Texas Constitution:Article III, Section 51: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
no edit summary
mNo edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 13: Line 13:
|recent=
|recent=


* ''Fort Worth Indep. Sch. Dist. v. City of Fort Worth'', 22 S.W.3d 831, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4029717219227699877#p841 841-42] (Tex. 2000) ("The City’s most serious attack on the validity of the 1936 arrangement is that Ordinance No. 1935 required it to grant its funds to the School District in violation of article III, section 51 of the Texas Constitution, which states that '[t]he Legislature shall have no power to make any grant or authorize the making of any grant of public moneys to any individual, association of individuals, municipal or other corporations whatsoever', and section 52 of the same article, which similarly provides that with exceptions not here applicable, 'the Legislature shall have no power to authorize any county, city, town or other political corporation or subdivision of the State to lend its credit or to grant public money or thing of value in aid of, or to an individual, association or corporation whatsoever'. To answer this argument, we must determine whether Bell's payments under Ordinance No. 1933 were solely for City services and taxes or whether they were also for School District taxes. If the former, then the City could not apportion them to the School District because they would constitute the City’s 'public money'.")
* ''Fort Worth Indep. Sch. Dist. v. City of Fort Worth'', 22 S.W.3d 831, [https://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4029717219227699877#p841 841-42] (Tex. 2000) ("The City’s most serious attack on the validity of the 1936 arrangement
is that Ordinance No. 1935 required it to grant its funds to the School District in violation of article III, section 51 of the Texas Constitution, which states that '. . .', and section 52 of the same article, which similarly provides that with exceptions not here applicable, '. . .'. To answer this argument, we must determine whether Bell's payments under Ordinance No. 1933 were solely for City services and taxes or whether they were also for School District taxes. If the former, then the City could not apportion them to the School District because they would constitute the City’s 'public money'.")


|historic=
|historic=

Navigation menu