Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1988 )

September 9, 1988
Honorable Hugh Parmer Opinion No. JM-952
Chairman
Committee on Intar- Re: Whether certain improve-
governmental Relations ments may constitute "regional
Texas State Senate economic development facilities"
P. 0. BOX 12068 within the meaning of article
Austin, Texas 78711 1118x, V.T.C.S. (RQ-1296)
Dear Senator Parmer:
you have asked whether
drainage projects, street and other infra-
structural improvements, and library facili-
ties can be considered 'regional economic
development facilities' as defined in section
(6C)(e), article 1118x, V.T.C.S., as added
by Rouse Bill No. 2008, 70th Legislative
Session.
Article 1118x, V.T.C.S., is a very lengthy, very
detailed statute originally enacted in 1973 to help the
state's urban areas remedy problems such as traffic conges-
tion and air pollution which resulted in part from a lack of
mass transit systems in those areas. Citv of Humble v.
Metrooolitan Transit Authority, 636 S.W.2ds484 (Tex. App. -
Austin 1982, writ ref'd n.r.e.), anoeal di mlssed sub nom.
Arch r . Metrooolitan Transit Authoritv, 464 U.S. 80;
(198:) .v Generally, it authorizes metropolitan areas, upon
a vote of the electorate, to establish rapid transit
authorities to be structured and operated in accordance with
the act. Section 6C(e) was added to the statute by Acts
1987, 70th Leg., ch. 804, at 2796,l which also amended other
1. The legislation has an interesting history. The
content of House Bill No. 2008 originated under the style of
Senate Bill No. 1536, introduced in the Senate on May 18,
1987, by Senator Tejeda. The bill was referred to the
(Footnote Continued)
P. 4816
HOnOrable Hugh Parmer - Page 2 (JM-952)
-_
sections of the act to complement the section 6c(e)
provisions.
Section 6C deals with acquisition of station or terminal
complexes by an authority. Subsection (a) thereof declares
such acquisitions to be 1°public and governmental functions,
exercised for a public purpose, and matters of public
necessity for public use and public benefit." Subsection
(b) gives an authority power to acquire lands and interest
in lands "adjacent or accessible to stations and other mass
transit facilities, developed or to be developed by the
(Footnote Continued)
Senate Committee on Intergovernmental Relations, where it
was taken up in public hearing on May 19. At that public
hearing, Senator Tejeda explained that Senate Bill No. 1536
was to serve as a legislative vehicle in case some agreement
could be worked out between San Antonio's transit authority
(WIA"), the San Antonio City Council, and the Bexar County
delegation to the legislature. The bill would allow a
+year, one-half-cent raise in the sales tax in San Antonio,
subject to voter approval. The proceeds of that tax -- some
$150 million -- would be dedicated to economic development
projects undertaken in conjunction with mass transit
facilities. Hearings on Senate Bill No. 1536 before the
Senate Committee on Intergovernmental Relations, 70th
Legislature (May 19, 1987).
The committee approved Senate Bill No. 1536 by a vote
of 6-0, and the bill was passed unamended by the full Senate
on May 22. The bill was then sent to the Rouse of Represen-
tatives, where it was referred to the Committee on Urban
Affairs. The House Committee on Urban Affairs considered
Senate Bill No. 1536 in a formal meeting on May 27, 1987.
There is no record of the discussion that took place at that
meeting, but the members present did approve several impor-
tant changes to the bill. m Bill Analysis, Tex. S.B.
1536, 70th Leg. (1987). The committee approved its sub-
stitute for Senate Bill No. 1536 by a vote of 12-0, and
reported it back to the full house.
By this time, however, the regular session was drawing
to a close, and there was a growing concern within the Bexar
County delegation that Senate Bill No. 1536 was moving too
slowly to ever reach the Governor's desk. A simple solution
was found in House Bill No. 2008, which was then sitting in
the Senate. House Bill No. 2008 was originally intended to
(Footnote Continued)
p. 4817
Honorable Hugh Parmer - Page 3 (JR-952)
C
authority" and to lease or transfer them to others subject
to certain restrictions. Subsection (c) provides that any
such acquisitions must be part of, or contained within, a
complex needed for successful operation of the system and
designated as such by an approved %omprehensive transit
plan." Subsection (d) states that a station or terminal
complex ua include adequate provisions for the transfer
of passengers,n and "BIQY include provisions for commercial,
residential, recreational, institutional, and industrial
facilities, except that no land or interest in land that is
more than 1,500 feet in distance from the center point of
the complex or that has not been included in a master plan
of development adopted by the board may be acquired for
the facilities." V.T.C.S. art. 1118x, 5 6C(d). (Emphasis
added.)
In addition, subsection (e) of section 6C, the focus of
your question, authorizes, in a station or terminal complex
"of an authority created before January 1, 1980, in which
the principal city had a population of less than 1,200,000``
according to the most recent census, the inclusion of
"regional economic development facilities" if approved by
both the board of the authority and the governing body
of the principal city. "Regional economic development
facilities" are defined by the subsection as
facilities which will lead to the creation of
new jobs, maintain existing jobs or generally
improve the conditions under which a local
(Footnote Continued)
create an economic development finance agency in Corpus
Christi. It passed the House on May 6, but had become
stalled in the Senate -- reportedly due to the ill health of
Senator Truan. On June 1, on motion of Senator Armbrister,
the Senate suspended the rules and took up House Bill No.
2008. Senator Tejeda immediately offered an amendment to
strike all below the enacting clause and substitute therefor
the language of Senate Bill No. 1536, as amended by the
House. The amendment was approved by a viva vote vote, and
after one further amendment, the bill was passed by a vote
of 31-o. f&8 Senate Journal of Texas, 70th Leg., Reg.
Sess., 2643-48 (1987). The bill was sent to the Rouse of
Representatives that same day. The House refused to concur
with the Senate amendment, but a conference committee
resolved the disagreement, and both houses managed to
approve the conference report before the close of the
legislative day.
p. 4818
Honorable Hugh Parmer - Page 4 (JM-952)
economy may prosper, and which include, but
are not limited to, facilities used primarily
for conventions, entertainment, special
events, professional and amateur sports, or
other lawful purposes,2
The remainder of subsection (e) deals with the power of the
authority to institute a tax to pay for such facilities, the
mechanics of doing so, and the limitations upon the use of
the funds so raised, and with the type of agreements the
authority might make to implement the realization of
"regional economic development facilities."
Although the power to include regional economic
development facilities within a station or terminal complex
is bestowed upon the authority by a separate subsection of
section 6C, such facilities are only authorized if located
"withinn such a station or complex. Consequently, drainage
projects, street and other infrastructural improvements, or
library facilities located outside the permitted expanse of
the station or terminal complex, could not be considered
Vegional economic development facilities" within the
meaning of the statute, whether or not they would "lead
to the creation of new jobs, maintain existing jobs or
generally improve the conditions under which a local economy
may prosper."
Inasmuch as subsection (d) limits the expanse of such a
station or terminal complex acquired for commercial, resi-
dential, recreational, institutional or industrial facili-
ties to not more than 500 yards from the center point of the
complex, the opportunity for drainage projects, street and
other infrastructural improvements, or library facilities to
qualify as regional economic development facilities is
accordingly limited, but we cannot say that as a matter of
law they could not be considered as such if they were
located within the complex. Each situation will depend on
its own particular facts, The criteria are that regional
economic development facilities:
(1) must be located at a station or
terminal complex:
2. &g Tex. Con&. art. III, 5 52-a added November 3,
1987. Because your question involves only matters of
statutory construction, we do not consider constitutional
provisions affecting the legislation.
p. 4819
Honorable Hugh Parmer - Page 5 (JM-952)
(2) must be aimed at providing jobs or
improving economic conditions generally:
(3) must be dedicated to lawful purposes:
and
(4) must meet statutory requirements for
funding and approval.
To qualify as "regional economic develop-
ment facilities" pursuant to section 6C(e) of
article 1118x, V.T.C.S., such facilities must
be located at a station or terminal complex,
must be aimed at providing jobs or improving
economic conditions generally, must be
dedicated to lawful purposes, and must meet
statutory requirements for funding and
approval. Whether a particular facility
qualifies will depend upon the facts peculiar
to it.
JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas
MARYEELLER
First Assistant Attorney General
MU MccREARY
Executive Assistant Attorney General
JUDGE ZOUIE STEAELEY
Special Assistant Attorney General
RICK GILPIN
Chairman, Opinion Committee
Prepared by Bruce Youngblood
Assistant Attorney General
p. 4820