DocketNumber: JM-145
Judges: Jim Mattox
Filed Date: 7/2/1984
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017
The Attorney General of Texas April 11, 1984 JIM MATTOX Attorney General Supreme Court Building Honorable Charles Evans Opinion No..JM-145 P. 0. BOX 12548 Chairman Austin, TX. 78711. 2548 Committee on House Administration Re: Acquisition of land for 512/475-2501 Telex 910/874-1367 Texas House of Representatives Gateway State Park Telecopier 5121475.0266 P. 0. Box 2910 Austin, Texas 78769 714 Jackson, Suite 700 Dear Representative Evans: Dallas, TX. 75202-4506 2141742.8944 You ask whether certain property, established as Gateway State Park, may be deeded to the state in parcels at various times or only 4824 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 in whole in a single conveyance. Additionally, you ask whether the El Paso, TX. 79905-2793 state may accept only land that is connected to described land. We 9151533-3484 conclude that the state may acquire described land in more than one conveyance, but that only connected lands may be so acquired. 01 Texas. Suite 700 Houston, TX. 77002.3111 House Bill No. 2061, Acts 1983, Sixty-eighth Legislature, chapter 7131223-5886 983, at 5354, established Gateway State Park to consist of all land described in House Bill No. 63, Acts 1979, Sixty-sixth Legislature, 608 Broadway, Suite 312 chapter 542, at 1131. House Bill No. 2061 repealed section l(c) of Lubbock. TX. 79401.3479 House Bill No. 63 but left the remainder of the act intact. House 8061747.5238 Bill No. 63 contains the authorization for and the method of acquiring land for the park: 4309 N. Tenth. Suite 6 McAlten, TX. 78501-1685 Section 1. (a) The Parks and Wildlife 5121682.4547 Department shall accept and may record ss and when offered any conveyance to the State of Texas of land and improvements on land: 200 Main Plaza, Suite 400 San Antonio. TX. 78205.2797 51212254191 (1) described in Subdivision (1). Section 2 of this Act; An Equal Opportunity/ (2) having a boundary that is contiguous with Affirmative Action Employer or adjacent to a boundary of the land described in Subdivision (l), Section 2 of this Act; (3) having a boundary that is contiguous with or adjacent to the boundary of land accepted under Subdivision (2) of thins section or under this subdivision; and p. 623 Honorable Charles Evans - Page 2 (JM-145) -., (4) described in Subdivision (2). Section 2 of this Act. (b) Acceptance under this Act may be accomplished without regard to whether the conveyance of land that may be accepted is made in one or more instruments executed at different times. . . . . Sec. 2. Section 1 of this Act refers to the following property: (1) [land described by metes and bounds, ‘tract 1’1 (2) [land described by metes and bounds, qtr&i 2’1 sec. 3. The Parks and Wildlife Department s acquire and record other property which is contig”o”s with or adjacent to the property ? described or provided for in this Act, to be used for park purposes . . . . (Emphasis added). Sections l(a) and l(b) of House Bill No. 63 read together specifically authorize acceptance of land described therein “as and when offered . . . without regard to whether the conveyance of land that may be accepted is made in one or more instruments executed at different times.” Thus, the state may acquire authorized land in parcels. However, House Bill No. 63 limits the particular parcels that may be so acquired. House Bill No. 63 mandates acceptance of land described by metes and bounds in subdivisions (1) and (2) of section 2 (tracts 1 and 2), land with a boundary that is “contiguous with or adjacent to” tract 1. and land with a boundary that is contiguous with land which is connected to tract 1 and which is “accepted.” Additionally, section 3 of House Bill No. 63 authorizes acceptance of land contiguous to land descrl~bed as tract 2. Although “adjacent” does not always mean actual contact, “Contig”o”s” means more than near; it means touching at a point or along a boundary. City of Safford V. Town of Thatcher,495 P.2d 150
. 153 (Ariz. Ct. App. 1972); Black’s Law Dictionary (5th ed. 1979). Texas courts also use “adjacent” to describe land that is touching. See Carlton V. Marshall,208 S.W.2d 661
(Tex. Civ. App. - Austin 1948, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Smith V. Linton,130 S.W.2d 1108
(Tex. Civ. App. - p. 624 Il~u~-;~hle Charles Evans - Page 3 (JM-145) Galveston 1939). rev'd on other grounds,154 S.W.2d 643
(1941). House Bill No. 63, section l(d), defining "contiguous" and "adjacent" together, explains them as follows: For the purposes of this Act, boundaries are considered to be contiguous or adjacent where each follows the right-of-way of a public roadway, including the Dallas-Fort Worth Turnpike, or a river channel, or are separated only by the public roadway or the river channel. (Emphasis added). Section l(d) indicates that the presence of a narrow, intervening interest in land such as state ownership of the beds of navigable streams, see Coastal Industrial Water Authority v. York, 520 SiW.2d 494 (Tex.Civ. App. - Houston [lst Dist.] 1975). aff'd, 532 S.W.Zd 949 (1976), will not prevent land from being "contiguous." If the legislature found it necessary to specify that tracts are not prevented from being "contiguous" or "adjacent" when separated by a river channel or a roadway, it probably intended both "contiguous" snd "adjacent" to mean touching. Thus, under House Bill No. 63, the state may acquire only property that is physically touching tracts 1 and 2. As indicated previously, the state must accept land connected to tract 1 ;Ind x accept land connected to tract 2. However, House Bj,ll No. 63 also mandates acceptance of additional contiguous land with regard to tract 1. Texas courts treat "contiguous" as bordering a specified lot or as bordering another lot which borders the specified lot; thus three tracts may all be "contiguous" with each other in the sense that one tract borders on a middle tract which in turn borders on another tract. Railroad Commission V. Lone Star Gas Co., 587 S.W.Zd 110 (Tex. 1979). Although, under Texas law, "contiguous" embraces the idea of numerous tracts being "contiguous" by relation, House Bill No. 63 specifically authorizes acceptance of an expanding group of contiguous parcels only with regard to tract I. Subdivisions (2) :snd (3) of section l(a) authorize acceptance of land (2) having a boundary that is contiguous with or adjacent to a boundary of the land described III Subdivision (l), Section 2 of this Act; [and] (3) having a boundary that is contiguous witI> or adjacent to the boundary of land accepted under Subdivision (2) of this section or under this subdivision; (Emphasis added). In contrast, section 3 provides: p. 625 Honorable Charles Evans - Page 4 (JM-145) The Parks and Wildlife Department may acquire and record other property which is contiguous with or adjacent to the property described or provided for in this Act, to be used for park purposes. Although section 3 includes the words "or provided for," the Bill Analysis states that section 3 means that the Parks and Wildlife Department may acquire and record other property contiguous or adjacent to property described in this Act, to be used for park puspoes. Additionally, the specific mandate for acceptance of expanding co"tig"o"s tracts applies only to tract 1; thus, by negative implication, the concept of expanding contiguous tracts does not apply to tract 2. Thus, the state must accept, first, land described herein as tracts 1 and 2; second, land that is connected to tract 1; and third, land that is contiguous in turn with land which is connected to tract 1 and which has already been accepted. Additionally the state 9 accept land that is connected to tract 2. If any authorized "expanding" contiguous land is offered in multiple conveyances, the state may accept only those portions which are connected to middle parcels that are already accepted and are connected to tract 1. Sections l(a) and (b) of House Bill No. 63 only authorize acceptance of land described therein 88 and when offered . . . without regard to whether the conveyance of land that may be accepted is made in one or more instruments executed at different times. (Emphasis added). Therefore, acceptance of contiguous tracts by parcel is limited to acceptance of co"tig"o"s parcels. Without assurance that parcels will be physically connected, except as provided for roadways and waterways, the state cannot rationally fulfill the purpose of Aouse Bill No. 63 and House Bill No. 2061, mandating acceptance and development of all specified land as a park. SUMMARY The property specified in House Bill No. 63. Acts 1979, Sixty-sixth Legislature, chapter 542 at 1131, and established as Gateway State Park by House Bill No. 2061, Acts 1983, Sixty-eighth - Legislature. chapter 983, at 5354, may be deeded p. 626 e . Honorable Charles Evans - Page 5 (JM-145) to the stats in parcels. HOWeVer, except as provided for roadways and waterways, the state must accept, first, land described herein as Gts 1 and 2; second, land that is connected to tract 1; and third, land that is contiguous in turn with land which is connected to tract 1 and which has already been accepted. Additionally, the state a accept land that is connected to tract 2. JIM MATTOX Attorney General of Texas TOM GREEN First Assistant Attorney General DAVID R. RICHARDS Executive Assistant Attorney General Prepared by Rick Gilpin Assistant Attorney General APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Rick Gilpin, Chairman David Brooks Colin Carl Susan Garrison Jim Moellinger 'Nancy Sutton p. 627