Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1951 )

August 16, 1951
Hon. W. A. Eedden Opinion Ho. V-1238
County Aftomey
Peooe county Be: Authority or the oom-
Fort StooktOn, Torea mlEiaionera’ oourt to
cell en eleotion to
levy a tax tar edver-
Beer Sir: thing purpot388.
Bererenoe is made to your requeet which made
in pert es r0iim8:
“The~Peoos county Chamber or’~0mm9~0
with offioes here in Ft. Btookton, Texas
are applying to the county asking that (LLL
dbotion bs chlled to vote a tax or rive
cents on $100.00 valuation for edvertialng
pur oaem. I have advised the County Judge
of this county that in my opinion there
f3
a no law In Texas whereby Peoos County oen
levy such a tar.
“Under dot or 47th Leg., ~3. 8. Bo.1082,
Chapter 558 there ia a provision of the law
authorizing the above tar, but under Qeo. 2
or said Act it etatee that 8uoh tax levy la
reetrioted to counties of more than one hun-
dred thousand population. Peoos County doee
not hate this population.
“The above law was emended lee& Legla-
lature under Home Rule Cities Ch. 224, H. B.
IJo. 298, but a8 I under&and it this amended
eat only added home rule oitles.to the law,
end that the restriction of 100,000 popule-
tion still applied.
=I will thank you for en opinion as to
whether Peo~e County, being under the 100,000
bracket gan oall an eleotion ror purpose 0r
levying thiq 5t tax.”
Hon. W. A. Hadden, page 2 (V-1238)
According to the 1950 Federal census, Pecos
County has a population or 9,939 inhabitants.
The decisions of the Texas courts have repeat-
edly held that the commissioners’ court is e oourt of
limited jurisdiction end has only such powers as are con-
rerred uponit, either by express terms or by necessary
imnlioation. bs the statutes and Constitution of this
State. Chiid~ress County v. State, 127 Tex. 343, 92 S.W.
2d 1011 T1936); Von Rosenberg v. Lovett, 173 S.W. 508
(Tex; Civ. App; 1915 error ref.); Ro er v. Hall 280
S.W. 289 (Tex. Civ.‘App. 1925); Art. 2 51, V. C. 9.;
-pj---,
11 Tex. Jur. 632, Counties, Sec. 95.
House Bill 1082, Acts 47th Leg., R. S. 1941,
ch. 558, p* 905, (codified as Artiole 2352d), V. C. S.,
provides in part es follows:
“Section 1. That all counties in the
State .of Texas may appropriate from the Gen-
eral Fund of said counties en amount not ex-
oeeding five (5) cents on the one hundred
dollars assessed valuation, for the purpose
of advertising and promoting the growth and
development of such county; providing that
before the Commissioners Court of any county
may appropriate any sums for such purpose,
the qualified taxpaying voters of said coun-
ty shall, by a majorityvote of the persons
voting at such election, authorize the Coun-
ty Commissioners to thereafter appropriate
not to exceed five (5) cents on the one hun-
dred dollars assessed valuation .0e0’
“Sec. 2. The authority to levy the tax
provided for herein, shall be restricted to
counties of more than one hundred thousand
(100,000) population, acoording to the most
recent United States Census.”
House Bill 298, Acts 52nd Leg., B. S, 1951, ch.
224, p0 359, amends Section 1 of House Bill-1082, supra,
so as to include home rule cities. However, Section 2
was not amended, Therefore, Article 2352d is not appli-
cable to Pecos County, since it has a population of less
than 100,000 inhabitants. We know of no law which au-
thorizes a county of its population to levy a tax for
advertising purposes, Therefore, we agree with you that
Hon. W. A. Hedden, page 3 (V-1238)
Peoos County is not authorized to call en election for
the purpose of levying a five-cent tax for advertising
purposes.
SUMMAHY
The Commissioners* Court of Pecos Coun-
ty is not authorized to call an eleotion for
the purpose of levying a five-cent tax for
advertising purposes.
APPROVED: Yours very truly,
Everett Hutchinson PRICE DARIEL
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Charles D. Mathews
First Assistant "ap +fg+&i<
Assistant
BA:awo