ATTORNEY GENERAL
Under provisions set out in the Texas Constitution, the Texas Government Code, 
Title 4,  402.042 and numerous statutes, the attorney general is authorized to 
write advisory opinions for state and local officials. These advisory opinions 
are requested by agencies or officials when they are confronted with unique or 
unusually difficult legal questions. The attorney general also determines, under 
authority of the Texas Open Records Act, whether information requested for 
release from governmental agencies may be held from public disclosure. Requests 
for opinions, opinions, and open record decisions are summarized for publication 
in the Texas Register. The Attorney General responds to many requests for 
opinions and open records decisions with letter opinions. A letter opinion has 
the same force and effect as a formal Attorney General Opinion, and represents 
the opinion of the Attorney General unless and until it is modified or overruled 
by a subsequent letter opinion, a formal Attorney General Opinion, or a decision 
of a court of record. To request copies of opinions, phone (512) 462-0011. To 
inquire about pending requests for opinions, phone (512) 463-2110.

Opinions

DM-467 (RQ-1001). The Honorable
 Bruce Isaacks, Criminal District Attorney, Carroll Courts Building, Fifth
 Floor, P.O. Box 2344, Denton, Texas 76202, concerning whether a hold and
 save harmless provision that requires a county to indemnify another party
 for damages creates a debt within the meaning of article XI, section 7 of
 the Texas Constitution.


SUMMARY. A hold and save harmless provision
 that obligates a county to indemnify a third party for damages arising from
 the acts of the third party creates a debt within the meaning of Article
 XI, section 7 and is therefore an obligation that the county may not undertake
 without taking certain steps. Whether Article XI, section 7 debt is created
 by a hold and save harmless provision that requires a county to indemnify
 a third party only for damages arising from county acts and does not expand
 the county's liability beyond its liability under existing law appears to
 be a question of first impression that has not been addressed by the courts.

TRD-9801598