Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
GERALD C. MANN ATTORNEY GENERAL
Bonorable A. J. Riley County Auditor, Van Zandt County Canton, Texas
Dear Sir:
Opinion No. 0-6233 Re: In absence of provision in county budget for expenses of a county agent, may the county pay for transporting 4-H Boys to a district meeting?
We are in receipt of your letter of November 16, 1943, requesting the opinion of this department on the question stated therein. Your letter reads as follows:
"According to the last federal Census my county has a population of 51,185, and according to the latest tax roll it has a valuation of some $22,000,000,00.
Your county budget for 1943 sets aside $600,00 for expenses for the County Home Demonstration About but makes no specific provision for expenses for the County Agent, except for salary.
Under the kind of setup, does the Com- dashdoy's Court and County Auditor have authority to expend county funds to pay the exposures of the County Agent and Assistant County Agent for transporting 4-H Boys from said county to Trinidad for the purpose of attending a district 4-H Club meeting?"
*2 Article 689a-11, Vernon's Anno:ated Civil Statutes, provides, in part, as follows:
" * * * and no expenditure of the funds of the county shall thereafter be made except in strict conpliance with the budget as adopted by the court. Except that emergency expenditures, in case of grave public necessity, to meet unusual and unforeseen conditions which could not, by reasonably diligent thought and attention, have been included in the original budget, may from time to time be authorized by the court as amendments to the original budget.
This department on numerous occasions, construing the above statute has held that a commissioners' court of a county was unauthorized to make changes in a budget after final approval and adoption, except in case of emergency and grave public necessity. In support hereof, we herewith direct your attention to Opinion No. 0-1053 and various opinions of this department mentioned therein. We enclose copy of said opinion. Also we are enclosing Opinion No. 0-638 regarding the authority of the commissioners' court to expend county funds for transportation of WPA workers engaged in drilling wells, etc.
The facts set out in your letter would indicate that the budget for the county contains no provisions for said expenditure; therefore, such expenditure could not be made.
Furthermore, after a careful search of the statutes, we fail to find any statute authorizing the expenditure under consideration.
We recognize the commendable purpose for which this money is desired to be expended; however, in view of the fact that such expenses are not provided for in the county budget, and in the absence of any law authorizing same, we respectfully answer your question in the negative.
Very truly yours
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS By W. P. Water
Asaiawawernow OPINIO COMMITT BY ONAIRMAL