Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                           GREG
    0
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
    ABBOTT
    May 13,2014
    The Honorable Rob Baiamonte                          Opinion No. GA-1058
    Goliad County Attorney
    Post Office Box 24                                   Re:      Whether a municipal development
    Goliad, Texas 77963                                  district may fund a new building for a senior
    civic center if the center will be operated by
    a private nonprofit corporation
    (RQ-1165-GA)
    Dear Mr. Baiamonte:
    You ask whether chapter 377 of the Local Government Code authorizes a municipal
    development district to fund a senior civic center that is own d and operated by a non-profil
    organization."' You explain that the City of Goliad Mw1icipal Development D istrict ('the
    District") would like to provide a grant to a nonprofit corporation to replace an existing building
    for a "Senior Citizens and Civic Center." The center is used to serve low-cost meals to senior
    citizens and to provide a venue for "health and nutrition education, games, social and business
    events and entertainment." Request Letter at 1. The center is, and under the terms of the grant
    application would continue to be, "owned and operated by Goliad County Senior Citizens, Inc., a
    non-profit corporation." !d.
    Chapter 3 77 of the Local Government Code authorizes municipalities to create municipal
    development districts, which are authorized to "plan, acquire, establish, develop, construct, or
    renovate one or more development projects beneficial to the district." TEX. Lac. Gov'T CODE
    ANN. § 377.02l(a) (West 2005). "Development project" is defined to include, among other
    things, a "civic center" or "civic center building." !d. § 377.001(3)(8) (West Supp. 2013).
    Based on your description of the proposed purpose and use of the building in question, it is likely
    that such a project would constitute a civic center. However, whether a particular project meets
    the statutory requirements to be funded as a development project involves questions of fact that
    are within the discretion of the board of directors of the development district to determine in the
    first instance. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0264 (2004) at 10 (explaining that whether a
    particular project satisfies the requirements of the Economic Development Act involves
    1
    Letter from Honorable Rob Baiamonte, Goliad Cnty. Att' y, to Honorable Greg Abbott, Tex. Att' y Gen. at
    2 (Nov. 14, 2013), http://www.texasattomeygeneral.gov/opin ("Request Letter").
    The Honorable Rob Baiamonte - Page 2          (GA-1058)
    questions of fact within the discretion of the development corporation). Because of the fact
    questions involved, we cannot definitively answer whether the particular development project
    about which you ask is authorized by chapter 377 of the Local Government Code.
    In addition to asking about this particular project, you also ask whether a civic center may
    qualify as an authorized project if it will be owned and operated by a nonprofit organization
    rather than the municipal development district. Request Letter at 2. No Texas court cases or
    attorney general opinions have addressed this issue. In establishing the powers and duties of a
    municipal development district, the Legislature has authorized a district to "contract with a
    public or private person to: (1) plan, acquire, establish, develop, construct, or renovate a
    development project; or (2) perform any other act the district is authorized to perform under
    [chapter 377]." TEX. Loc. Gov'T CoDE ANN. § 377.071(b) (West 2005). Under the Code
    Construction Act, the term "person" is defined to include a "corporation" or "organization."
    TEX. Gov'T CoDE ANN. § 311.005(2) (West 2013). Thus, the express terms of chapter 377
    authorize a municipal development district to contract with a private, nonprofit organization to
    plan, acquire, establish, develop, construct, or renovate a civic center. Under this broad
    contracting authority, a court would likely conclude that a municipal development djstrict may
    contract with a nonprofit organization to operate a civic center.
    Whether chapter 377 authorizes development of a civic center that will be owned by a
    m.mprofit organization is a more difficult question. Chapter 377 does not define "civic center,"
    but the term is commonly understood to mean "a municipal building or building complex, often
    publicly financed, with space for conventions, sports events, and theatrical entertainment." NEW
    OXFORD AM. DICTIONARY 313 (2001). Using this definition, a court could conclude that a
    municipality must own the building in order for it to qualify as a "civic center," thereby
    prohibiting ownership by a nonprofit organization. Without further guidance from the
    Legislature or the courts, we are unable to confirm that funding a civic center building is an
    authorized project under chapter 377 of the Local Government Code if the building will be
    owned by a nonprofit organization rather than the municipal development district.
    If a municipal development district decides to contract with a private entity to perform
    any functions related to a civic center, its grant of public funds must satisfy the requirements of
    Texas Constitution article III, section 52, which precludes political subdivisions from using
    public funds for private purposes. TEX. CONST. art. III, § 52(a). Article III, section 52(a) does
    not bar all funding from a political subdivision to a private entity. See Edgewood Indep. Sch.
    Dist. v. Meno, 917 S.W.2d 717,740 (Tex. 1995) (explaining that the purpose ofthis provision is
    to prevent the gratuitous grant of public funds for a private purpose). The Texas Supreme Court
    has explained that the grant of public funds that benefit a private entity will avoid violating
    article III, section 52(a) if it satisfies a three-part test: (1) the predominant purpose of the
    expenditure is to accomplish a public purpose, not to benefit private parties; (2) there are
    adequate public controls in place to ensure that the public purpose is accomplished and to protect
    the public's investment; and (3) the political subdivision is receiving adequate consideration.
    Tex. Mun. League Intergov 'I Risk Pool v. Tex. Workers' Comp. Comm 'n, 
    74 S.W.3d 377
    , 384
    (Tex. 2002). Thus, if a municipal development district decides to contract with a private
    organization to perform any functions related to a publicly funded civic center, it must ensure
    that these requirements are met.
    The Honorable Rob Baiamonte - Page 3        (GA-1058)
    SUMMARY
    Whether any particular project of a municipal development
    district meets the statutory requirements in order to be funded as a
    development project involves questions of fact that cannot be
    determined through the opinion process.
    A court would likely conclude that chapter 377 of the Local
    Government Code authorizes a municipal development district to
    contract with a private, nonprofit organization to operate a civic
    center.
    Attorney General of Texas
    DANIEL T. HODGE
    First Assistant Attorney General
    JAMES D. BLACKLOCK
    Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel
    VIRGINIA K. HOELSCHER
    Chair, Opinion Committee
    Virginia K. Hoelscher
    Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee
    

Document Info

Docket Number: GA-1058

Judges: Greg Abbott

Filed Date: 7/2/2014

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017