DocketNumber: V-271
Judges: Price Daniel
Filed Date: 7/2/1947
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017
Autwx.xN H. .lk%Au PRICE DANIEL *T?oRWEY GEN?mAL June 28, 1947 Hon. James F. Houllban, Opinion Bo. V-271 County Auditor, orange county, ; Rer Atlthoritgof Or- Orange, Texas ange County to issue time uar- ,Mlntsagainst tbe :z .ana bFi- Bear nr. xoullhanr Pour request for an opllllonof thls 4fzgErt- me& is eotnrtuntia~ly ae follower lPz%or.to the date of thle request, it had been~the ctlstcmof the.Cormnlseioners’ court to paI%s.an order, whsch .saiaolder lra8 retarded ln .theMinutes oS sala Co*t, .wbalW- in the Ommlesioner ,d sanb pertianlarprs- cinct was ~authorisedto lsbue a eorip .+7- rant agalnst~his p&m&act irmds payable ln one ‘oktwo or more gears arter date, tith @ wIthoot SMxmest, whereu$on the .CountyOlerlc. wtmld issue an ‘ordinaryscrip warrant dlrect- ed to the County Treatvarer,aad in the lower left haml oorner 0r saia scrip warrant or elmwhere in the body of ealclscrip warrant wtmld tit0 In the worde ‘Payableon or be- l.lOth, 19189 or similar &tee, fob rzzlA c the words With Interest e> per -‘. aamm.mes these irarrantawere pay- abfr to a bank an4 the Ooumdsaloner would a40 fbsl t0 the bank, discbunt them, and .~ bmm the pmoeeas deposited to hle preaiact amount, aad thereafter carrent warrante wmld be dram against these funda to pay atrJw allared for the arMnary ana necef3- w expemea incurma in the construction gmm~tot+nc~ ,or roads and bridges in tbat . .%metWea these scrip wamanta were &nwn to tbr order of t3omeparticular f%rnI ah MivLaual ana given in payment f.or shell, iron. James F. Koullhan - Page 2 (V-271) lumber, machinery, or other equipment and supplies. This t e of scrip warrant while payable In one (1c two (2), or mope years. from date of Issue dia not always bear Ia- terest. . . a. . . "1. Must all warrants Issued'against the roadand bridge funds of a county and payable out of revenue anticipatedIn some future year, sala warrants being carried as outstandingby the Treasurer,while other warrants were being paid out of current fuule, be classed as time warrants7 a2. Must the CommIseIonersCourt pub- lish their intention to Issue l!ImeWarrants as out?.Iaeaand provided for In Article 2s (NT ‘3. Can Orange County with a valua- tion of alight1 over elgbteen mIllIon and Ho/l00 dollars 9$``,OOO,,OOO.OO) lame arinety- fire Hun&red and l'?o/lOODollars ($9,500.00) la Time Warrants In'any one year against Its Read and Bridge funds without advertis publia~ or giving notice of the intea T! Ion Or of thoCfnmi~8lqaert3~ Court to do sq?. .4. If the Ccumnlaaloners~ Court should x!&ias an'oraer authorizing any partloular aan- . ml8sloner to issue a warrant, ecrlp 6r other- idme agamt his particular precinct fUula, mile ln any year other than the current yap with or without~lnterest,aaId warrant tobe psed by said commlSslonerto purchase ~;cI, shell, or road building matbrlal, 'orto be ticounted by said oommlaslonerand tsr,pooeeds used to finance current work In Ua pzeolnot and to pay other warrants issued wt his preclaot funds to pay alaIms Ia- m Uto these wappaats are authorleed, Is * Ooamty Clerk requiped to Iesue said war- xmts am mwh a court orderana ia the County ztgzaq to approve ana countersign - tnlml the Legislature paeeea what I8 ae- i a- a# the %ond and Warrant.Law* (Art. 2368a, Hon. James F. Houllhan - Page 3 (V-271) V.C.S.). The Bond,and Warrant Law, while it recognizes .Mme wrrad.6, and regulates ana lImIta their lseuance; do&t!not purport to.authorlzetheir Issuance; it does expressly authorize the funding OS euch warrants as tire validly Issued Into negotiable bonds’. The.manner ana mode OS such reSuaalag is careSully and minutely ipecl- riea. In the cases of the erectionof court houses, jails, aad the coastmotion of pub110 ma&s, it has been oitea heltYthat the county hae the Implied power to ls- . me time warrants~to pay therefor (A&IUEJ VB. McOi.11, 146 S. W. (26) 332; San Patrlclo Couaty vs..McClane,58 Tex.243; Oavls vs. Bumey, 58 Tex.~364; Stratton ~8. CamIssloners~ Court,137 S.W. 1170
; Leeater vs. Lopez, 217 S. w. 373). Section 7, Article Xl of he Constitution of Tern8 provides In partr a lUodebt for any purpose shall ever bi $krred in any manner by any city or oouaty lmlesa provision ia made at.the time of creatingthe .eame,for leVylag aqd oolleoting a suSSluI~nt tax to pay .thefin- teremt thereon and provide at kmst- two per centattaslnklngSunQ,. .*. TM8 department, Ia disoueslag’ the above con- etitutlaml p~ooialon, la Opinion Bo.- O-6433, dated July 24, 1945, state&a . : %a foregoing provIsIoa Is a restrlc- . . tiara and lImItatioa,and it .Ms been held :<.; that when no authority exists to levy a tax *.:.. to PJ a debt, no power can exist to Incur ‘.. tba &bt. (&mater v. Lopez, (Clv.App.) . 202d. W. 1039, affirmed 130 Tex..179, 217 S. Y. 373.) We point out that the term ’ ‘bci#’ab usea In the above oonstitutianal adsion is to be distinguishedrrom ob- b OM payable Sran aurmnt revenues. The tern ‘tibt’, above referred to has been aeflmd *a8 ocunprehendIn& any pecuniary ob- llgaWosrimposed by ooatract, exoept such as is at the date oS the agreement within ths la~Sul ti ,reasonablecontemplationOS t& mrtie8, to be eatiatled out of the our- mat revenuea for the year, or out OS some fuea then vUhU the immediate coxitrolof thm ~a.rloaors ' oourt Sdo.l21, p* 670). If ai'th!%iFi %*'- - . tractis made, it is contemplatedthat any &n. J-8 F. Houllban - Page 4 (V-271) I part 0s the purohaee price.18 to be *ia Srcm taxes levied and collected for ruttire years, the obligation aonatltutesa ‘debt’ wl$Un the meaning 0s the corurtitutional prohIbItion. *The legislaturehas authorized ooun- ties to create ‘debts’within the meaning 0s the oonstitutionby authorlslngthe is- mumoe of bonds and time warrants; and we are unablenna am lenal meane by which a cam&esIonera’ court ma6 obll ate )rhetax revenue8of the county for a Su&ure year other than by complyingwith the statutory provIslom aa to the issuance oS bonds a&or time warranta.” The term “time warrant’ has beea.aeSIaeaas includingany warrant iaeuea by a city or .couutynot pay able out of current funds ana those warrants.lssuedand payable out of aurreat Sunus aresImown as yecrlp warrints”. Therefore,your SIrst question should be aamrered in .the affirmnrtive%Mi8Inuchas warranta issued and payable,out oS antlaipatedrevenue8 i,nsuture years should be ‘c~Eu~sI- sled aa time rarraat;s. Seotion 2 of Article g3688, V. C. S., &ovSdes in part as r0~w8~ a . . . liotice0s the ti.mi3 and plaoe wha aad where mah coatraot shall be let s&l1 .be published in euoh oouity (i.S’ cons eardsg a aormty oontraot, or ooatract for mnh mbatvi~i0n 0s suoh county) ana In m@t oi* (ff oonoeming a aity ooatract), ww a week $or two oonsecutiveweeks prior to the time set for lettiag suoh oontract, m date OS the first publicationto be at lowt rowtesa aaya prior to the date set fw lot Mid aontract, axidaaia oon- twat rlml 9 be let to the lowest respoatti- Wlo Mwr, oa the respeotlVe type oS oon- &met+ aelected. .. . a prbritia, that la aaae of publia sty, whwe it.beoaneeaeaessary to aat at on00 to a ropMate money to re- llwi the neoesal T y of the oitltene, or to~nezWe the property of such oouuty or *, or vb8a St Is neaeesarg to preeerve Eon. James F. Houlihan - Page 5 (V-271) or protedt the public health of the clti- Zen8 of such county or city, or In caee of uaforeseen damage to public property, ma- chinery or equipment, t&Is provision ahall not apply; and provided further, that it shall not be applied to contracts for per- sonal or for professional services, nor to work done by such county or city and paid for by the day, as’such work progresses.” Section 3 of Article 2368a, ,V.C.S.,Is a8 Sol- 1Owet ?fhen It shall be the Intention of the CommI~sIoners~Court, or of the gov- erning body, to lasue time warrants for the,payment of all or any part of the pro- posed aontract, the notlae to.bldaers re- qu5lW under Section 2’of thIe Aot shall recite that fact, setting out the maximum amount of the proposed time warrant Inaebt- edmee, the rate of Interest.such time Wmaats are to bear, and the xa&ci.mWn ma- tur?lty&ate thereof. Section 5 o* Article 2368a, V.C.S., Is sub- stantifilly a8 r0ii0w8: “The notice tibqulreaIn Sectlom 2 and 3, aad the right to referendum election de- Simd in Section 4, shall not be applicable to expenditurespayable out of Our&eat funds or bond rum, a6 above aeacribea, aor to ad- tlltbaal expenditure8by counties unless In exaeee OS Five Hundred Dollar6 ($500.00 for eaccbdw Wllion Dollars ($l,OOO,OO,O.OO 1, w a oart thereof, of taxable property in’sala oaaw, according to the last approved tax rollai . . . andprovided further that no sti warraats shall ever be issued by a coun- la exoeee~of One Hundred Thousand Dollars ( %o ,OOO.OO) for any one year, without the ve notice and the’right to referen- :z?pz & ti in Section 3. Is in.exces8 of Uw W .the expenc¶lturecannot be au- #arUed uaiil the expiration of the time for aatha petition for referendum vote has . . . In the oaee of Foreman vs. Gooch, et al, 184 S. W. (a) 481, the court stated as follows: _ eon. James F. Houllhan - Page 6 (V-271) aAppellant,in hi.8briefs, concedes that the &xmnlssioaers~Court.has authority to Issue what Is commonly called 'Interest bearing time war.rants,'contendingthat such warrants are authorIz.ed by the pro- visions of Article 2368a, Vertion'sAnn. Clv. St ., which statute Is known as the *Baod andwerrant Law.' With this contea- tlm we are unable to agree. As we under- stand the decisions, the authority for a Camlssloners" Court to Issue Interest bear- ing time warrants is derived from what now is Article 2351, Vernon's Ann. Tex. CIv.St. San Patrlclo County v. Jno. McClane,58 Tex. 243
; Lasater v. Lopez,110 Tex. 179
, 217 S.W. 2;3. While Article 2368a, Vernon's Ann.CIv. ., is a restrlotlon or llmItatloa upon the authority 0s the CcnmnIssloaers``Court Inis- suisg suih warrants Section 5 oS said Artl- cle urovldes that suoh Act does not apply to exmndltures DaYable out of aurreat funds." Therefore, In answer to your second question, It I? ths opinion of this department that notice must be. given of the:intention of the C~seloaers 1 Court to 18~ sue tlWwaraWLtf3 is the expendituresare ia.excees 0s $5dO.OOfor tiaoh$~,OOO,OOO.OOoS tax,valtitlonor your county,ud the notices required by Article2368a, supra
, mwtbe&tvela before the Commisslonera~Court could le- gallyiwue time warrant.8for such purposes. Your sekoad questionshould be answered In the aSSlrmatIve. Xa uestlon 100..3you askwhether O&nge Coun- ty WlMue 19,500.00 "In time warrants ln any one year agalnstlts road -'bridge funds without advertising or publleb4 m giving notice of the Intention of the Can- IIISSS~-’ court t0.‘a0 a?,* aqd it is assumed by this de- partmeatthatthe expeI&dIture is to bemade fromandthe wwraabS~wd against current funds. IS such be the aa8e. Y obvlarrslyyour question relates to s~crlpwar- raata Llbad OS time warrants as stated In your question, and lte be mma from the foregoing oaae oS~Foremam vs. (loodr, da, rw, that .theprovlslons 0s Section 5 of 'Artl8leZ366ado not apply to those expendIt~es.S~cnncur- reatB,.but li the IndebtednessIs-to be evldeaoed by a tiwmt that is, oae r0r.a future year, then the '@ovi&a~ oS &ofion 5 would be applloable. Therefore, ltirfLopinSonoSthIs department that Orange County, wboea et&an lo alightly over $``,ooo,ooo.o~,may Is- stu$g~.OOirrro~pti~ants from the current funds of its iarlrnd b&%dga funds without advertising,pt?blIshing .. Ilou.JrupsaF. Eoullhan - Page 7 (V-271) or glvlag notice of Its Intention to do so. Your third questian should be answered in the afSIrmatIve. .; Any warrant ordered issued by the Commlssloa- ; era1 Court; payable out of the reasonably anticipated revenues for the current year Is a vaild warrant and should be Issued by the County Clerk ad approved by the CountyAuditor. But, if a warrant be atiered Issued agalhst future revenues of the.countyand not payable wlthla the year from current funds, the seme would be classed as a time warrant. .ThereSore,a prerequisite to the lsswiace of'time warrants would be the required notlce, a tax levy, and.the estabilsbmeatof a sinking Sun6 to care for the same. The County Clerk would be bound by the order of the CommIssI~ers~ Court to per- Sms a sdalsterlalduty, but If the time warrants are not In doaSormItywith law the County Auditor Is'aot legallyauthorlsea~toapprove the same. . -SUMMARY : 1. A ttie.'warra&inaludeasay tirraat lssueaby a city or countynot .payabl? Sroq 0-t Sunds and notice, a tax levy, ana the ore&lea .0ra sinklug fund are.prerequlsltes. i . for the ldsuarke 0s the same by a Comlssion- . ers' Cotirt. 2. The Cwml.ssIonerslCourt of Orange County,vhose valustloais sllghtlyover EighteeaiUlUoa Dollars,may Issue N%ae :~ Thweand Five madred wllsrs la scrip war- &6 colifs "c-at Suads"~wlthoutadVeT- 2' %~-$j8i?ivc: ,"*l::~:a%aG::oh lt il, 185 S.W. (2i) I;Si;'&dAdams vs. McGIli, 146 S.Y. (2a) 332. : . *Yours very. truli, . lHtlm,~*mw Assistant '. ..