Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE AYTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS / I This has been made good 6. again by Acts 58th Leg
Roncreble J. 26. Williams County~Auditor
Tarrant County
Fort Wmth, Texao
Dear Sir:
"It haa boefi.a,well eettlad aoume ai 'px%- oedura for many years r0r the Aaeessor-Colleator to pay his oommlaslc~n for aseesalng end ooXleo$- ing taxes out or the dirrerot funds of the County affeoted, in the same proportion as the tax rates of eeah fund bears to the Wtal tax rate for the county.
Honorable J. M. %'illiam8, Page 2
*In view or the above, we eek this question: "*In cerrylng out the duty im@tiGd upon the Court under Artlole 7212, ea above pointed out, oan the expenses thereby in- ourred be paid out of the different tex funds in the proportion as the tax rate of eeoh fund bear8 to the total tex rate for the County?
". . . ." As to the valuation of rendered property, Article 7185, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes, provides in pert;
"If the twsse68or Is Satisfied with the valua- tion as rendered * * *, he shall 80 enter the same; ii he Is not satisfied with the valuation, he 8hall rerer tha same to the Board or Pquallurtlon or the County for their aotion, shall immediately not- ii9 the person rrom whom he reeelved said liet that he ha8 rererred said valuation to the Board of I.'quelization.*
Artiole 7206, Vernon*8 Annotated Civil Statute8 provide8 in pert:
6Eaoh Coaaalesionere* Oourt shall oonvene and sit a8 a Bo~ard of Equalization on the seoond hondey in May of each year, or a8 soon thereafter a8 practioable before the first day of June, to receive 811 the assessvmnt lists or hook6 0r the as8eseore of their Countlee for inapeotion, oor- reotion or equalization and approval.
"1. They Shall cause the sssessor to bring before them at such meeting all said assessment lists, books, 6tO., for inspeotion, end see that every person has rendered his property at 8 fair mnrket velue, and shall have power to send ror persons, books and papers, swear and qualify per- sons, to esoertain the value of auoh property, snd to lower or raise the value of the same. *I. l . .*
Honorable J. Y. Wllliama, Page 3
Artiole 7211, Vernon's Annotated Civil Stetutea, provides in etieot that In listing property, the l aseasor shall state hie valuation ii he oonaiders that the owner has undervelued. Furthermore, &?ticle 7212, Vernon's Anno- tsted Civil Stetutes, gives to tha Board of Eqrlalizetion a general power of SuperViSing a8aee8mente end "if Setlafied thst the valuation of any property is not In aooordanoe with the laws of the atete, to inarease or diminish the s8me and to fix 8 nroper valuation thereto, as provided rar in the preoeding artlo1e.v Referring to these provisions It was stated in the case of Republio Ino. Company va. Highland Park Inde ndent "ohool Dlstriat (57 S. W. (2) 627, error dismissed Y that "the plain import and meaning of theee stet- utory prOViSiOn is, that when an owner tenders to the aa- aesaor a listing end valuation of his property ror taxation it la the duty of the asBeaaor to rsoalve the same, and In oaae of dlfferanoe of opinion between them as to the valna- tiona plaoed upon the property by the aner, the a8aeaaor*a duty then is to refer the aattor to the Con6nisslonerar Oourt as a Board of Equalization, the Court, arter notioe to the owner, is to hear evldanae, settle and fl% the disputed valuatlon.W
Prom the iaots stated in your letter, we assume, our o inion as to whether or not money may
that you desire be taken from the 3: var 0~8 funda of the oounty inoluding all the constitutional funds to pay such persona who shall teati- fy under oath conoamlng the aharaoter, quality and quantity or suoh property, es well 68 the value thereof under the pro- vialona or Artlole 7212, aupra. It is to be noted in the first plaoe th8t the Commissioners* Court has no authority aside from that granted to it by the Oonstltution, or Legis- lature. ~a stated by the .Supreme Court of Texas in the oaae of Commiaaloner8~ Court of Idadieon County ~6. :Tallaoe, 15 s. w. (2) 535:
v* * * As aaid by the Court of Civil Appeela in its opiniont the Commiaalonera* Court is a oreature or the %ate Constitution and its powers ere limited end oontrolled by the Constitution and the laws as paS88d by the Legislature.* It %S to be noted that in the oaw 0r Roper vs. Hall, 280 3. W. 289, the oontraot about whioh the case was oonoerned, oelled ror th6 payment of the rw 0r tax e@neera by warrants drawn on the general fund of the oounty. The *4 Eonorable J. M. Williams, Peg8 l+
Court dose not discuss the question of whether Or not the enginsers aould have been paid with warrant8 drawn on aMna of the cOnstitutiona fund8 Of the County.
The outetandlng authority on the propoeition Or
the purposea f=or whloh the oonstitutional fund8 may ba 8x- ponded by the C~mmlseioners ' court IS the ease or Carroll Y& vfiiih?~~6, 202 !% we sob, %1p81!18 cOWt Or ?8Xa13. In this o&38, the 3lprBPl8 COUl't sp8OiriOally held that th8 mOn8y oOlleOt8d for the various OoMtitutional funds could not ba Spent for any Other purpose then the.purposa ior whioh euoh fund was set up by the Oonetitution. The OaS8 Of Wyatt County Judge, et al, YS. MoOill,
ll4 2. K. (2) 860, among other things, holds that the Corn-- Court may Yalidly employ "akilled ezpert~* to mirslonere~ value ror taxation purpo5ss prop8rty in epeolal lnstanaea, Wh8r8 t8OhniOal WJUiplWlt iS r8qUil’8d.
In Opinion Ij,. O-1612, this d8pOrtm8nt held that the County Commlsaionera* Gtiurt had authority to employ tax fSfi,nsiA88rS t0 r8p888nt the C0mBiSBiOnBrB' COurt ill arriYiIlg at various 011 valuations in Folk County. And that suoh oontraot was not analogous to the oontraot ror thr 001180- tion for delinquent taxea.
The case or Maxpart, et al Ys. Harris County, et al, 117 S. W. (2) 494, holds that a oontraot Wb8r8by e county 8mp1OyS skill8d 8m8rtS to dieowar and p1aO8 On rOfls f0r taxation property whhioh has tharetoiora aecaped taxation wa8 a oontraot *in 'oouneotion with oolleotion or delinquent tarsaw and wlthln tha statute requiring suoh OOntrsot~ to be apprwed by th8 Comptroller Or Pub110 Aueounta and Attorney &n8ral Or t&S State of Texas and was raid without suoh approral. Th.%a oaae iurther holds that the partioipatioa Of the Comptraller was an :ndlepansable requirement ror the validity or the oon- tract whereby sk$iled experts agreed to eaaroh for, ~u??Y~J, identity the owners of, and make an appraieal of all the tax- ab16 pereonalty in a oounty shOwing the Yalue of suoh prapcrty aa of January 1, 1938, and to 0olDplete a land building valuation survey for tha 8ntira 00Unty and ii18 th8 eaaplete report of such lend and btildlngs and the Yalusa ior the use of tha Board of Equalization end th6 Tax Ass8sBOr and Callee%or.
It, is further stated in Opinion No. 0-~612, supra, *that the Commissionera t Court le unauthorized to pay the firm of tax engineare InYolYad to aselat said Court In evalu- ation or oil properties in the county out 0r any or the verloua *5 flonOrabl8 J. W. Williams, Paga 5
6onatltutlonal funds or said county. There is no authority for the paymnt or such money out or sny fund except the gfneral fund."
In view of the roregoing authorities and the roots ill YOU? letter, W8 r88DWJtiPgly 8llSWeeI the above 8t6t8d stated qucation in the negativs.
Trueting th6t the toregoing fully emw6re your ln- qulry, wa m-8
Yours very truly ATTOFINEYGFBERAL UP TRXS --GiL- (5L&a!d BY Ard8l.l Williams Aaeldmnt