h’

.

September 8, 1970

Honorable Henry Wade District Attorney Opinion No. M-689 Dallas County Government Center Re: Does the Commissioners Dallas, Texas 75202 Court of Dallas have the authority, jointly with a Home Rule City, to either act as a Community Action Agency under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. 2781 et seq.) or to designate another group to serve as a ComDear Mr. Wadei munityAction Agency.

You have requested our opinion on two questions, as follows:

“(1) Does the Commissioners Court have the authority to act as Community Action Agency on a jointbasis wrth a City Gwernment existing under the Home Rule Charter? "(2) Could the Commissioners Court jointly with a city operating under a Home Rule Charter, designate another group to serve as the Community Action Agency under existing laws and Constitution that governs the Commissioners Court?" We consider and answer your first question in the aff irmative.

Our opinion is that a county and a home rule city may work together as a community action agency under either of two modes of collaboration: a) a simple contractual joint endeavor, or b) as a Regional Planning Commission or Council of Governments organized and operating under Article lOllin, Vernon"5 Civil Statute8.
+ All references in this Opinion to Articles are to Articles of Vernon'5 Civil Statutes unless otherwiae indicated. -3315-xonorable Henry wade, page 2 (M-669)

This office recently held inAttorney General's Opinion Number M-264 (1968)that a CommissionersCourt, acting alone, did not have the power either to act as !& communityaction agency by itself, or to designate another entity to act as such for it.

A community action agency is defined in Title 42, U.S. Code Annotated, Section 2790 (a)as follows:

"A community action agency shallbe a State or political subdivision of a State (havingelected or duly appointed governing officials),or a combination of such political subdivisions,or a public or private nonprofit agency or organizationwhich has been designatedby a State or such a political subdivision or combination of such subdivisions,which-- (1) has the power and authorityandwill perform the functions set forth in Section 2795 of this title, including the power to enter into contracts with public and private nonprofitagencies and organizations to assist in fulfillingthe purposes of this subchapter,and (2) is determined to be capableof planning, conducting,administering and evalua%ing a ccmmunity action program and is currentlydesignatedas a community action agency by the Director." Sub-section (b) of said Section 2790, in its relevant part, reads:

"lb) Components of a wmununitvaction procram may be administeredby the communityaction agency, where consistent with sound and efficientmanagement and applicable law, or bv other agencies. Do." Sub-section (c) of said Section 2790, in its relevant part, reads:

-3316-Honorable Henry Wade, page 3 (M-689)

"(c) For the plrpoae of this subchapter, a communitymay be a city, county,multicity, or multicounty unit...or a neighborhood or other area (irrespective of boundaries or political subdivisions) which provides a suitable organizational base and possesses the commonality of interestneeded for a community action program. ...- Sub-section (a) of Section 2791 of said Title 42 reads, in part: "La) Each community action agency which is+.. a combination of political subdivisionsshall ad,- minister its program through a cumaunity action board..." and the requirements of this board are stated in the immediately following sub-section (b) of this Section 2791.

The Bulletin on OrganizingC-unities forAction under the 1967Amendments to the Economic OpportunityAct, published by the Office of Economic Opportunity iFebruary 1968), at page 4 states the overall purpose of communityaction agencies as being

2,

...establishedat the local or state level to prwide a focal point for anti-poverty efforts within a community or c-unities. *..(I The Bulletin then lists a number of goals and required activities of such agencies.

While some of these activities are beyond the statutory powers of county commissioners courts, (AttorneyGeneral's OpinionNo. H-264 (1968).),nevertheless,some of these activities are within the clear powers of commissionerscourts. See Attorney General's Opinion Number M-605 (1970).and Articles 2351, 4436a-1, and 4447a, and other statutes cited in that Opinion. On the other hand, as to the plenary powers of home rule cities,

-3317-

.Honorable Henry Wade, page 4 (M-689)

I .D. a home rule citymay exercise any power not denied itby the constitution or the general statutes, 50 long as the power is incorporated in the city charter. sO0" 39 Tex.Jur.2d 642,Municipal Corporations,Sec. 312. We are aware that Article 695c. Section 6-A(a),deaignates the State Department of Public Welfare as the Stats Agency

II .*a to cooperatewith the Federal Government in the administrationof the provisions of Title V of the 'EconomicOpportunityAct of 1964' and of the provisions of such other applicable titles of the 'EconomicOpportunityAct of 1964' as are nw provided or as may be added thereto from time to time in the event **no** other State Agency isby law designated to cooperatewith the Federal Government in the administrationof the prwiaiona of such. title or titles as may be added to saidAct, ...Y. Our opinion is that this prwision contemplates that localgovernments or organlsationsshould administer Title II of the Economic OpportunityAct of 1964,which provides for community action agencies, and that the State Department of PublicWelfare should render to them such cooperation and assistance as they might need.

We interpretyour first question to ask whether a Commissioners Court might collaboratewith a city in the manner and to the extent that their joint endeavorswould carry out && the activities and meet all the goals required of a community action agency. eommissione~courts are authorized to carry out some of the activities required of community action agencies: these courts are not authorized to carry out some of the other activities required of such agencies. Attorney General's OpinionM-264, supra,

-3318-Honorable Henry Wade, page 5 (‘M-689)

Our opinion is that a county, actingby its Commissioners Court, may collaborateunder a joint sponsorshipwith a city to carry out the activities required by the Office of Economic Gpportunity of a community action agency, where the county's undertakings and obligationsdo not go further than to exercise those powers conferredupon it under the law. Otherwise stated, the county may perform those activities which the law authorizes it to perform, and the citymight perform all other activities required of a community action agency which the county may not and does not perform. This joint undertakingwould seem to qualify the two participants, the county and city, as a community action agency as that term is defined inTitle 42, U. S. Code Annotated, Section 2790(a) supra, except fordesignation by the Director. Under Article 1Ollm any county and any incorporated city, town or village may voluntarily join themselves together as a Regional Planning Cononiasion or Council of Gwernments (Art. lOllm,Sec. 1 and 3) for any or all of the multiple and varied purposes authorized in that Article. The joint agreement between the political entities comprising theComniasion or Council, II

. . . may provide for the manner of cooperation, ~...~ and themeans and methods of the operationof the Comrdssion.
.D.I' (Sec. 5)e ~.__ Section 4 of thisArticle prwidea. in parts,as follwan

"UnderthisAct, a Regional PlanningCommission shall be a political subdivisionof this state, aOaN Attorney General's OpinionNo. M-149 (1967). The Co5u5ission a

m v contractwith one or more of its member governments to wrform any servicewhich that government could,by contract, have any private organizationwithout governmental powers perform.."

-3319-Honorable Henry Wade, page 6

In Section 3 is prwided, (M-689)

I,

... But nothinq in the Act shallbe construed to lrmit the powers of the participating qwernmental units as providedby existinq law. The participatinggovernmental units,by appropriate mutual agreement, may establish a Regional Planning Commission for a region designated in such agreement,provided that such region shall consist of terrItcryunder their respective jurisdictions, includingextraterritorial jurisdiction,if any, but need not include all of the territoryof the governmentalunits participating." (Emphasisadded.) In Section i E is stated,

"'ComprehensiveDevelopment PlanningProcess' means the process of (1) assessing the needs and resources of an area; (2) formulatinqgoals, objectives,policies and standards to guide its longrange physical,economic, and human resource development.;

and (3:preparingplans and programs theref or r
__

a D” LEmphasisadded.) Section 2? in its relevant part, reads:

"Thepurpose of thisAct is to encourage and permit localunits of government to joinand cooperate with one another to immwe the health, safetv and general welfare of their citizens;
... that communities, areas, and regions grow with adequate street,utility, health, educational, recreational,and other essential facilities: .-.-. (Emphasisadded.) Section 6(a) of thisArticle 1Ollm reads:

"ARegional Planning Commission isauthorized to apply for, contract for, receive and expend for its purposesany funds or grants from any participating governmentalunit or from the State of Texas, federal government0or any other source." AttorneyGeneral's OpinionNo. M-518 (1969). -3320-Honorable Henry Wade, page 7 (M-689)

The prwisions ofArticle 1Ollm shouldbe liberally construed pursuant to the rule stated in Board of Ina. Com'rs. v. Great Southern Life Ins. Co., 150 Tex. 258,239 S.W;Zd 803, 809 (1951).as follows:

II

...A law introducinga new regulation-for the advancement of the publicwelfare or conducive to the public good is a remedial statute and should be liberally construedto effect its purpose. 50 Amer.Jur., p. 420, sec. 395: 59 C.J., p. 1107, sec. 657.
..." Accord: 82 C.J.S. 916, Statutes,Sec. 387. note 49, and 70 C.J.S. 12, Paupers, Sec. 3-4.

Cur opinion is that the Legislature, by thisArticle lOllm, materially enlargedthe pwers and the scope of the pwers conferred upon CommissionersCourts in the respects coveredby the Article, but within the limitation imposedby Article V, Section 18 of our Constitutionwhich provides that such courts,

II

... shall exercise such pwers and jurisdiction Over all countybusiness, as is conferredby this Constitution and the laws of the State, or as may be hereafter prescribed." (Emphasisadded.) In construing this provisionof the Constitution our Supreme Court has said:

II

. . . Where a right is conferred or obligation imposed on said court, it has implied authority to exercise a broad discretion to acccmplish the purposes intended.
...* Anderson v. Wood, 137 Tex. 201. 152 S.W.Zd 1084.1085 (1941). (Emphasis added.1 Accord: Dodson v. Marshall, 118 S.W.Zd 621,623 (Tex.Civ.App. 1938, error dism.). The term "countybusiness" used in this provision of the Constitutionshould be given,

-3321-.,

Honorable Henry Wade. page 8 (M-689)

I ...abroad and liberal construction so as not to defeat the real purpose that was intended to be accomplished..." Glenn v. Dallas County Bois D'Arc Island Levee Diet., 282 S.W. 339, 344 {Tex.Civ.App. 1926, on motion for reh., rev. on other grounds, 288 S.W. 165,Tex.Comm.App. 1926). The courtshave so held: Harris County Flood Control Dist. v. MS, 135 Tex. 239, 140 S.W.Zd 1098 (1940);Morton v. Thomson, 15 S.W.2d 1067, (Tex.Civ.App.1929, no writ).

The broad powers of the Legislature to delegate its legislativeauthority concerningmatters of local interest in support of local self-governmentare givenbroad discussion and

__ application in Trimmier v, Carlton. li6 Tex. 572, 296 S.W. 1070, 1079-1082 j1927).

In answer to your second question, and in the absence of a stipulation of the powers conferredunder Article lOllm, it is our opinion that the Commissioners'Court can designate another agency to act as the CommunityAction Agency but only to the extent that the functions of the agency, as they pertain to the Commissioner'sCourt, are limited to those functions allowed tobe performedby thca Court by the statutes and Constitution of Texas. It IS, however,well settled that the Commissioner'r Court is givenbroad discretion to accomplish the power granted to them. Rwan v. PiCkett, 237 S.W.Zd 734, (Tex.Civ.App.1951, no writ) Anderson v. Wood, 137 Tex. 201, 152 S.W.Zd 1084;Dodson v. Marshall, 118 S.W.Zd 621 (Tex.Civ.App.1938 err.dism.1, and.that it is the duty of the Commissioner88Court to promote the generalwelfare of the whole of the county. Stwall v. Shivers, 129 Tex. 256, 103 S.W.Zd 363 (1937).

Attorney General's Opinion NumberM-605 (1970)as well as authorities cited therein, express the legal concept that our law is a changing thing thatmust grw and adjust to current conditions. Associated Indemnity **Corn,.** v. Oil Well Drillinq Co., 258 S.W.2d 523,529 (Tex.Civ.App.1953, affirmed,Tex.Sup. 264 S.W.Zd 697 (1954). By virtue of its duties and responsibilities,

-3322-c

Honorable HenryWade, page 9 (M-689)

the Commissioner'sCourt has the impliedpower to designate an agent or agency to act as the CommunityAction Agency, prwided that such agent or agency does not usurp the non-delegable duties of the Commissioner'sCourt in exercising judgment and discretion and deciding overall policies and plans and confines its activities to the carrying out of theae decisionsand exercising only ministerial functions. Hill v. Sterrett, 252 S.W.2d 766 (Tex.Civ.App.1952, error ref. n.r.e.) at page 770; Gano v. Palo Pinto County, 71 Tex. 99, 8 S.W. 634 (1888):Pritchard & Abbott v. McKenna, 162 Tex. 617, 350 S.W.2d 333 (1961). It is generally held that a county board considered as a governmental agency has implied power to employ agents and servants. 20 C.J.S. 896, Counties, Section 101(l), page 1014, section 180. 15 Tex.Jur.Zd 321, Counties, Section 94, and cases there cited.

SUMMARY The Commissioner's Court has the authority to act on a jointbasis with a home-rule city in the establishment of a community action agency, and in this connection, the Commissioner'sCourt may designateanother agent or agency to serveas the CommunityAction Agency on this jointbasis with the city: so long as the non-delegable duties of the Commissioner'sCourt regarding decisionmaking and exercise of judgment and discretion are not permitted to be usurped by such agency, but limited only to the exercise of ministerial functionrr.

Attorr&y General of Texas Preparedby Melvin E. Corley Assistant Attorney General

-3323-Honorable Henry Wade, page 10 **(M-689)**

APPROVED: OPINIa CCMMITTEE Kerns Taylor, Chairman W. **E.** Allen, Co-Chairman Gilbert Pens Ralph Rash Lehman Marks E. L. Hamilton ME?DE **F.** GRIFFIN Staff Legal Assistant
ALFRED WALKER ExecutiveAssistant NOLA WHITE FirstAssistant

,’ t

**-3324-**