c-. 

TEIIEATTOECNRY GENERAL 

o>F TEXAS 

December 13, 1966 

Honorable Burton Burks, Sr. 

County Attorney 

Hood County 

Granbury, Texas 

Opinion No. C-790 

Re: Whether the counties 

located within the 

Kickapoo Watershed have 

the authority to pay for 

the maintenance cost of 

dams erected in the watershed under the particular 

Dear Mr. Burks: facts stated. 

You have requested the opinion of this office regarding 

the matter stated above. In this connection, a portion of your 

letter of request is quoted herewith: 

"The Kickapoo Watershed Project involves 

portions of Erath, Hood, Palo Pinto and Parker 

Counties. It has been approved by the Texas 

Soil Conservation Board. Further progress is 

being delayed because the Commissioners Court 

of Parker County is unwilling to underwrite 

any maintenance expense of the dams in that 

county. The other counties are willing to do 

this insofar as their respective counties are 

concerned, and also to share in the Parker 

County m$lntenance costs, if this can be done 

legally. 

In the consideration of your request, it is necessary 

that we set forth Article llOqk, Vernon's Civil Statutes, in 

pertinent part: 

'Section 1. All counties, cities, water 

control and improvement districts, drainage 

districts and other political subdivisions in 

the State of Texas are authorized to enter into 

contracts with soil conservation districts Par 

the joint acquisition of right-of-ways or joint 

-3792- 
Hon. Burton Burks, Sr., page 2 (C-790) 

. . 

construction or maintenance of dams, flood 

detention structures, canals, drains, levees 

and other improvements for flood control and 

drainage as related to flood control, and for 

making the necessary outlets and maintaining 

them; and providing further that such contracts 

and agreements shall contain such terms, provisions and details as the governing bodies of 

the respective political subdivisions determine 

to be necessary under all facts and circumstances. 

'Sec. 2. All counties, cities, water control and improvement districts, drainage districts 

and other political subdivisions in the State of 

Texas may contribute funds to soil conservation 

districts for construction or maintenance of 

canals, dams, flood detention structures, drains, 

levees and other improvements for flood control 

and drainage as related to flood control and for 

making the necessary outlets and maintaining them 

regardless of whether the title to such properties 

Is vested in the State of Texas, or a soil conservation district, so long as the work to be 

accomplished is for the mutual benefit of the 

donor and the agency or political subdivision 

having title to such pr;perty on which the improvements are located. 

This office has previously ruled~ in Attorney General's 

Opinion c-26 (1963), that the expenditure of county permanent 

improvement funds, as authorized by Article 1109k, Vernon's Civil 

Statutes, is constitutional. Further, there is no constitutional 

prohibition against the payment of expenses incidental to the 

construction and maintenance of permanent improvements out of 

the county permanent improvement fund. Article llOqk, Vernon's 

Civil Statutes, does not require the participation of any county 

or other specified political subdivision, nor does it require 

that those acting pursuant to this Article contribute in any 

particular proportion or amount. The statute merely permits all 

counties and other political subdivisions to contract for participation in the operation of a district , with the financial contribution of each county being a matter of contract by the commissioners court and the officers of the district. The purpose 

of county participation is to obtain for the residents of the 

county the benefits afforded by the operations of the district. 

The precise amount of contribution that is made by an individual 

county is a matter within the sound discretion of the commissioners 

court of the particular county. For this reason, it is the opinion 

of this office that the unwillingness of Parker County to underwrite 

-3793- 
Hon. Burton Burks, Sr., page 3 (C-790) 

any maintenance expense for the structures in question has no 

bearing upon the legal capacity of the remaining counties to 

contribute to the district for construction or maintenance of 

flood control and drainage as related to flood control. 

The amount contributed to a soil conservation 

district 

Vernon's 

by a county pursuant to Article 1109k, 

Civil Statutes, for flood control and - . _ _ -. - 

SUMMARY 

arainage as relateo to flood control is a matter 

within the sound discretion of the commissioners 

court of the contributing county, Such contribution is not dependent upon the extent of the 

participation of other counties. 

Very truly yours, 

WAGGONER CARR 

Attorney General 

Byz~&ck@

Assistant' 

MLQ:mh:mkh 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. 0. Shultz, Chairman 

John Reeves 

Pat Bailey 

Paul Phy 

John Fainter 

APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: T. B. Wright 

-3794-