370 S.W.2d 851
    (Tex. 1963).
    SUMMARY
    It is unlikely that the planned acquisi-
    tion by a non-profit corporation of an
    old building to be rented to Harris County
    as a courthouse can be structured to make
    the building tax-exempt as "public prop-
    erty," but the building might become a
    tax-exempt historical site. A building
    owned by a non-profit corporation and
    rented to Harris County as a courthouse
    would not be exempt from taxation as
    "public property," but it might be exempt
    as an historic site under article 7150,
    sections 20 and 22, V.T.C.S.
    ery truly,yours,
    Attorney General of Texas
    APPROVED:
    C. ROBERT HEATH, Chairman
    Opinion Committee
    jst
    P. 4351
    

Document Info

Docket Number: H-1059

Judges: John Hill

Filed Date: 7/2/1977

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017