Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1952 )

AUSTIN m;Tizs~e _.
‘~
PRICE DANDZL ..
.s-ro``IIN oEN-*L
Juiy 16, 1952
.:
Hon. Austin F...Anderson :'-'~
Criminal D'$strictAttorney Opinion NO...V-1478
Bexar County
San Antonio 5, Te,Faa I. Re:".Aut&rity~dfthe Com-
miss~loners’ Court of
.Beliar County to erect
traffio control devices
Dear Sir: on cou&y.roads.
We.refer.to your r@quest In which you ask:.
: "D&s the Commlssloners Court of Bexar
County, !l?exas
have the authority to erect
traffic control devices?i".
.~
We kriowof no lati,.a&ho*lzlng
the Commlssion-
ers' Court of BexarCounty to erect traffic control
devices q-icounty roads. ~.
It Gas held In Attorney Qenerails.Oplnlon
V-429 (1947) that the c~o~&sloners' court did not have
authority to pass an prder regulatingtraffic In the
county,
II _- affixing a penalty for violation oi'such regula-
The pertinent part OP House Sill 458, Acts
52nd'Leg.,R.S. 1951, ch.~346,. p...589(Sec.: 8 of.Art.
827a, V.P.C.),,Is as follows: .~,
"Subsection2. ~Authorityof.State Iiigh-
way Commissj.onto alter prima-facie'tipeed
llmits.~(a) Whenever:the'Stat& Highway Com-
mission shall determineupon the;basls~of an
engineeringand traffic investigationthat'
any prima-facie;.speedherelnbeforeset.forth
is greater or lese than Is reasonab+or safe
under thenconditionsfound ,toexistiat,any
intersectionor other plaae or uponany part
of a highway,~taklnglnto~consideratlonthe
width and condition of the pavement and other
circumstanceson.such portion of said high-
way, as well as the uiiualtraffic thereon,
Hon. Austin F. Anderson, page 2 (V-1478)
Said,StateHighway Commissionmay determine
and declare a reasonable and safe prima- 1
facie speed limit ther.eator thereon by ',Y
proper order of the Commissionentered on
its Minutes,~wh,lchshall be effective at !
all times or during hours of~dayllghtor
darkness, or at such other times a8 may
be determinedwhen appropriatesigns giv-
ving notice thereof are erected at such
intersectionor other place or partof high-
way, except,that said State Highway Commission
shall not have the authority to modify or
..alter the baslc'rule set forth in subsect$on
1 '(a).nor'toauthorize by a.CommlsslonMin-
ute'speeds for any alass of vehicle In ex-
cess of'the maximum value8 herelnbeforeset
forth for Said class of vehicle in subsec-
tion 1 (!I, payagrai+s (2); (31, and,(4).
"(6) e authority of 'theState High-
way Comm5iF:~.slon
to alter prima-faciespeed
ll~tsshall be restricted to highways,
roads; or-streets~offlcla~lydeslgnatedby
the State Highway Commission as's part of
the State Highway,Systemand which are not
'&thin the l++te.of'e+ in6,orporated Flty
Or town.
"'~'"Subsectfon3;. Authority of 'County' ".
' Co``s'sfolier~.'Courts'~d governing bodies
of,incorporatedcities and towns to alter
prima-faciespeed llmlts. (a) !l?he.County
Cominiss1oner.s Court of any county.wlthre-
spect 'tocounty highways or roads outslde``
the limits of right-of-wayof any official-
ly designatedhighway, road, orstreetof
the State Highway System and outslde the
limits ofan.ln$,orporatedcity or,town shall
have the same authority by Order of the $out-i-
ty CommJs,slo,ners Court entered upon its re-
cords:to alterprlma~fac~lespeed llmd.ts~,upon
the .bas$softanyengineeringand trafflo in-
vestigatfon as that'delegated'tothe State
Hlghjvay~Commisslon wlth,respeatto any of+
flcially:des$gnated ~Wghway; road,'Er
streetof the:State.HlghwaySystem.
_;.
E&se &11'~458 is .a penal s,tatute.snd~penal
State~'exrel.
statutes must be 'strictly.'~,Cohritr.ued.
Shobk vi all Texas RackingAsa'n.128 Tex.~384, 97 S.W.
2d 669 (l936),
5. ”
533,
. Hon. Austin F. Anderson, page 3 (V-1478)
.Underthis Bill the'commissi.oners'court Is
authorized to regulate'thespeed on county roads out-
side the corporate limits of cities and towns...In other
words it has the same power in.the way of regulating
speed on the county roads'outsidethe corporate limits
of cities and townsas -theHighvtayCommissionhas In
regulating speed on.state highways. However, the High-
way Commissiondoes not derive~itspower from.House
Bill 458 (Sec. 8 of Art. 827a V.p.C.) to erect control
devices on state highways. That power isgiven the
Highway Commissionunder the provisionsof Article
827e V.P.C. and Article 111 of the Uniform Traffic
Code (Art: 6701d V.C.S.). We therefore agree with you
that although House Bill 458 authorizes'theCommlssloners~
Court to regulate the speed on county road8 outside the
corporate limits of cities and towns there is no author-
ity for the Commissioners'court of Bexar County to
erect control devices on County roads.
We believe that the above result is supported \'
by the fact that the same Legislaturein passing House
Bill 207 Acts of the 52nd Leg. R. S. 1951 ch. 302 p:
483 (Art. 67Olg V.C.S.) in addition to giving the Com-
missioners'Courts In countieshaving a population of
600,000 or more power to regulate speed on county roads,
SpeCIfIcallyauthorized'themto erect traffic control
devices on county roads under their jurlsdlatlon. This
clearly.indicatesthat the Legislaturerehognized that
the power to erect traffic control devices did not exist
in the dommissioners'courts in such counties absent
this provision. However since Bexar county has a popula-
tion of only 500,460 according to the 1950 Federal census
House Bill 207 has no applicationto It.
House Bill 458 Acts of the 52nd Le
R. S. 1951 ch. 346 p. 589 (Sec. 8 Art. 8'27a
V.P.C.) authorizesthe commlssioners'court
to regulate the speed on county roads out-
side the corporate limits of citd.esand
towns. However, the Legislaturehas not
authorizedthe commissioners'court of a
county having a populationof less than
600,000 inhabltantsto erect traffic con-
.trol devices on county roads.
Hon. Austin F. Anderson,page 4 (V-1478)
534
Yours very truly,
APPROVED: .pRICEDANIEL
Attorney General
J. C. Davis; Jr1.y
County'AffalrsDWlslon
E..Jacobson '.~
Reviewing Assistant
Charles'D..Mathews
Fir&k Assistant :
.
BA:am