Texas Attorney General Opinion: JC-202 Page: 3 of 4
4 p.View a full description of this text.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
The Honorable Jill Cornelius - Page 3
proceedings the necessary right-of-way and property of any kind necessary for improvements
contemplated by this chapter." Id. 63.155.
The Port Authority is not expressly authorized to accept the conveyance of an interest in land
for the purpose of returning it to a private property owner nor may this authority be implied. Again,
the express provisions of chapter 63 authorize the Port Authority to acquire "property of any kind
necessary for improvements contemplated by this chapter," id. 63.155, or land "incident to or
necessary in the proper operation and development of ports and waterways in the district," id.
63.153(3). Your letter does not indicate that acquisition of these easements is necessary for
improvements contemplated by chapter 63 or incident to or necessary in the proper operation and
development of ports and waterways.
Furthermore, we see no basis for concluding that this authority may be implied. The purpose
of a navigation district is to make improvements for the navigation of inland and coastal water; the
preservation and conservation of inland and coastal water for navigation; the control and distribution
of storm water and floodwater of rivers and streams in aid of navigation; and any purpose necessary
or incidental to the navigation of inland and coastal water as provided in article XVI, section 59. See
id. 63.152. Acquisition of these easements does not appear to be indispensable to the
accomplishment of the purposes for which the Port Authority was created. See Tri-City Fresh Water
Supply Dist., 142 S.W.2d at 947. Accordingly, we conclude that the authority to accept conveyance
of the easements may not be implied.
Finally, we note that you suggest that questions of fact may hinder this office from ultimately
resolving whether the Port Authority is authorized to accept conveyance of the easements. See
Request Letter at 3 ("Whether the property, i.e. the easements, are being acquired for improvements
contemplated by the district is a fact question which is not resolved in the attorney general [opinion]
process. The Port Authority can make the determination of whether the property is being acquired
for improvements contemplated by [the Water Code]."). As you have not indicated that the Port
Authority would accept the conveyance of the easements for any purpose other than to act as a
conduit between the Corps and the property owners, we do not see any fact question hindering
resolution of this issue.
In conclusion, the Port Authority, a special purpose district with limited powers, is not
authorized to accept the conveyance of easements from the Corps for the purpose of returning them
to private property owners. Given our answer to this threshold issue, we do not address your
remaining questions.(JC-0202)
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
Texas. Attorney-General's Office. Texas Attorney General Opinion: JC-202, text, March 21, 2000; (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth274511/m1/3/: accessed June 9, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.