Honorable Robert R. Barton



### CountyAttorndy Kerr County Kerrville, Texas

Bear Sir: **Opinion** No. C-459
Re: For the purpose of approving plats.of subdivisions, does Article 970s or Article 974a, Vernon's Civil Statutes, govern the **extent** of the **extraterri** torial jurisdiction of an incorporated city, 8.naallied question.
You have requested 811opinion on the following queetions:
"(1)

“(2) Under **Art.** g7Oa, V.A.C.S., must the governing body of a city extent3 by ordixk%nceto the area under its~ extraterritorial jurisdiction 'the application of such city.*8orainance establishing rules and regulations governing plats ma the subdivision of .landbefore theplanning commiesion or goveming~body of such city ha8 authority ta approve or disapprove aplat of a'subdlvislon lyingwithin the area of its extrat8rrltclrialjurisaiction4n
In order toanswer your question, we muat look to Article VOa, Vernon's Civil Statute8 (Act8 58th Leg., 1963# **Ch.** 160, **Art.** l), andArticle y#a, Vernon*8 Civil Sttrtutes (Acts 40th Leg., 1927, Ch. 231;Act8 518t Leg., @kg, ch. 19, Sec. l(1); Acts 9th Leg., lg559 Ch. 317, p. 8% Sec. 1). For thepurpose of~approvlng plats of subaivisions, does Art. 97Oa, V.A.C.S., or Art. 97&, V.A.C.S., ~~ govern the &tent of the **extra** territorial jurisdiction of an incorporated city?HazS.Robert R, Earton,'page 2 (C-459)

Section 3A of Article 97Oa, states:
"Inorder topromote,ahd protect the general health, safety, andwelfare of persons resQdix3gwithin aha adjacent to the Cities of this State, the Legislature of the State of Texas declare8 It tobe the policy of the State of Texas that the,uuincorporated area, not,a part of any other city,which is conti uous to the co&orate' limits of any cE&kYiie extent described herein,phall comprise and be known as the **extjraterritorial jurieaiction**  of **the various**  population classes of c~It=-in the State and ,Sh&11be **as fOllOW8:**  "(1) The extraterritorial **jurlsalction** ofmy city having apopulation of le88

- five thousand (5,OOO) Inhabitants ~~ S&11 COiraSiSt Of 811 the **COntiguoUS ,W-**  'incdrporatea area, not a city, within ohe .half~ (1.2)mile of the P art of any~other corporate **limits** of such city. "(2) The extraterritorial jurisdiction of any city having a populationof five #OUScbna (5,000) 'ormore *bitants, butt~~ less than twenty-five thousand (25,000) inhabitants shall consist of all the corntlguous un&ncorporatea area, not apart of. any other city3 within one (1)mile of the" corporate liPlit-ofsuch **:city.**

of'an~%t~ having a

The extraterritorlal jurisdiction five thousand (25,000 pu.lationof **twenty** or more Inhabitants, but less.than fifty thousand (9,000) Inhabitants shall conslslt of all~the contiguous unincorporated 

### ax-e¬ 8part 

### of any other city,within two (2)miles of' the corporate limlte Of -suchcity. ?(4)~ The extraterritorial jUdtlaiCt*on of any city having a population of .fifty thousand (50pOOO) ormoreinhabitantS, but lesr thamome hundred thousaM (lOO&MO) ixWbltamte shall consist of all the con-

-2885- :.

Hon. Robert R. Barton~,page 3 (C-459)

tlguous unincorporated area, not a part of any other city, within three and one half (33)miles of the corporate limits of such city.

of ani(3tyThhavin

e extraterritorial jurisdiction
hundred thousand 7 apopulation of one 100,000) or more inhabitants shall consist of all the contiguous unincorporated area, not a part of any other city, within five (5)miles of the corporate limits of such city." adaed.) (Emphasis

Article 97Oa, Section 3C states: II

. e .In addition, the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the citymaybe extended beyond the distance limitation8 imposed by Subsection A of this Section to include therein any territory contiguous to the otherwise existing extraterritorial jurisdiction of such city, provided the owner or owners of such contiguous territory request 8UCh .eXpanSion. However, inno event Shall the expansion of the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a city, through annexation, or upon request, or because,of increase inpopulation of the city, conflict with the existing extraterritorial jurisdiction of another city. The extraterrltorieljurisdiction,of a city shall not be reduced without the written consent of the governing body of such city, except in cases of judicial apportionment of overlapping extraterritorial jUriSdiCtiOn8." Article 9748, provide8 inpert: "Section i. Hereafter every owner of any tract of iana Situated within the corporate limits, orwithin fivemiles of the corporate limits of any city in the State -fZne 0 exas, in two or more parts for thepurpose of laying out any subdivision of any tract of land or any addition to any town or city, or for laying out suburban lots OPbuilding lots,

-2186-. .

Hon. Robert R. Barton, p g **a e**  **4 (C-459)** 



### , or any lots, ana streets, alleys or

### perksor other portion8 intended forpublic use, or the use of purchasers or owners of lots fronting thereon or adjacent thereto, shall cause aplat tobe made thereofwhich shall accurately describe all of Said subdivision or addition by metes ana bounds . . . "Section 2. That every suchplat shall

### be duly 8cknowledged by owhers orproprietors of the land, or by some duly authorized agent of said Owner8 or proprietor8, in the 

### mannerrequired for the acknowledgment of deeds; ana the said plat, subject to the provi8ions contained in this.Act,l Shall

### be filed for record and be recorded in the office of the County Clerk of the County in which the land lies.

**Qection 3.**  That it Shall‘be Unlawful for the County Clerk,of any county inwhich **such** ma lies to receive or record any such plan, plat or replet, unless and until the **same shell**  have been approved by the City Planning Commis8ion of any city effected by **this** Act,l if said city h88 a City Planning **c0plmiSS1Oll** and if It has no City Plamiing **commiS8i0~1,** UWleSS.?SIdUntil 

### the88idplan, plat, or replet shall hav8 been approved by thegoverning 

### body

### of such city. If such lend lies outside of andwithin five **(5)** miles of mre than one (1) city affected 

### .by. thisAct, then the requisite approval shall beby the City Planning Cox8ission or governbg body, es the case Bay be, Of SUCh Of **said** cities having the largest population; - . . "Section **4.** If 

### suchplanorplat,

### or replet **shell** conform to the general plan of ssia city..ua its etreets,~'olleya,

### parks,play- :ground8 and public utility facilities, including thosewhich have been ormay be laid out, and to the geneP81 pl811for the .eXteneiOnOf 8Ucb \ cityand of its roads,~etree$s and public

**.** hi8 erticle~~ **Vernon18** Am.P.C., **Art.** 427b..

Hon. Robert R. Barton, page 5 (C-459)

highways Within said city anaWithin fivemiles of the corporate ~limitsthereof, regard being haa for access to ana extension of sewer ana water mains and the instrumentalities ofpublic utilities, and if same shall conform to SUCh general rules ana regulations, if any, governing plats ana subdivisions of land falling within its jurisdiction as thegoverning body of such city may adopt and promulgate to promote the health, safety, morals or general welfare of the community, . . ."
You will note that Sec. 3A of Art. 970a states: II

. . .The Legislature of the State of Texas declares it tobe thepolicy of the State of Texas that the unincorporated area, not apart of any other city, which is contiguous to the corporate limits of any city, to the extent described herein, shall co rise and byeknown as the (extreterritoriel juri8dlction of the various

7 population classes 

### of cities in the State and shall be as follows: . . ." (hnphaSi8 added.) Generally speaking where public policy has been declared by the Legislature acting within its constitutional powered,courts are bound thereby. Wehw.arten, Inc. v. Sanchez, :Z Siy;'d 303 ,(Tex.Civ.App.1950). 53 Tex.Jur.2d 175, Statutes,

. . ~
As the courts have not construed Art. 97Oa, th8liouse Journal of 1963 was checked forhistorical background an this Article.
Itwas found that thebill as originally passed by the HOUSe (H.B.#13 in '1963;contained therein practically verbatim Article 972, (samebeing Sec. 3 of B.B. No. 13 entitled: **Authority** Yithin Extreterritoriel Area) withthe exception’that the extraterritorial area was set out as distance limitations instead of "orwithin 5miles ofthe corporate 11m1t8" 88 set out InArt. g748.

Sec. 35 of the original bill provided:
."TheplXWiSiOn8 of this Sec. 3 era cumuletlve of.the'provisiona of Art. g@a, R.C.S. of Texas, but the PrOViSiOnS of this-act Shall control in event of conflict."

-2188-. .

Hon. Robert R. Barton, page 6 (C-459) .

The bill was thereafter 

### sent to the Senate, amand&@, .andthereafter passed by the Lbuee ia ii.8present **form;** whlcb kticbi (9708) Omit8 &Co 3 **of the**  or&ghal Bill. House Jimmel, 1963'.

"Review of Historical background of Statute CM be important at arriving et Legislative intent", State v. .AranseeDock & Channel Company, 365 s.w.2a 220, (%X.CAV. Xpp* 1963, error ref.)

Acts 58th Leg. 1963, ch:U%;p. 447$ enecting the Municipal Annexation Act (Art. 970s) prOtide tiArt. III of the **Act that**  **it ehell**  not repeal **Acts** 40th Legislature, 1927, Ch. 231 88 amended **(Art.** 9748 8ndVernon's Annotated F’enalCodeArt. 427b), UQh?SS expressly iuconeistent with the act, **and** then 

### only **to the**  **extent of**  such lncoasistency.

Upon 8 careful~reeding of Arts. **flOa 8nd**  **#J8 the**  only inconsietency we can find in the twoArticles erethe distance limitations imposed upon incorporated cities accordiug topopuJAt&ionbrackets, insofar es extraterritorial jurisdiction is concerued.

It is our opinion from the foregoing, that Article WOa, eSt@bbliSheSthe extraterritorial jurisdiction of any :r city es set out in Section 3Ar Subparsgraphs 1, 2, 3, 4, end 5, 

### accordingtopopulation'breckete, and Sec. 3C, which provides for **the** extensiouof **extraterritorial** jurisdiction provided the owner

### orowners of contiguous territom request au aXp8QSibQ Oft8BBe.

Your second **quest-** pertelristo the **intarpretatlon** of Be&ion 4.of Article 9708, es to

### whethere,clty ma& axtend by ordinance ~tothe area uuder extraterritorial jurlsdictiou the application of such city's ordiuance estAblishlngrule8 and Psguletione go~mingplate sndsubdltisions oflagdbefore theplauuiug cosmissicmorgoverniag body 

### of such city has **authority to**  **epprove** 

### or **direpprove a**  plat of i subdtviaion lying withig the wea Of its exkr

### terrltorlal jurisdiction.

'. Article ~Or,.V.b;r,&..@ec: 4:&CUds a8,ftillot?st

“Thegoverning body of any cityx eatex)dby ordinauce to,8llof the areaunder 

## itr extreterritorS.al jur~edictioart&O : application of Such Cfty~S.oEdiusuCe

.lion..RobertR. Barton, page 

### 7 (C-459)

establishing rules and XegulatiOnS governingplats and the subdivision of land; provided, that any vloletion of any provision of any such ordinance outside the corporate limlts of the city, **but within**  Such city's extreterritorlal jurisdiction, shall not constitute 8misdemeanor under such ordinance nor shall any,fineprovided for in such ordinance be applicable to a violation within 8UCh eXtr8territmi81 jUri8diCtiou. However, any citywhich ex-' tend8 the application of itsorainance~ eStabliShinn rules 

### anaregulation8 governingplats and the Subdivision of land to the area under its extraterritorial jUZ'iS-

-on in the distr& court tos&)~~ diction shall have the lght to in it t the violation of any provision of such ordinance in such extraterfltorial jUriSdiction, and the district court 8halLhave thepower $0 grant any gr all typs of injunctive relief in suoh cases.. (Emphasis added.)

n

. . ..Where theword *may'occur8 in the statute, It is to be construed~as.merely permissive, and not 88 mandatory, except for the purpose of suetelning or enforcing 8 right--either public or pr&vate--but ~3.8 never~construed asmaudatory for the purpose of creating a right. 

### 26~Words & Phrases, May-In Statutes, and authorities cited; San An Tex. 2l3, 

### 216,30 **S.W.** William (TeX.C&v. Witchell v. 

### 1% S.W.694,700; Kleck **v. Zoning**  **Board** of **Ad.lustment** of City o&m4$$onio-(Tex.Civ.App:) 319 S.W.2d -

, .



### -2290-

.

.,. .

Eon. Robert R. Barton, page 

### 8 (C-459)

It Is therefore our opinion thatunder Sec..4 of Article WCs, it isnot Wndatory that thegoverning body of **a** city extend by ordinance’to the 8re8 under it8 extraterrltorial.jurisdiction the application of such cityls ordinance establishing rules and regulations governing plats and the subdivisions of-Landbefore theplanning commission or governing body of such cityhas authority to

. approve or disapprove aplat of a subdivision lyingwithin the are8 of its extraterritorial jurisdiction.
SUMMARY (1) For the purposes of approving plats of subdivisions, Article VCa, V.C.S., governs the extent of the extritemltorial jurisdiction of any ini\orporstedcity.

/ (2)Under Article 9708, Section 4, V.C.S.,

It isnot mandatory for the.governing **body** of a city to extend by ordinance to the area under Its extrsterrltorirl jurisdiction then, application of such city’s ordinance establishing rules and regulat,ions.

**governing** plats,and the subdivieions of land before.theplanning conrmissionor **govem** ing **.body** of such city h8e suthority to spprove or disapprove theplat ,of**a** subdivls$on lying within the **are8** of this extraterritorlal jWie- .dictlon.
Yours very truly,



### APPRoviEDn OPIUIOM coI@!I!iTlU3

w. v. Ueppert, Chairman M5.l.ton

Richardson Arthur SandllnHon. Robert R. Barton8 PaSe 9 (c-k@)

APlWNEDF'ORTHEAT"MRI9EPQ~ERAL BY0 T. 8. Wright

.:. .

-2r92- /;

., ..’