Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

THEA'ITORNEY GENERAL
OF TEXAS
Autwrx~, TEKAS rerll
The Honorable Alex W. Gabert Opinion No. H- 458
County Attorney
Starr County Re: Conflicts of authority
P. 0. Box 726 between a regional
Rio Grande City, Texas 78582 planning commission
and the commissioners’
Dear Mr. Gabert: court.
You have requested our opinion on the following questions:
(1) What governmental body has the authority to select a county’s
representatives to a regional planning commission?
(2) Has the Commissioners Court of Starr County delegated its
authority over “county business” by joining the regional planning commission?
Pursuant to Article lOllm, section 3(a), V. T. C. S., “two or more general
purpose governmental units may join in the exercise, performance, and cooper-
ation of planning, powers, duties, and functions as provided by law for any or
all such governmental units. ” Starr, Jim Hogg, Webb and Zapata counties
have so joined and formed the South Texas Development Council, a Regional
Planning Commission. While Article lOllm, does not establish a procedure
whereby members are to be selected, section 5 of the Article allows “cooper-
ating governmental units . . . through joint agreement [to] determine the
number and qualifications of the governing body of the Commission.” However,
the “governing body. . . shall consist of at least sixty-six and two-thirds
percent (66 2/30/o) elected officials of general purpose governmental units. ”
Article IOllm, $ 5, V. T. C. S.
The Council has passed a set of by-laws which in part provide for the
selection of its members. It is our understanding that the Commissioners
Court of Starr County has never ratified these by-laws or any agreement
concerning selection of county representatives of the Council. However,
one of Starr County’s representatives to the Council, the .County Judge who
is a member of the County Comm issioners Court, did vote to pass such by-
laws.
p. 2105
The Honorable Alex W. Gabert, page 2 (H-458)
The “joint agreement” contemplated by section 5 must be passed by
the Commissioners Court of Starr County as “a cooperating governmental
unit” for the county to be bound. Article 1011m. section 5, makes such
an agreement county business over which the Commissioners Court alone
has jurisdiction and power to bind the county. Tex. Const., art. 5, § 18.
The fact that an individual member of the Court did agree to the by-
laws is of no effect, since individual members of a county commissioners
court have no authority to bind the county by their separate action. Canales
v. Lauehlin, 214 S. W. 2d 451 (Tex. Sup. 1948); Rowan v. Pickett, 237 S. W. 2d
734 (Tex. Civ. App. --San Antonio 1951, no writ). And since the Commissioners
Court has the authority to agree to the number and qualification of the county’s
representatives to the Council under section 5, it is our opinion that the
power to select those representatives rests with the Court until a joint agree-
ment is executed.
Your second question asks whether the Commissioners Court has dele-
gated its authority over “county business ” by joining the regional planning
commission. A commissioners court may not delegate powers involving
the exercise of judgment unless the court is statutorily enabled to do so.
Guerra v. Rodriguez, 239 S. W. 2d 915 (Tex. Civ.App. --San Antonio 1951, no
writ); Attorney General Opinion V-532 (1948).
In this instance it is our opinion that the Court is not delegating any
of its authority over county business by joining the Commission. Section 3(a)
of Article 1Ollm provides that “nothing in this Act shall be construed to
limit the powers of the participating governmental units as provided by
existing law. ” Section 4(b) designates the purposes of a regional planning
commission as those of making “studies and plans, ” the latter of which
‘fnav be adopted in whole or in part by the respective governing bodies of the
cooperating governmental units. I’ (Emphasis added) The statute in no way
authorizes any delegation of county business except with respect to the
formulation of studies and plans.
SUMMARY
Until the Commissioner’s Court of Starr County
enters a “joint agreement” concerning the selection
of representatives to the South Texas Development
p. 2106
The Honorable Alex W. Gabert, page 3 (H-458)
Council, the Court retains the power to select such
representatives.
The Commissioners Court of Starr County has
not delegated its authority over “county business”
by joining the Council.
Very truly yours,
Attorney Geaeral of Texas
DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman
Opinion Committee
p. 2107