Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1987 )

TRE ATTORSE~ GESERAL
OF ‘IL‘ESAS
Nay 15, 1987
Bonorable John D. Hughes Opinion No. J&i-699
Hood County Attorney
Room 6, County Courthouse Re: Whether a county clerk is required
Granbury, Texas 76040 co notify nondeveloper owners of land
in a subdivision of a developer's re-
quest to revise a subdivision plat
Dear Mr. Hughes:
Article 6626e. V.T.C.S., provides for the revision by devriopers
of subdivision plats subject co the subdivision controls of the county
and filed for record with the county clerk. See art. 6626e, §l; cf.
Attorney General Opinion JM-365 (1985). Section 3 or article 6626e
provides that the county commissioners court shall permit the revision
if it is shown either that the revision will nor. interfere with the
established rights of any owner of a part of the subdivided land or,
if the revision will interfere with such owners' rights, that the
owners have agreed to the revision. Section 2 of the act provides for
notice of thk proposed revision by general publication and by specific
notice to the nondeveloper owners of the subdivided land.
You ask two questions about the notice provisions of article
6626e. Your first question is whether section 2 requires the county
to send notice to nondeveloper owners of part of the subdivided tract
or whether the county clerk may require the developer to notify
nondeveloper owners. Your second question relates to iarge sub-
divisions which have been platted in smaller units. You ask whdchsr
all nondrveioper owners in the subdivision must be notified or whether
notice may be sent only to those nondeveloper owners of land in the
unit of the subdivision that is subject to revision.
Section 2 of article 6626e provides:
(a) After the application is filed with the
commissioners court, the court shall cause a
notice of the application to be printed in d news-
paper of general circulation in the county. The
notice must include a statement of the time and
place at which the commissioners court will meet
p. 3239
Honorable John D. Hughes - Page 2 (JM-699)
to consider the application and to hear protests
to the revision of the subdivision plat.
(b) The notice musr be published at least
three times within the period beginning on the
30th day axLending on the seventh day before the
date of the meeting.
(c) If ali or part of the subdivided tract has
been sold to nondeveloper owners, notice shall
also be given to each owner, at his address on
said tract. by certifieu mail or registered nail,
return receipt requested. (Emphasis added).
Resolution of your first question depends on whether subsection (c)
was intented to place a duty on the comissionrrs court to notify
nondeveloper owners.
Statutory construction depends on a determination of legislative
intent. The language of a statute is the primary guide in determining
legislative intent. The language and syntax of section 2 indicate
that the legislature intended that the county commissioners court
notify nondeveloper owners of proposed subdivision revisions. Sub-
section (a) of section 2 refers to the commissioners court and
expressly requires “the court” to cause notice to be printed.111 a
newspaper of general circulation in the county. Subsection (c) scaces
that “notice shall also be given to each owner. . . .” Although
subsection (c) does not refer expressly to the commissioners court,
the use of the word “also” indicates that subsection (c) imposes an
additional notice responsibility on the county coolmissioners court.
You also ask whether all nondeveloper owners in the subdivision
must be notified or whether the county may limit notice to non-
developer owners of land in the unit of the subdivision chat is
subject to revision. If one subdivision plat could be divided into
smaller unirs for purposes of determining which landowners to notify,
a core purpose of the notice requirements would be violated. Sub-
section (c) of section 2 states that “[ilf all or part of the sub-
divided tract hds been sold to nondeveloper owners, notice shall also
be given to each owner. . . .” (Emphasis added). This subsection
refers to “each” nondeveloper owner of land in the “subdivided tract;”
it does not limit notice to owners in some smaller “affected portion”
of the subdivision. Nor does it limit notice to owners ,in cbe “aub-
division plac.” Even if one subdivision is platred in various units,
it remains one subdivision. Consequently, the legislature must have
intended that the county notify all nondeveloper owners in the
subdivision of proposed revisions in the subdivision plat, including
revisions in any smaller unit plat of the subdivision.
p. 3240
Honorable John D. Hughes - Page 3 (JM-699)
SUMMARY
Subsection (c) of section 2 of article 66260,
V.T.C.S., places the duty on the county commir-
sioners court to notify all nondeveloper owners of
all or part of a subdivided tract of a proposed
revision of the subdivision plats including
revisions in auy smalier unit plat of the rub-
division, filed for record with the county clerk.
-JIM MAT-T 0 X
Attorney General of Texas
JACK HIGHTOWRR
First Assistant Attorney General
MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General
JUDGE ZOLLIE STRARLEY
Special Assistant Attorney General
RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee
Prepared by Jennifer Riggs
Assistant Attorney General
p. 3241