Case Information
*1 OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN
Zlonor%bl% B. Faua%ttYora%, Zlonor%bl% B. Faua%ttYora%, Speeker Speeker Eotme of Reprsseittatives Eotme of Reprsseittatives
Au~tln, Tazslr Au~tln, Tazslr
Bear 81r: Bear 81r:
in whloh pna r
18mled under t
mmta8pro~ed
and le$%l obli
ot to sxeeed i1rte.n (16) year& e of refunding all tlw outstand- of the G@wral l!'wd debtadmss
It 18 the opinion of this dePertment thati the bond8 6otaght to be issued under authority of the propolrod sasab- ment would be valid and lag%2 obLlgetion8 of 8uoh OmRtjr, *2 Honorable R. -Ott ldorse, IQne 14, 1939, page #I?
but o&g to the oxtent that same are issued and exohsnaed WWrant indebtedness, ln for legal aad ralld outs~dlng suah mamier aslbnor provided by general law. The pro- posed amendment oeeks only to ahange the constltntlosal provlslons with rererenoe tc the levy or taxes lssofar as same arreots Red River County, and we do not think it la anywise alters the general laws sppertalnlng to the lsm- anoe of fundlog or refusdlag bonds. Aooordlnglf, we are of the opinion that the flegallty of the wimrtmts sought to be runaed must be determined betore the Attornoy Qaaw82 oould properly approve the bonds to be issued la liea o? and in erahangs for such b&standing warrant lnd8btsdness. The resolution, clearly, does not undertake to vaLidate all warrant indebtedness now outstanding agalsst the General l%M or Bed River County.
Trustlng'that this satisfaotorily ass-8 $our ques- tloa, we are
Very truly yotirs ATTOIGIEY GENERAL OB'TUAS