### THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 0F TEXAS P
April12,1988

P Honorable Hugh Parmer

Chairman Opinion No. JM-891
Intergovernmental Relations Re: Whether an emergency Committee communication district is Texas State Senate authorized under article P. 0. Box 12068 1432e, V.T.C.S., to supply Austin, Texas 78711 emergency communications service under contract with other jurisdictions (RQ-1338)

Dear Senator Parmer:

You ask three questions in regard tothe authority and operation of the Lubbock Emergency Communication District. We restate those questions as follows:

1. Does the district have the authority to contract to provide emergency communications services to other jurisdictions without those jurisdictions becoming part of the district?

2. Does the district have the authority to impose an additional fee onan incoming jurisdiction tocover the costs of providing emergency communication services to that jurisdiction?

3. How and when does the membership of the board change when new jurisdictions are added to the district?

Wehave been informed by abrief submitted inresponse to your questions that the Lubbock Emergency Communication District [hereinafter the district] was created in 1986 pursuant to article 1432e, V.T.C.S. [hereinafter the act]. Acts 1985, 69th Leg., ch. 288, at 1331.
Section 2of the act identifies the purpose of the act as follows:

p.4364Honorable Hugh Parmer -Page 2 04-891)

It is

### the purpose ofthis Act to establish the number 9-l-l as the primary emergency telephone number for use by certain local governments inthis state and to encourage units of local government and combinations of those units of local government todevelop and improve emergency communication procedures and facilities in a manner that will make possible the quick response toany person calling the telephone number 9-l-l seeking police, fire, medical, rescue, and other emergency services. . . . The district iscomposed ofLubbock County and all incorporated cities located inLubbock County. The questions arise because the district has received inquiries from Hale County and the City of Plainview in regard to becoming apart of the district 

### or receiving the services of the district. ?

Your first question, regarding the authorfty ofthe district to contract to provide emergency communication services to a jurisdiction that is not part of the district, isanswered inthe affirmative. Weunderstand your question tobe whether an entity that isauthorized tobecome apart ofthe district pursuant to the act may, inthe alternative, merely contract for 9-l-l services. The Interlocal Cooperation Act was enacted in 1971 with the purpose of improving "the 

### efficiency andeffectiveness of local governments byauthorizing the fullest possible range of intergovernmental contracting authority at the local level." V.T.C.S. art. 4413(326), 51. That act allows local governments to contract for the performance ofgovernmental functions and services. V.T.C.S. art. 4413(32c), 54. Section 3(l) ofthe act defines "local government" inpart as 'Iacounty; a home rule city ora city, village, or town organized under the general laws of this state: aspecial district." Section 3(2) defines lqgovernmental functions and services" as "all or part of any function or service included within the following general areas: police protection and detention services; fire protection . . .public health andwelfare." -,

That actwould seem tohave anticipated exactly the kind ofcontract under consideration here; however section ? 4(b) requires that all parties to 

### acontract for the performance ofgovernmental functions or services must be authorized toperform those functions or services. See Attorney General Opinion Nos. H-28 (1973); H-392 (1974). ?

p.4365Honorable Hugh Parmer -Page 3 (JM-891)

The Lubbock Emergency Communication District isauthorized to provide 9-l-l emergency service. See uenerally V.T.C.S. art. 1432e.

Ingeneral, the duty ofmunicipalities toprovide for the health, safety, and welfare oftheir inhabitants and their authority todo sothrough ordinance and contract is well established in Texas law. &S Texas-New Mexico Utilities Co.v. Citv ofTeacue 174 S.W.2d 57 (Tex. Civ. APP. -Fort Worth 1943, writ iefld w.o.m.): Neal v. San Antonio Water Soolv Antonio 1919, wzit r;fld) 21; itWin; (Tex. Civ. App. -San h Tlewhone C 182 S.W.42 (Tex. Civ. Appf!- 0. v. Citv of

sr Dallas 1915, writ

-Local Gov't Code 5551.001, 51.012, 51.014, 51.032, 51.051: 51.072.
Counties donot have the broad range ofauthority in the area ofhealth, safety andwelfare that cities have. Counties have no powers orduties except those that are expressly granted and defined by statute or constitution. Harrison Countv v. Citv ofMarshalL 253 S.W.2d 67 (Tex. Civ. App. -Fort Worth 1952, writ rei'd); Attorney General Opinion JM-789 (1987). We find authorization for acounty toprovide 9-l-l emergency service only inarticle 1432g, which authorization is limited toa county that has a population of more than 1.5 million and in which a communication district has not been established under article 1432c, V.T.C.S. Accordingly, we find that the district may contract with acounty that comes within the terms of article 1432g and with any city, general law or home rule, that has anordinance allowing the city to provide 9-l-l emergency service. Any such contract would need to meet the requirements of both the Interlocal Cooperation Act (article 4413(32c)) and the district's enabling act (article 1432e). Hale County does not, however, fallwithin this statute because itspopulation issubstantially less than 1.5million. Therefore, Hale County may participate inthe district only by joining as amember jurisdiciton pursuant to article 1432e, V.T.C.S.

Your second question concerns the authority of the district to impose ona jurisdiction, which isbecoming a part of the district, anadditional charge to cover the cost ofproviding service. Section 27of the act provides that apublic agency in the county inwhich the district is located or inanadjoining county may become apart of the district onadoption ofaresolution by the governing board ofthe public agency and approval by the district's board. Section 3(2) ofthe act defines "public agency"

p.4366Honorable Hugh Parmer -Page 4 W-891)

as *'anycity or county that provides orhas authority toprovide fire-fighting, law enforcement, ambulance, medical, orother emergency services." ?

Section 11(c) enumerates charges that are assessable topublic agencies that enter the district after its formation. That section expressly authorizes the board to charge the incoming jurisdiction "an additional amount of money to cover the initial cost ofproviding the service to the incoming jurisdiction." Accordingly, we answer your second question inthe affirmative.

Your third question involves the reorganization of the board upon the addition ofnew jurisdictions. For the purposes of this opinion wewill assume that an adjoining county isto be added to the district. As noted above, section 27of the act clearly permits non-participating jurisdictions to join the district after its initial formation by the joint action ofthe board ofmanagers and the governing body ofthe incoming jurisdiction.

Because the city of Lubbock meets the definition of "most populous city" found in section 3(6) ofthe act, section 6(a) governs the appointment of the members of the board ofmanagers. That section reads inpart as follows: ?

Sec. 6. (a) Ifthe district has a city meeting the definition of 'most populous city,' the district's governing authority is aboard ofmanagers composed of:
(1) onevoting member for each county in the district, with the commissioners court ofeach county appointing its ownmember:
(2) two voting members appointed by the governing body ofthe most populous city in the district:
(3) one voting member appointed by the governing body of the second-most populous city inthe district:
(4) one voting member appointed to represent the other cities and towns lying wholly orpartly within the district, that appointment to be made by the mayor's council established to administer urban development block grant funds if such a

p.4367Honorable Hugh Parmer -Page 5 (JM-891)

P mayor's council exists and, if a mayor's council does not exist, then by action of the other board members, onthe advice and recommendation of the governing bodies of all other cities and towns lying wholly or partly within the district: and
(5) one nonvoting member appointed by the principal service supplier.
While the legislative intent tochange the composition of the board upon the addition ofnew territory isnot clear from the language of section 6(a), such an intent isclear from the language found insection 6(b), which governs the composition of the board where there is city" within the district. no "most populous Section 6(b)(l)(B) reads as follows:
[I]f only one county was inthe district

as the district was originally created but more than one county iscurrently in the district, two voting members appointed by the commissioners court ofthe county in which the district was originally located and onevoting member for each other in the district, county with the commissioners court of each of those other counties appointing its ownmember. . . . That section clearly indicates that the membership of the board will change with a change inthe territory that is included in the district. We find no reason in that regard to distinguish adistrict that includes a most populous city from one that does not. The legislature intended to create arepresentative board, albeit remotely representative inthe case ofother cities and towns in the district (M section 6(a)(4) above).

The legislature has given nodirection in regard to the change in the membership of the board upon the addition of new territory. We can find no reason to unseat the member currently representing the second most populous city upon the addition ofanother city. Furthermore, there ispublic policy tobe served by allowing that member to serve the remainder of his term. The statute does not, however, contemplate the immediate addition of anadditional member to the board. Consequently, we conclude that themember currently appointed by the second most populous city should serve the remainder ofhis term,

p.4368Honorable Hugh Parmer -Page 6 (JM-891)

and the member appointed by the newly added second most populous city should not begin to serve his term until the completion of the term of that member whom he will ? replace.

SUMMARY

The Lubbock Emergency Communication District has the authority under the Interlocal Cooperation Act to contract toprovide 

### emergency communication services to jurisdictions that are not part ofthe district. The district has the authority to impose afee on an incoming jurisdiction to cover the cost of providing emergency communication services to that jurisdiction. The membership of the board will not change until the expiration of the term of themember who will vacate the board.

JIM MATTOX Attorney General ofTexas

MARY KELLER First Assistant .Attorney General

LOUMCCRKARY Executive Assistant Attorney General

JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLKY Special Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN Chairman, Opinion Committee
Prepared byKaren C.Gladney Assistant Attorney General

p.4369