The Honorable J. Albert Dickie County Attorney, Coryell County Gatesville, Texas 76528

Dear Mr. Dickie: May 6, 1974 Opinion No. H- 296 Re: Validity of contracts made between the city of Copperas Cove and Central Texas Council of Governments under Interlocal Cooperation Act Article 4413 (32c), V. T. C.S.

You have asked our opinion concerning the validity of certain contracts entered into between the city of,(=opperas Cove and the Central Texas Council of Governments (CTCOG) and, parenthetically, a similar contract between Coryell County and the Central Texas Council of Governments.The purpose and effect ofthese contracts is to provide a cooperative law enforcement effort inapprehending and arresting drunken drivers in the area. Your concern is that pursuant to the agreement peace officers commissioned by the city of Copperas Cove are making arrests outside the city limits. The CTCOG has furnished us with a copy ofa revised contract between the CTCOG and various counties and cities. An important difference between the contracts is that the latter contract gives the CTCOG authority toprovide coordination only and provides nopower for the Council to control law enforcement activities. Our comments are directed exclusively to the latter agreement. We believe that this contract, and the activities ofthe respective political subdivisions pursuant thereto, is valid and authorized. Its

p. 1376The Honorable J. Albert Dickie page 2 (H-296)

statutory basis is Article 4413 (32c), V. T. C. S., known as The Interlocal Cooperation Act. Section 4 (a) ofthis statute provides as follows, with emphasis added:

“Any local government may contract or agree with one or more local governments toperform governmental functions and services under terms ofthis Act. ” Section 3(1)ofthe Act defines “local government” as follows: ” ‘local’governmentf means a county; ahome rule city or a city, village, or town organized under the general laws ofthis state; a special district; a school district; ajunior college district; any other legally constituted political subdivision ofthe state; or a combination ofpolitical subdivisions. ” (emphasis wadded) Section 3(2) defines “governmental functions and services” to include “police~protection and detention services. ” The Central Texas Council~of Governments is a,“regional planning commission” authorized and established under Article lOllm, V. T. C.S. Section 4 (a) ofthis Act provides that “a Regional Planning Commission shall be apolitical subdivision ofthis State.” thus qualifying it as a
“local government” under $3(l) of4413 (32~). Your concern over the extraterritorial arrests made by officers commissioned by the city of Copperas Cove is answered by Green v. State, 490 S.W. 2d 826 (Tex. Crim. 1973) which involved a conviction for driving a motor vehicle upon apublic highway while intoxicated. The court upheld the conviction stating:

“The appellant does not contend that the officer was without probable cause to arrest him within the city limits ofWinnsboro, but asserts that the officer didnot have the authority to make the arrest outside the city limits ofWinnsboro. A city police officer

p. 1377The Honorable J. Albert Dickie page 3 (H-296)

is apeace officer. Article 2.12, V.A. C. C.P. As a peace officer he is authorized to make arrests outside the city limits where he serves. See Article 14.01(b), V.A. C. C.P. ;Article 803, Vernon’s Ann. P.C. ; Article 6701d, Sec. 153, Vernon’s Ann. Civ. St. and Buse v. State, 435 S.W. 2d 530 (Tex. Cr. App. 1968); Milligan v. State, 343 S.W. 2d 455 (Tex. Cr. App. 1969); Gonzalez v. State, 320 S.W. 2d 9(Tex. Cr. App. 1959); Watson v. State, 466 S.W. 2d 783 (Tex. Cr. App. 1971); Winfield v. State, 163 Tex. Cr. 445, 293 S.W. 2d 765 (1955) and Hurley v. State, 155 Tex. Cr. R. 315, 234 S.W. 2d 1006 (1950).” (490 S.W. 2d .at827). Even ifthe above authorities are given alimited and carefully circumscribed interpretation; we believe the arrests are substantially authorized by the recent amendment toArticle 999b, V. T. C.S., Acts 1973, 63rd Leg., ch. 587, p. 1626. providing:

“Sec.. 2a. A county or municipality may by resolution or order of its governing body enter into an agreenxnt with any neighboring municipality or contiguous county toform amutual aid law enforcement task force to cooperate inthe investigation of criminal activity and enforcement ofthe laws ofthis state. Peace officers employed by counties or municipalities entering into such agreements shall have only such additional investigative authority throughout the region as may be set.forth inthe agreement. The counties or municipalities shall provide for compensation ofpeace officers involved inthenactivities ofamutual aid law enforcement task force, which provision for compensation shall be contained inthe agreement.

‘!A law enforcement officer employed by a county or municipality covered by an agreement

p. 1378The Honorable J. Albert Dickie page 4 (H-296)

authorized by this section may make arrests outside the county or municipality inwhich he is employed, butwithin the area covered by the agreement, provided however, that the law enforcement agencies within such county or municipality shall be notified of such arrest without delay. Such notified agency shall make available the notice of such arrest inthe same manner as if said arrest were made by amember ofthe law enforcement agency of said county or municipality. ” Article 14.01 (b), Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, cited in the Green case, provides that “a peace officer may arrest anoffender without awarrant for any offense committed inhis presence or within his view. ” SUMMARY

Arrests made by peace officers commissioned by the city of Copperas Cove pursuant to contract between the city and Central Texas Council of Governments are not unconstitutional and are authorized by statute. Very truly yours,

Attorney General of Texas

p. 1379The Honorable J. Albert Dickie page 5 (~-296)

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman Opinion Committee

p. 1380