Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

E Aaso GENERAL OF XAS AUSTIN 1%TEXAS FVILL WILSON A’ITORNEY ‘3IENERAL day 2, 1960

Honorable Weldon Cabaniss Opinion No. WW-832 County Attorney Aransas County Re: Whether the Aransas Rockport, Texas County Tax Collector may issue 'voting" poll tax receipts to certain residents of Aransas County under the facts Dear Mr. Cabaniss: stated. Your request for an opinion is based on the following fact situation: The city of Aransas Pass is situated partly In Aransas County and partly In San Patricia County. Each of these counties levies the 25-cent county poll tax. During the poll tax payment period which ended on January 31, 1960, the Tax Collector of San Patricia County had a deputy stationed In Aransas Pass, within the portion lying in San Patricia County, for the pur- pose of receiving poll tax payments and issuing re- ceipts therefor. Several residents of Aransas Pass, who were subject to payment of the 1959 poll tax and who at all times pertinent to this opinion have lived within the portion of the city lying in Aransas County, paid their poll tax in the sum of $1.75 to this deputy, before February 1, and were issued San Patricia County poll tax receipts. The deputy has made the following statement in connection with the issuance of these receipts: "I was under the impression that I could issue poll tax receipts to all residents of the City of Aransas Pass otherwise qualified and without regard as to whether residents of Aransas or San Patrlcio County. I Issued to persons who told me they lived in AFansas County, as I thought I was authorized to do so. The acceptance of payments from residents of Aransas County did not come to the attention of the San Patricia Collector until after February 1. He Is ready to deliver over to the Aransas County Collector the money received

Honorable Weldon Cabaniss, page 2 (WW-832)

from the Aransas County residents, but the Aransas County Collector inquires whether there Is any manner by which this can be legally accomplished, and the individuals thereby franchised in Aransas County. QUESTION: Under these facts, are these individuals entitled to vote in Aransas County in the primary, general and other elections, for the year 1960; and if not, is there any means of transferring the poll fees from San Patricia County to Aransas County to entitle these per- sons to vote in Aransas County? Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitution provides: '* * * any voter who is subject to pay a poll tax under the laws of the State of Texas shall have paid said tax before offering to vote at any election in this State and hold a receipt showing that said poll tax was paid'before the {irat day of February next preceding such election. .n the county in which the taxpayer The poll tax is payable in resided on January 1 preceding its levy. Payment of the tax in some other county will suffice for the state tax of $1.50; but the county tax must be paid in the county where it is due, and ,ndpayment in some other county will not entitle4 the taxpayer to vote. Sava e v. um;h;l;s,,,;;8go;. (N:9 c~~8A~~x;"9:~j~~c~~~~; vy;Ew;ri17 (Tex,Ci;,App: 1925), In orderOto qualify the taxpayer ?or voting, the money in payment of the tax and the information necessary for filling out the receipt must have been delivered to the tax collector or an authorized deputy (Tex.Civ.App. 1913pf'~~,~"is~~"~"~~r~~s D~?S~W.~$% ~~~x?C!~.:~~. 1948, error ref. n.r.e.). The tax colleitor may issue a 'voting" poll tax receipt after January 31 if the taxpayer has done all that is required of him in paying the tax before that date; but the receipt must be stamped "Holder not entitled to vote" if the tax is not paid to him until after January 31" Parker v. Busby, 170 S.W. 1042 (Tex. Civ.App. 1914); Art. 5,12, Election Code. The Aransas County Tax Collector had not authorized this deputy to act for him, and the deputy was neither a de ure nor a de facto officer for Aransas County. Payment to the sn h- atricio ZpKthough made In the mistaken belief by the taxpayer and by the deputy that the deputy could accept payment for Aransas County resi- dents, did not fulfill the requirement for payment in the county where the tax was due. The faet that all parties acted in good faith, or that the deputy gave erroneous advice to the taxpayers under a mis- apprehension of the law, does not change the result. Davis v. Riley, supra.

Honorable Weldon Cabaniss, page 3 (WW-832)

Under the foregoing authorities, we are constrained to hold that these individuals did not make timely payment of the poll tax that was due in Aransas County, and there is no way by which they may lawfully vote on the receipts issued by the San Patricia deputy or by which the Tax Collector of Aransas County may now issue Aransas County receipts entitling them to vote In the 1960 elections. SUMMARY Where residents of a county which levies a county poll tax were subject to payment of the poll tax and paid their poll tax for the year 1959 to the deputy of another county in the mistaken belief that the deputy was authorized to accept the payments, and the money was not delivered to the tax collector of the county of their residence prior to February 1, 1960, there had not been a timely payment of the tax and there is no way by which these persons may lawfully vote in the 1960 elections. Yours very truly, WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas

Mary K. Wall Assistant MKW:bh APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Morgan Nesbitt, Chairman Houghton Brownlee, Jr. J.C. Davis, Jr. Riley Eugene Fletcher J. Arthur Sandlin REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: Leonard Passmore