Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1965 )

. .
THEATTO``~CNEY GENERAL
OF?i?EXAS
Mr. Harvey Davis Opinion No., C-436
Executive Director
Texas State Soil Re: Whether Attoyac Bayou
Conservation Board Watershed Authority has
Temple, Texas the legal authority to
develop a multlple-
purpose reservoir to
include recreational use
Dear Mr. Davis: as a purpose.
In your letter requesting an opinion from this office,
you submit certain facts which we summarize as follows:
Under the provisions of Public Law 566, 83rd Congress,
known as the Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act, a
work plan for a watershed protection, flood prevention and
recreational development for the Attoyac Bayou Watershed has
been developed by the Attoyac Bayou Watershed Authority and
by several other sponsors with the assistance of the United
States Department of Agriculture. Prior to the development
of the work plan, an application was approved as being feasi-
ble by the State Soil Conservation Board of Texas for this
watershed. Included In the work plan is one multiple purpose
reservoir proJect which will include among Its purposes the
impounding of public waters for both flood prevention and for
recreation. Attoyac Bayou Watershed Authority proposes to
share costs with the Federal Government In developing the
recreational facilities in connection with this multiple pur-
pose dam and reservoir. The office of the General Counsel of
the United States Department of Agriculture has requested in-
formation relative to the powers of such state water district
to participate in this recreational development.
You request the opinion of this office on the following
questions:
1. Does the Attoyac Bayou Watershed Authority have the
legal authority to develop a multiple purpose
structure which includes recreational use?
2. If the Attoyac Bayou Watershed Authority does have
legal authorlty to develop recreational facilities,
is It legal for the authority to use funds received
-2064-
, .
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 2 (C-436)
from taxes to finance and maintain a recreational
development?
Section 59a, of Article XVI, Texas Constitution, provides:
“The conservation and development of all of
the natural resources of this State, including the
control, storing, preservation and distribution of
its 8
rivers and streams, for irrigation, power and all
other useful purposes, the reclamation and irrigation
of its arid, semi-arid and other lands needing
irrigation, the reclamation and drainage of its
overflowed lands, and other lands needing drainage,
the conservation and development of its forests,
water and hydro-electric power, the navigation of
its inland and coastal waters, and the preser-
vation and conservation of all such natural re-
sources of this State are each and all hereby
declared public rights and duties; and the Legls-
lature shall pass all such laws as may be appro-
priate thereto .‘I (Emphasis supplied)
The overriding purpose and Intent of the Constitutional
Amendment is clear In providing a mandate for the maximum
development of all of the State’s natural resources for all
recognized beneficial or conservational purposes. The public
policy is declared to encourage conservation, development, and
utilization of water resources as well as all other natural
resources to the greatest beneficial extent practicable.
Subsection (b) of the above constitutional amendment of
1917 permits the Legislature to create conservation and recla-
mation districts essential to the accomplishment of the pur-
poses of the amendment, these districts to be governmental
agencies and bodies politic and corporate with such powers of
government, and authority to exercise such rights, privileges
and functions concerning the subject matter of the amendment
as might be conferred upon them.
tihile a right to develop natural resources for recreation-
al purposes is not specifically mentioned in Section 59a of
Article XVI of the Texas Constitution, such right would un-
doubtedly be included in the language.
“The
-..- co
--nservatlon and development of all
of the natural resources of this State, includ-
ing the control, storing, preservation and dis-
tribution of its storm and flood waters, the
waters of its rivers and streams for . . T-5-z
-2065-
.
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 3 (C-436)
the conservation
hereby declared public righe
and the Legislature such laws
as may be appropriate thereto." (Emphasis
supplied)
It is pertinent to observe that no specific mention is
made in the Constitutional Amendment of the right to conserve
and develop for oil and gas purposes and uses, yet this Amend-
ment was liberally construed to include these also In Terre11
Parker v. San Jacinto Water Control & Imp. Dist., 1% Tex.
15, 273 S.W.2d 58b (1954), liberally construed Sec. sga, Art.
XVI of the Texas Constitution in holding that a water district
is authorized to erect and operate a sewer disposal plant, a
power not expressly mentioned in the enumeration of purposes
therein set out. Sewage disposal was thus held to be within
the phrase in Sec. %a, Art. XVI of the Constitution, "all
other useful purposes." This case is authority for giving the
Constitution a construction in support of powers necessarily
or fairly implied for the accomplishment of its declared ob-
jects and purposes, while avoiding the technical rules of
construction of ejusdem generis and expresslo unius, which are
employed only where the intent or purpose cannot be determined
otherwise.
It is generally recognized by the authorities that the
term "conservation of public waters" Is used in the Conserva-
tion Amendment and water statutes means the development of
water for beneficial uses and that recreation is a beneficial
use of water. Empire Water and Power Co. v. Cascade Town Co.,
2O5Fl23 (CCA 8th 1913) mod. In part, 205 F 130; U. S. v.
Ballard (1960), l&+ F Su'p. 1, 12, note 4; 93 CJS gr5--i7rs;"
S-2, Waters, note 7g ; p onterey County Flood Control and
Water Conservation Dist. v. Hughes 1 b2 20 Cal R t 22
201 C.A. 2d 1%'; Wiel, Water Rights(iz t& Westeri Sk& 5 '
(3rd Ed.), Vol. 1, p. 166; 2 Kinney on Irrigation and Water
Rights (2nd Ed.) p. 1200, Sec. 696.
This philosophy is followed in Texas in Art. 7470, V.C.S.
which provides that "the public waters of this szate may be
appropriated for any of the following purposes: public
parks, . . . recreation and pleasure. . . ." The'ligislature
-2066-
. .
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 4 (C-436)
created a very complete system of laws “for the maximum
judicious employment of the State waters In the public
interest . . . to conserve this natural resource in the
greatest practicable measure for the public welfare; . . .
to take and utilize the waters of this State for uses recog-
nized and authorized . . . (In order) to prevent the escape
of waters without contribution to a beneficial public ser-
vice. . . .I’ Art. 7472c, V.C.S.
It is settled that recreational uses or purposes are
deemed such beneficial uses which usually pertain to public
waters and may properly be deemed the subject of a necessary
implication in connection with the grant of authority over
conservation and development of the natural resources of a
state, State, ex rel. State Game Commission v. Red River
51 N.M. 207, 182 P.2d 421, 429 ( 94 )
vE$+%F ; 6 Tex.Law Rev. 524; Diversion LakelCl~b’vSi``~th
126 Tex. 129, 86 S.vJ.2d 441, 4-J ; 7 Tex. I&W Rev. (F$6.
At a time when millions of dollars are being spent
toward the possible development of fresh water from sea
water at a reasonable cost, and at a time when the State
of Texas is desirous of attracting more industry and tourists,
the public cannot afford the luxury of wasting water resources.
Our advancing civilization is placing progressively
greater burdens upon the existing supplies of water available
for beneficial uses. Science tells us that the basic problem
is not one of total supply, since that cannot be increased,
but rather is one of controlling, distributing and utilizing
our water supply efficiently. Demands for recreational use
as well as for other uses of public water areas are expanding
at phenomenal rates under the pressing stimulus of Increasing
population. In addition, other stimuli such as widening
mobility, rising standards of living, increased personal ln-
come and the growth in leisure time of a wide segment of the
public, create additional demands for recreational use of
waters. Resource development through a watershed project of
this nature could boost the economy of both the local area
and the State of Texas. A too strict construction of the
Texas Constitution, so as to prevent the development of multi-
purpose reservoirs which include recreation as a beneficial
use would have a serious, and totally unnecessary, retarding
effect on Texas economy.
If possible, that construction shall be adopted which
will promote the public interest in accord with sound economic
-2067-
.
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 5 (C-436)
policy. State v. DeGress, 72 Tex. 242, 11 S.W. 1029 (1888).
It is common knowledge in this State that numerous
water districts have erected dams and created reservoirs
to store, control, preserve and develop the waters for
recreational uses along with other uses, and no question
has been raised in our appellate courts of their constitu-
tional authority to do so during the past forty-seven years
since the Constitutional Amendmentwas adopted in this State.
A recreational lake is a reasonable form of conserving,
developing, storing and preserving public waters.
Separate and aside from the benefits to the public to
be derived from the use of recreational waters as such, the
proposed structure will constitute a form of controlling
flood waters, (the common enemy), and is a form of preser-
vation of public waters, for otherwise such waters would
quickly waste into the gulf and be lost to other and higher
statutory beneficial uses of water. Thus, in a very real
sense, the proposed structure would aid in "the conservation
and development of all of the natural resources of this State,
including the control, storing, preservation, and distribution
of its storm and flood waters, the waters of its rivers and
streams. . . .", for the phrase "all other useful purposes"
follows the quoted language of Article XVI, Section 59, of
the Texas Constitution.
Where a general power is conferred, every particular
power necessary for the exercise of same is also conferred,
whether expressly granted or not. By its very nature, a
constitution cannot "enter into a minute specification of all
the minor powers naturally and obviously included in it and
flowing from the great and important ones which are expressly
granted." 1 Cooley on Constitutional Limitations (8th Ed.
1927) 138.
In construing the Texas Constitution, it is necessary to
keep in mind that a liberal construction, particularly to
remedial portions or amendment, Is to be indulged to carry
out its purposes. 12 Tex.Jur. 2d 364, Sec. 16, Constitutional
Law; also Sec. 14, p. 363 observing, "If necessary the lan-
guage of the constitution is to be given a broad and liberal
meaning in order to effectuate the purpose of the provision
of which it is a part." Brown County Water Imp. Dist v.
Austin Mill & Grain Co., '135Tex. 140, 138 S.W.2d 523 12940).
In this State where water shortage has often been acute,
it would be an unreasonable, impractical construction of the
-2068-
.
hh-. Harvey Davis, page 6 (c-436)
Constitution, contrary to its purposes and public policy
mandate, to confine and restrict its language to narrow
water development programs. There can be no doubt that
the power to erect a dam and create a reservoir for water
conservation purposes Includes by fair and necessary
impllcatlon the recreational purposes and uses. These
are beneficial or conservation uses and, are given legis-
lative recognition as such In the statutes of this State.
Your first question Is whether the statute creating
Attoyac Bayou Watershed Authority (Article 8280-220, V.C.S.),
enacted expressly pursuant to Sec. 59 of Article XVI of the
Texas Constitution (as expressed in the caption of the Act,
as well as in Section 1 of the Act), gives Attoyac Bayou
Watershed Authority the right and power to develop a multi-
purpose project which includes recreational uses.
Such a water district possesses not only such powers
as are expressly granted by statute but ':also those
necessarily or fairly implied, or incident to the powers
expressly granted, or essential to the accomplishment of
the declared objects and urposes of the water district."
94 C.J.S. 71, Sec. 243 (57, Waters and cases there cited;
Harris Co., v.
of Houston,
. W. 2d 789 (Civ.App., lgb2, error ref. n.r.e.). See
also Parker v.'San Jacinto Water Control and Imp. Dist., 154
Tex. 15, 273 S.!~?.2d 58b (1954) .
In Lower Nueces River Water Supply District v. Cartwright,
274 S.W.Zd 199 07 (Ci " 1954) the 'San Antonio C t
of Civil Appeals: &eak&*%ugh Justice Norvell, helz",&at,
11
. in determining the corporate powers
of suet; iistricts, it is necessary to examine in
some detail the legislative act and the constitu-
tional basis upon which it rests. Water control
and Improvement districts and river authorities
are creatures of 'statutes, and, although insofar
as the general scope of government OperatiOni are
concerned, they could be classified as 'low down
in the scale or grade of corporate existence,*
yet within their proper sphere or operation they
may be powerful lnstrumenta%ies exercising
;y.
broa an . ."
~Emphasis added)
-206%
Xr. Harvey Davis, page 7 (c-436)
In holding that the Lower Nueces River Water Supply
District (created by Art. 8280-134) had the power to con-
struct a dam and reservoir for the permissible uses
authorized by the water control and improvement district,
referred to and adopted by the creating Act, and to con-
demn lands within or without the district, even though
such power might conflict with the authority and jurlsdic-
tlon conferred upon some other agency or district, the San
Antonio Court of Civil Appeals found said authority In that
section of the Act which adopted the governing powers and
autilority applicable to water control and improvement dis-
tricts. Like Art. 8280-220 creating the Attoyac Bayou
Authority, Art. 8280-134 creating Lower Nueces River Water
Supply District reads virtually identical to that Act in
this respect, and the Court's analysis and construction
will be hereinafter quoted because peculiarly pertinent
and applicable to the same construction which must be given
to Art. 8280-220, wherein in its Section 13 it likewise
!'adopted by reference as though set out at length herein"
all of "the general laws pertaining to water control and
imorovement districts". In Sec. 1 of that Article. the
Attoyac Authority was given "the power to exerclse*the
rights, privileges and functions hereinafter specified
and the creation of this Authority is hereby declared to
be essential to the accomplishment of the purposes set
forth in Article XVI, Sec. 59, of the Constitution of Texas."
Section 3 commands the Attoyac Authority to conduct sur-
veys and develop a plan for control and use of its waters
"to the end that improvements" will be made and related to
the entire watershed. Section 4 vests the authority "with
the power to control, store, preserve and distribute the
water and floodwaters. . . for conservation, preservation,
reclamation, and drainage of the lands within the authority,
and is empowered to carry out flood prevention measures. . .
to provide the facilities authorized to be constructed under
the provisions of this Act."
Section 5 reads: "In exercising the power for which
the authority is created, it shall have all of the authority
conferred by general law upon water control and improvement
districts, including but not limited to, the power to con-
struct, acquire, improve, maintain and repair dams or other
structures and the acquisition of land, easements, properties,
or equipment which may be needed to utilize, control, and
distribute any waters that may be Impounded, diverted, or
controlled by the authority."
-2070-
.
klr. Harvey Davis, page 8 (c-436)
Itmust be here observed that the subsequent Section
13 of the Act further adopts by reference all of the general
laws pertaining to water control and improvement districts
"except as modified or supplemented by the provisions of
this Act." Section 13 must necessarily be construed in har-
mony with the powers conferred by Sections 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
and 5A, which are not obviously intended to be exclusive.
These are not In anyway Inconsistent therewith but are
expressly said to be in Section 13 "supplemented by the
provisions of this Act." These powers In the Section 13
provision are cumulative to the other powers set forth in
Art. 8280-220, and any conflict which could reasonably exist
would have to be found by way of express limitation within
the terms of the Statute under the well settled canons of
construction applicable thereto. The powers enumerated In
Section 4 of the Act are thus not expressly or by necessary
implication exclusive but the powers in Sections 1, 2, 3,
5, 5R and 13 are cumulative or "supplementary." The powers
in Section 4 are as general and broad as can be conceivably
made “to control, store, preserve and distribute the water. . .
for conservation, preservation, reclamation, and drainage. . . ."
These powers do not even purport to set out what specific
and legally recognized uses or purposes of the water are con-
templated; that is, irrigation, mining, milling, manufacturing,
power, stock-raising, town water works, public parks, game
preserves, recreational, domestic, etc., as statutorily recog-
nized in the general laws, Arts. 7470, 7471, 7880-4a, etc.
It thus appears that the legislature was not attempting to
specify in the statute any specific purpose or use or limit
the powers conferred to any specific purposes or uses.
Article 8280-220, involving a grant of authority for
public advantages and purposes , pursuantto the mandate
and public policy declared by the remedial Constltutional
Pmendment, Sec. 59, Art. 16 of the Texas Constitution, must
be construed liberally and reasonably, disregarding technical
distinctions, and giving the Act the most comprehensive
application of which it Is susceptible to effectuate the
legislative objects, purpose and intent. Im erial Irr. Co,
``r``~o``4s``~230``~s``~u```` 575, 581 hi 53 Tex.
The proper construction of the powers of the Attoyac
Bayou Watershed Authority is that adopted in Lower Nueces
River Water Supply Dist. v. Cartwright, supra, where a
similar incorporation of other statutes by reference was
-2071-
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 9 (C-436)
before the courts. Sections 2, 5 & 9, of Art. 8280-134,
V.C.S. incorporated by reference the general laws Per-
taining to water control improvement districts created
under Authority of Section 59, Art. XVI of the Constitu-
tion and the court held as follows:
"The general laws of the State applicable
to water control and improvement districts and
referred to in Section 2 of the 199 Acts above
quoted, are designated as Articles 7880-l to
7880-153, inclusive, of Vernon's Ann. Tex, Stats.
The basic Act was passed by the 39th Legislature,
Acts. 1925, p. 86, ch. 25, and numerous amend-
ments thereto have been adopted.
"Among the purposes for which such dls-
tricts may be organized is that specifically
stated in Subdivision (a) of Section 59 of
Article 16, Constitution of TexBs, namely 'the
control, storing, preservation and distribution
of its (the State's) storm and flood waters, the
waters of its rivers and streams. for ir@inatlon.
power and all other useful purposes, i -
Article 7880-3. To these districts a;e'd&egated
'such functions, powers, authority, rights and
duties as may permit the accomplishments of the
purposes for which such districts may be created,
including the investigation, and In case a plan
for improvements is adopted, then, the con-
struction, maintenance, and operation of all
necessary improvement, plants, works and facili-
ties, the acquisition of water rights and all
other properties, lands, tenements, easements,
and all other rights helpful to the purpose of
the organization of the district, subject only
to the restrictions imposed by the Constitution
of the State of Texas or that of the United
States: . . .I Article 7880-7.
"A water control and improvement district
is further empowered Ito construct all plants,
works and improvements necessary to the pur-
pose for which it is organized and incident
thereto. . . (They) may construct all works and
improvements necessary for the prevention of the
floods, the irrigation of land In such districts,
for drainage of lands and construction of levees
to protect same from overflow, to alter land
elevations where correction is needed, and to
supply water for municipal uses, domestic uses,
-2072-
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 10 (C-436)
power and commercial purposes, and all other
beneficial uses or controls.' Article -48.
"It is further provided that, 'the dlrec-
tars, employees and engineers of a district
shall have authority to go upon any lands for
the purpose of making surveys for reservoirs,
canals, rights of way, dams or other contem-
plated Improvements and to attend to any business
of the district whether such lands are situated
in the district or outside of such district.'
Article 7880-49.
"Articles 7880-125 and 7880-126 relate to
the property of a water control and lmprove-
ment district and its powers of eminent domain.
Among other means, such districts are authorized
to acquire under the power of eminent domain,
'all lands, materials, borrow and waste grounds,
easements, rights of way and everything deemed
necessary, incident or helpful for the purpose
of accomplishing any one or more of the objects
authorized for water control and improvement
districts, which shall be held to mean the
accomplishment of said objects by any practica-
ble mechanical means: . . .I A detailed pro-
cedure Is likewise provided for the taking of
lands (either within or without the District,'
under the power of eminent domain." (Emphasis
added)
In addition to the above statutes referred to by the
court, Art. 7880-&a, is a statute which was also pertinently
adopted by Sec. 13 of Art. 8280-220, and authorizes our water
district to award the use of waters for the following uses:
domestic and municipal use, industrial use . . .; irrigation;
development of hydro-electric power; pleasure and recreation.
It is well settled that recreation as a use in Art.
7880&a, V.C.S. must be read into Art. 8280-220 and given
effect, either as a statute adopted 'by reference (53 Tex.Jur.
2d 278, Sec. 185, Statutes), and many cases cited or as "in
pari materia". 53 Tex.Jur. 280, Sec. 186, Statutes, and
many cases cited.
Likewise, the constitutional provisions and powers
(such as Sec.~59, Art. XVI) must be Interpreted and read
into a statute (such as Art. 8280-220), in the light of the
-2073-
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 11 (c-436)
constitutional purposes, "both express and implied."
Clark v. Briscoe Irrigation Co., 200 S.W.28 674, (Civ.
App. 1947) Brazes River Conservation & Reclamation
Dlst. v. Cismo, 135 Tex. 307m . W. 28 577 (19 0).
In Corzelius v. Railroad Commission, 182 S.W.2d
412, 415 (Civ.App. 1944) the applicable rule of con-
struction of fair implications from the conservation
laws of this state was clearly and forcefully stated as
follows:
"It is equally well settled, however,
that when a statute imposes a mandatory duty
upon a governmental agency to carry out the
express and specifically defined purposes and
objectives stated in the law, such statute
carries with it by necessary implication the
authority to do whatever is reasonably
necessary to effectuate the legislative
mandate and purpose. 39 Tex.Jur. Sea. 99,
p. 186; 50 Am.Jur. Sec. 428, p. 449."
Art. 8280-220 must be so construed in the above light
as granting to the Attoyac Bayou Watershed Authority the
power to develop a multi-purpose structure which includes
recreational uses recognized as being included within the
purposes or needs of "conservation, preservation, recla-
mation, and drainage," the statutory purposes or uses
expressly adopted by reference as a part of the general
laws pertaining to water control and improvement districts,
and the constitutional purposes or uses in Sec. 5ga of
Art. 16 which comprehend "all . . . useful purposes."
Section a of Art. 8280-220, V.C.S. of Texas, grants
the express power "to cooperate with any agency, represen-
tative or instrumentality or department of the Federal
government . . . for the purpose of acquiring the funds
necessary to furnish land easements or permanent improve-
ments thereon. . . .' This provision gives the Attoyac
Authority the power to acquire funds from or share costs
?ith the Federal government for the construction of a
multi-purpose dam, to include recreational or other statu-
tory recognized conservation purposes, as expressly author-
ized by Public Law 566, 83rd Congress, as amended.
In projects involving recreational purposes, Public
Law 566 authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to finance
not to exceed one-half of the cost of land, easements, or
-2074-
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 12 (C-436)
rights of way and minimum basic facilities needed for
public health and safety, access to, and use of such
reservoir or the area for such purposes whenever the need
therefor is demonstrated. However, the local district
apparently is required to acquire or condemn the land
necessary for such projects.
Sections 5 and 5A of hrt. 8280-220 and kt. 7880-126
confers upon the authority the powers of eminent domain
and relocation in carrying out any of the powers granted
the Authority.
The power of eminent domain depends upon the express
language of the statutory authority.
Having concluded that beneficial and useful purposes
of flood control and water conservation include recreational
uses, we believe that land to be inundated by such a water
conservation project is within the purview of "property . . .
needed for, or Incident to, or helpful for, accomplishing
the object of the District, and to effect the economical
operation thereof . . . ." Art. 7880-126; See Monterey
on, 178 s.W.2d
(Civ.App. 1944, error ref., w.o.m.); 29-A C.J.S. 311,
Eminent Domain, Sec. 64(X).
As to lands lying above the contour line of the water
level of the reservoir, the power to condemn is strictly
construed and limited to the amount of property reasonably
necessary and convenient for the "public use" authorized,
as distinguished from "private" uses for individuals, and
as illustrated in the above cited authorities. Public access,
safety, protection or purity of water and sanitation would
appear to be valid considerations in view of the authority's
power, expressed, for example, in Art. 7880-T.
The final question presented is whether the Attoyac
Bayou Authority may use funds received from taxes to finance
and maintain the recreational development. By the express
terms of Section 59c, Art. XVI of the Texas Constitution, . . .
which must be read into Art. 8280-220 in the light of the
constitutionally expressed purposes, uses and objectives, as
heretofore shown, it Is provided that, "the Legislature shall
authorize all such Indebtedness as may be necessary to provide
all improvements and the maintenance thereof requisite to the
achievement of the purposes of this Amendment, and all such
-2075-
. .
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 13 (c-436)
Indebtedness may be evidencodby bonds of such conservation
and reclamation districts, to be issued under such regulb-
tionn as may be prescribed by larr and shall also authorize
the levy and collection within such districts of all taxes,
equitably distributed, as may be necessary for the payment
of the interest and the creation of a sinking fund for the
payment of such bonds . . . .I'
Pursuant to the above, the Legislature provided by
.',rt. 8280-220, Sec. 5, that the .jttoyac Bayou Authority
is vested with all of the authority conferred by general
l:iw upon water control and improvement districts, including
We acquisition of land, easements, properties, or equip-
ment which may be needed to utilize, control and distri-
bute any water that may be impounded, diverted or controlled
b;>. the :,uthority. Section 8 of the statute provides that
the ;.uthority may levy a maintenance tax, If approved by
vote.of qualified voters within the authority, for the
purpose of maintaining~:gorks of improvements constructed
in cooperation with the Federal government. Section 12
provides that "all bonds issued by the authority . . .
shall be issued in the same manner and with the same con-
sideration and provision as under the general lavi governing
wster control and improvement districts." See Art. 7880-g
and other related articles for bond powers.
Sincethe generl;l law governing water control improve-
ment districts contains all items required by the levying
of a valid tax to support bonds issued for authorized con-
struction projects, there is no room for doubt that Attoyac
&you Authority would be authorized to levy the necessary
taxes to support its share of the said multi-purpose pro-
ject to the same full extent a s any of the other water con-
trol improvement districts in this state.
It appears that the Texas Soil Commission is authorized
only to "approve or disapprove of projects designed to
effectuate watershed protection and flood prevention pro-
grams . . . .'I Sec. 6, .\rt. 74'j'2e, V.C.S. Since the pro-
posed project goes beyond such purposes, approval of the
Texas ?;r;ter Commission 13 required; and a permit must be
obtained before commencing the project. Art. 7492, V.C.S.
of Texas.
-2076-
Mr. Harvey Davis, page 14 (C-436)
SUMMARY
em-----
The fittoyac ayou Watershed Authority, express-
ly created pursuant to Sec. 59, Art. XVI of the
Texas Constitution, and by Art. 8280-220, V.C.S.,
has the legal authority to develop a multi-purpose
reservoir which includes recreational use a8 a
purpose and may use funds received from taxes to
finance and maintain the same.
Very truly yours,
WAGGONER CARR
iittorney General of Texas
By:
Assistant
KBT:rm
APPROVED:
OPINIONCOMMITTEE
W. V. Geppert, Chairman
J. S. Bracewell
Robert Owen
Frank Booth
Larry Craddock
APPROVED
FOR THE ;\TTORNEY
GENERAL
By: Stanton Stone
-2077-