Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1987 )


Menu:
  •            THE     ATTORNEY            GENERAL
    OF    TEXAS
    Nay 22. 1987
    Honorable Lloyd Criss                  opinion No. .JH-706
    chairman
    Comictee on Labor and                  Re:   Effect of chapter 56 of the
    Employment Relations                Water Code with regard to the
    Texas Bouse of Representatives         authority of the Galveston County
    P. cl.Box 2910                         Drainage District No. 2
    Austin, Texas   78769
    Dear Representative Criss:
    You ask whether chapter 56 of the Water Code controls the actions
    of the Galveston County Drainage District No. 2. That drainage
    district was created in 1910 under the Drainage Act of 1907, pursuant
    to article III, section 52. of the Texas Constitution. It is our
    opinion that the district is subject to the provisions of chapter 56.
    Article III, section 52. of the Texas Constiturion was amended in
    1904 to authorize the establishment of districts with limited taxing
    power for drainage and the prevention of flooding, among other things.
    Because of the restrictive limitation on the marimum amount of in-
    debtedness allowed under article III, section 52. article XVI, section
    59, was added to the Texas Constitution in 1917 to authorize districts
    without the debt limitation.
    The Drainage Act of 1907 provided for the creation of.a drainage
    district pursuant to article III. section 52. Acts 1907, 30th Leg.,
    ch. 40. at 78. The Drainage Act, as amended. prescribed the creation.
    organization, powers, and duties of a district created by authority of
    that act. Its provisions originally governed. and still govern, such
    a drainage district. The Drainage Act subsequently was codified as
    articles 8097-8193, in chapter 7, Title 128, Revised Statutes, 1925.
    and was recodified without substantive channe in 1971 as chaoter 56 of
    the Water Code. See Mobile Oil Corp. v.-Katagorda County Drainage
    District No. 3, 597.W.2d    910 (Tex. 1980) (interpretation and effect
    of chapter 56 to .district created prior to 1912 under Drainage Act):
    Hategorde County Drainage District-No. 1 v. Commissioners Co&t, 
    278 S.W.2d 539
    (Ted. Civ. App. - Galveston 1955, writ ref'd n.r.e.)
    (interpretation and effect of artic1e.s 8097 et seq., V.T.C.S., to
    districts created in 1907, 1911, and 1912 under Drainage Act); Hidalgo
    County Drainage District No. I v. Swearingen, 
    158 S.W. 211
    (Tex. Civ.
    APP. - San Antonio 1913, no writ) (interpretation and effect of
    Drainage Act of 1907); Wharton County Drainage District No. 1 v.
    p. 3265
    Honorable Lloyd Criss - Page 2   (JM-706)
    Bigbee, 
    149 S.W. 381
    (Tex. Civ. App. - Galveston 1912, writ ref'd)
    (interpretation and effect of Drainage Act of 1907); Parker v. Harris
    County Drainage District No. 2. 
    148 S.W. 351
    (Tex. Civ. App. -
    Galveston 1912. writ ref'd) (interpretation and effect of Drainage Act
    of 1907).
    A district created under article III, section 52, and governed by
    chapter 56 of the Water Code may convert to a district authorized to
    operate under article XVI, section 59, in which case limitations
    imposed by article III. section 52 and chapter 56 on debts to be
    incurred and taxes to be levied are not applicable to the district.
    Water Code $56.032.
    You note that some statutory provisions which relate to drainage
    districts exist outside the Water Code and question the effect of
    those statutes on chapter 56 of the Water Code. A few stetutqry laws
    outside the Water Code relate generally co drainage districts as well
    as to other districts and govemental    entities. For instance. such
    statutes provide exemption from appeal bond requirements in a civil
    case for certain named special districts, including drainage districts
    (section 6.003 of the Civil Practice aad Remedies Code), and authorize
    obligations of a municipality, district, or political subdivision,
    including a drainage district, to be made payable at the state
    treasurer's office (article 4393-1. section 3.022 of the Treasury Act;
    formerly article 4379b, V.T.C.S.).      However, the great bulk of
    statutes relating to drainage districts that are not codified in the
    Water Code are special acts of the legislature that apply odly to
    designated draiuage districts. Such special acts are'not applicable
    to any district other than the drainage district named or described by
    the act. An example of such an act is chapter 467 enacted by the
    Fifty-sixth Legislature (article 8280-237. V.T.C.S.). which creates
    the Galveston County Drainage District No. 4 and provides its
    organization, powers, and duties. The provisions of chapter 467 of
    the Fifty-sixth Legislature apply only to the Galveston County
    Drainage District No. 4 and, hence, are not codified in the Water
    Code. -See Acts 1959, 56th Leg., ch. 467, at 999.
    You also ask whether the Galveston County Drainage District No. 2
    has authority to charge fees for reviewing plans for the construction
    of crossings over the district's ditches.        A drainage district
    organized under and governed by chapter 56 is a subdivision of the
    state which is created for a special purpose and exercises only powers
    that are expressly granted or which are necessary and incident to the
    exercise of expressed powers. See Mobile Oil Corp. v. Matagorda
    County Drainage District No. 3, e      (by annexing territory in gulf,
    drainage district acted beyond its limited powers); Attorney General
    Opinion O-1862 (1940) (drainage district lacks statutory authority to
    use district funds to maintain drainage ditches constructed by private
    owners).
    p. 3266
    Eonorable Lloyd Criss - Page 3     (JM-706)
    Subject to the constitutional limitations, chapter 56 expressly
    authorizes en annual lew of texes on district orooertv to PW bonded
    indebtedness and to coktruct and maintain distric; impkokments.
    Water Code 556.242. See also Matagorda County Drainage District v.
    Commissioners court, supra.      Chapter 56 contains no provision
    authorizing a drainage district to charge fees for reviewing plans for
    crossings over its ditches.    We con&de    that a drainage district
    governed by chapter 56 which charged such a fee would exceed its
    limited powers.
    SUMMARY
    The provisions of chapter 56 of the Water
    Code apply to and govern the Galveston County
    Drainage District No. 2. Most statutes relating
    to drainage districts that are not codified in the
    Water Code are special acts of the legislature
    that apply only to drainage districts named or
    described by the acts.       A dreinage district
    governed by chapter 56 is not authorized to charge
    a fee for reviewing plans for crossings over its
    ditches.
    ~g;.7lJax
    Attorney General of Texas
    JACK HIGEJX%ER
    First Assistant Attorney General
    MARYKRLLER
    Executive Assistant Attorney General
    JDDGR ZOLLIE STRARLFX
    Special Assistant Attorney General
    RICK GILPIN
    Chairman, Opinion Committee
    Prepared by Nancy Sutton
    Assistant Attorney General
    p. 3267
    

Document Info

Docket Number: JM-706

Judges: Jim Mattox

Filed Date: 7/2/1987

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017