Case Information
*1 OFFICE OFTHE ATTORNEYQENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
Honorable Clyde Barton, Parge 2
"The Comtnaioners Court in aountlss opuhtlon of more than three hundred havipg a thousand s 300,000) and less than three hundred and fifty thousand (350,000) Inhabitants In 8coord~oo vith the last preceding Fsdsral
Connun, and la countlos having a population
of more than forty-eight thousand, five bun-
dred (48,500) and lens than forty-nine thousand (49,000) Inhabitants, aud In aounties having a
population of not less than tventy-tvo thousand mad eighty-nine (22,089) nor more than twonty- two thousand, on. hundred (22,100) Inhabitants, and In aountles having a population of more
than SIX thousand, one hundred (6,100) and leas than nlxthou8and, onahundredand eighty
(6,180) Inhabitants In aocordancre with the last preoedlng Federal Cenmu~, shall have the au-
thority to purohase fire tmsks and other flre- fighting equipmnt by first advertising and
reaeiving bids thereon as provided by lav, to
be used for the protsatlon and pmservatlon
of bridges, aounty shops, oouaty varehouses,
and other property located vithout the lImit8
of any inaorporated oity or towi."
tilnkler County has a population of six thousaad, one hundred and forty-one (6,141) inhabitants a~comlIng to the 1940 Federal Census. Therefore, Wlnkler County 00168 vIthIn the last population bracket mentioned In the above quoted statute;
seation 56 of Artlale 3 of the State Constitution pro- vides In part:
"The Legislature shall not, exaspt as othervIse provided in this Constltutlon, pass
any local or special lav, authorlrrlngt
"Regulating the aff’airs of Gouutlss, Qitles, tovns, wards or sahool districts; l * l ."
This departlnent has heretofore construed ~llp statutes Involving certain population braakets rlmllar to the one oonslder- ed here, most of these, were strtutes attempting to regulate the of the various aountles croml.ng vithti a aertain designated affairs population bracket and were held to be SpeaIal or looal laws regU- lating the affairs of the various aountles and, therefore, umon- rtltutional and void.
.~, ~'1,:: *3 Ronorable Clyde Barton, Page 3
In view of the holdimg of the Supreme Court In the ease of Miller v. El Paso County (not yet reported), and the authorities cited therein, it is our opinion that the above mentioned statute? en it applies to Winkler County is a local _ _ ._ or special lav attempt- to regulate the affairs of the ooun-
ty and is unconetltutIoriaL and therefore void.
Therefore, the questions presented in your inquiry beaome moot.
Trusting that the foregoing fully anavers your Inquiry, vd are Yours very truly
IL941 ATTORREY m3lRRAL OF TRxAs &lAdsJeuk BY Ardell Williams Assistant AWaRS
