Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1967 )

March 13, 1967
Honorable Hurshel R. Harding Opinion No. M-41
County Attorney
Parmer County Re: Whether the severed
Farwell, Texas minerals which are
owned by Parmer County
as part of Its public
school lands, located
in Gaines and Andrews
counties, are subject
to taxation In the
Dear Mr. Harding: county where located.
In your opinion request you stated:
“Farmer County owns minerals in Gaines
and Andrews Counties, Texas, having sold the
surface of these lands a number of years ago.
Over the last several years the tax assessor-
collector of one or both of these counties
mails to Parmer County an assessment of taxes
for the minerals which Parmer County owns.”
We have also been advised that the above minerals
were a part of the public lands given to Parmer County
by the State for the endowment of Its Permanent School
fund. These 3.ands were subsequently sold and a portion
of the mineral estate was reserved to the county. The
lands have been leased for a number of years and there
was production of 011 and gas on the lands in Gaines
County during the tax years involved here.
You have requested our opinion as to whether the
severed mineral estate owned by Parmer County in lands
located in Gaines and Andrews Counties are taxable under
Article VII, Section 6a., Constitution of Texas, and
Article 7150a, Vernon’s Civil Statutes.
The pertinent constitutional provisions and statutory
enactments are as follows:
Article VII, Section 6, Constitution of Texas.
“All lands heretofore, or hereafter granted
- 197 -
Honorable Hurshel R. Harding, page 2 (M-41)
to the several counties of this State for
educational purposes, are of rightthe
property of said counties respectively, to
which they are granted, and title thereto
is vested in said counties, and no adverse
possession or limitation shall ever be
available against the title of any county.
Each County may sell or dispose of its
lands in whole or in part, in manner to be
provided by the Commissioners’ Court of the
county.. .Said lands, and the proceeds there-
of, when sold, shall be held by said counties
alone as a trust for the benefit of public
schools therein;. . .”
Article VII, Section 6a, Constitution of Texas.
“All agriculture or grazing school
land mentioned in Section 6 of this article
owned by any county shall be subject to
taxation except for State purposes to the
same extent as lands privately owned.”
Added Nov. 2, 1926, proclamation Jan. 20,
1927.
Article 7150a, Vernon’s Clvll Statutes.
“Any county in this State owning any
land mentioned and referred to in Sectlon
6a of Article VII of the Constitution of
Texas. . . , is hereby authorized to pay taxes
duly and lawfully levied on the same out of
the County’s revenue derived from such land...”
Article XI, Section 9, Constitution of Texas. ‘:
“The property of counties, cities and
towns, owned and held only for public pur-
poses, such as.. ., and all other property
devoted exclusively to the use and benefit
of the public shall be exempt from forced
sale and from taxation,...”
Article VII, Section 6a, and Article 7150a were
added in 1927. Prlor to that time, It was settled that
the oublic school lands owned by the several counties
were-not subject to taxation. baugherty v. Thompson,
71 Tex. 192, 9 S .M. 99 (1888). That court also held
- 198 -
.
Honorable Hurshel R. Harding, Page 3 (M-41)
that:
“Forbidding the taxation of the lands
it forbids the taxation of an estate less
than the fee,...”
Article VII, Section 6a, read in relationto
Article VII, Section 6, now makes all the agriculture
and grazing school lands owned by the several counties,
and granted to them by the State for educational pur-
poses, subject to taxation except for State purposes.
The question then is, does a severed mineral interest
come within the term “all agriculture and grazing school
land mentioned in Section 6 of this article...?”
The history of the State’s school grants to its
counties is set out in the interpretive commentary of
Article VII, Section 6, and will not be repeated here.
It is sufficient to note that these grants were generally
made upon vacant and unsurveyed public lands. They were
given to the counties and, therefore, were never classi-
fied by the General Land Office as being either agriculture,
grazing or timber lands, as was required for the sale of
public lands. It is our opinion, however, that the Legis-
lature used the term “all agriculture and grazing school
lands.. .‘I to distinguish between the several broad
classifications of public lands generally made by the
General Land Office in the sale of lands and not to dis-
tingulsh between the various estates in land. Childress
Count v. Morton Independent School Dist.,95 S.W.
1-p 193b) At the time of the enactme% Ai’”
Article VII, Section’Ga, timber upon public school lands
when sold became the personal property of the vendee, and
was .subject to taxation. Montgomery v. Peach River Lumber
-Co., 1.17 S .W. 1061, (Tex.Clv.App. 1905 error dism.w.0.j.).
It is not the use or classification of the land at
the time of the assessment that is controlling here, but
the use or classification at the time of the grant.
Section 6 refers to “all lands heretofore or hereafter
granted. . . ” It is the agriculture and grazing lands
granted to counties by the State that are made taxable.
The estate to be taxed is the entire fee of the land.
Article 7146 V.C.S.; Humble 011 and Refining Co. v. State
S W 2d 5s 560 (Tex.Ci A m, error ref. ) . In that
casi 113 Tex. 160 254 S W 290 (1923); State r
Downman, 134 S.W. 787, tTex.Civ.App., 1911 error ref.,
-1 US 353); Sheffield v. R”,g$ v. 124 Stakes
Tex 290li6 77 S W.
Tex.
2d 1021 80 S.W.2d
LIE&, :$ g.;. $ miv.s;. Jp%he&, lg;;ex.
174’S.W.2d’43 (1943); Ra~hara.~?k%%& Indep%ent ’
School Dist., 139 Tex. 532, 163 S.W.2d b31, (1942).
Assuming that the land was at the time of the grant
either agriculture or grazing land, it is our opinion
that Parmer County Is liable for all taxes properly
assessed against the mineral interest It reserved in the
sale of its school lands. See also, Phillips Chemical
Co. v. Dumas Independent School DlstrTct, 159 Tex. 116
3 6 2d 362 389 (19 8 I d Attorney General’s Opinions’
nimber o-6693 and 0~7&?(1946).
SUMMARY
Assuming that the lands in question, at
the time of the grant were either agriculture
or grazing lands, the severed minerals which
are owned by Parmer County as part of its
public school lands located in Gaines and
- 200 -
. .
Honorable Hurshel R. Harding, page 5 (M-41)
Andrews Counties are subJect to taxation
in the county where located under the
terms of Article VII, Section 6a, Consti-
tution of Texas, and Article 7150a, Vernon’s
Civil Statutes.
9V truly yours,
MFS:mh
??kF
Qkneral of Texas
Prepared by Marvin F. Sentell
Assistant Attorney Qeneral
APPROVED
OPINION COMMITTRE
Hawthorne Phillips, Chairman
W. V. Qeppert, Co-Chairman
John Pettit
kkghton E%rownlee
Bill Allen
STAFF LEGAL ASSISTANI'
A. J. Carubbi, Jr.
- 2-1 -