ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS GREG ABBOTT



### May 27, 2008

The Honorable Fred Hill Chair, Committee on Local Government Ways and Means Texas House ofRepresentatives Post Office Box 2910 Austin, Texas 78768-2910
Dear Representative Hill: Opinion No. GA-0631 Re: Implementation ofchanges to tax proceedings required by recently enacted House Bill 1010, which provides for the consolidation ofappraisal districts (RQ-0655-GA)

You request our opinion on several questions that relate to the implementation ofrecently enacted House Bill 1010. 1 

### By amending provisions in the Texas Tax Code, House Bill 1010 changed the property appraisal system by realigning appraisal district boundaries to county boundaries and eliminated overlapping appraisal territory caused by the decision ofa multi-county taxing unit to be served by a single appraisal district? On January 11,2008, we issued Attorney General Opinion GA-0590, which considered questions with respect to House Bill 1010's impact on the Waller County Appraisal District. See generally 

### Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0590 (2008). Attorney General OpinionGA-0590 describes the state ofthelawbeforethe enactmentofHouseBill 1010 as well as the statutory changes enactedbythe bill, andwe incorporatethatdescriptioninto this opinion. See id. 

### at 1-3. In 

### light of the changes made by House Bill 1010, you ask about the following scenarios: 1) A protest or correctionmotionrelating to 2007 or an earlieryear is presently pending before the appraisal review board for appraisal district A. 

### Does the appraisal review board for district A retain jurisdiction after January I to hear and determine the protest, and order a change to the relevant appraisal roll for the affected jurisdictions?

....

'See Letter from Honorable Fred Hill, Chair, Committee on Local Government Ways and Means, Texas House ofRepresentatives, to Honorable Greg Abbott, Attorney General ofTexas, at I (Dec. 7,2007) (on file with the Opinion Committee, also available athttp://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov) [hereinafter Request Letter]. 'See Act ofMay 17, 2007, 80th Leg., R.S., ch. 648, 2007 Tex. Gen. Laws 1223, 1223-25 [hereinafter Act of May 17, 2007].The Honorable Fred Hill

- Page 2 GA-063I

2) Assuming the answer to question I) is yes, would the chief appraiser ofappraisal district A still be required under Sec. 6.025 to notifythe chiefappraiser ofappraisal district B, and wouldthat chief appraiser berequiredto enterthe reduced value onthe appraisal roll?
3) In the event the chiefappraiser in appraisal district A discovers property that was not taxed in 2007 or in prior years in territory that is transferred to appraisal district B under HB 1010, does the chief appraiser ofappraisal districtA retainthe authorityto supplementthe property onto the appropriate appraisal rolls under Sec. 25.21, Tax Code? Underthe Tax Code, Sec. 32.01, a lien attaches to all property on January I to secure the payment oftaxes later imposed for the year. It would seem that, as the lien is a liability accrued under the prior statute, [t]he Code Construction Act would govern. 4)

. Not all ofthe possible deadlines for filing protests or correction motions related to years prior to 2008 have elapsed. 

### If a property owner files a protest or correction motion related to a year prior to 2008, and the property is located in territory transferred to appraisal district B, which appraisal review board has jurisdiction to hear the protest or correction[?] Again, it would seem that the appraisal review board for appraisal district A retains that authority. Request Letter, 

### supra note I, at I**~2.** Generallyan appraisal district's boundaries are the same as theboundaries ofthe county-its "home" county-forwhichthe appraisal district is established. 

### See TEX. TAX CODEANN. § 6.02(a) (Vernon 2008); 

### see also id. 

### § 6.01 (a)-(b) (establishing atax appraisal districtineachcounty). Under the former version ofsection 6.02 ofthe Tax Code, a taxing unit with boundaries in two ormore counties could "chooseto participate in only one ofthe appraisal districts." Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0590 (2008) at 2 (quoting former section 6.02(b) ofthe Tax Code). When such a multi-county taxingunitmade thatchoice "theboundaries of the appraisal district serving the taxing unitextended outside the district's home county to the extent ofthe taxing unit's boundaries." 

### Id. "This area of extension was referred to as 'overlapping territory.'" 

### Id. In Attorney General Opinion GA-0590, the Waller County Appraisal District ("WCAD") was concerned about its responsibility "afterJanuary I, 2008,3 for litigation filed against the district involving properties outside the boundaries ofWaller County." 

### Id. at I (footnote added). The authority for the WCAD to defend the litigation under chapter 42, Tax Code, for property located in the overlapping territorywas contained in former section 6.02(b). 

### Id. House Bill 1010 amended

'House Bill 1010 is generally effective on January 1, 2008. See Act ofMay 17, 2007, § 7(a), at 1225, 

### supra note 2. Section 6 ofthe Act was effective September 1, 2007. See id. § 7(b).The Honorable Fred Hill

- Page 3 GA-063I

section 6.02(a) and (b) to eliminate the authority ofa multi-county taxing unit to participate in only one appraisal district. See Act ofMay 17, 2007, 

### § 1, at 1223, supra note 2. The fundamental question then was whether the right to defend the litigation regarding property in the overlapping territoryunderformer law still existed afterthe amendment ofsection 6.02. See Tex. Att'yGen. Op. No. GA-0590 (2008) at 1, 4. Our initial determination that House Bill 1010 was prospective did not resolve the question. See id. Instead, the question in GA-0590 required an examination ofwhether provisions ofthe former law were "saved." See id. And, House Bill 1010 did not itselfcontain a savings clause. See Act ofMay 17, 2007, at 1223-25, supra note 2. Noting the principle that "generally, when a statute is repealed or amended without a savings clause, the repeal or amendment abrogates any cause of actionbaseduponthe former law, andpending suits cease," we nonetheless determinedin GA-0590 thattheWCAD retained authorityto defendthepending litigationbecause ofthe Code Construction Act's general savings clause. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0590 (2008) at 4, 8; TEX. GOV'T CODEANN. § 311.031 (Vernon 2005); see also Quickv. City of Austin, 7 S.W.3d 109, 125, 128-29 (Tex. 1998) (construing section 311.031). The general savings clause, found in section 311.031 ofthe Government Code, provides in relevant part that: (a)

... the reenactment, revision, amendment, orrepeal ofa statute does not affect: (1) the prior operation ofthe statute or any prior action taken under it; (2) anyvalidation, cure, right, privilege, obligation, orliability previously acquired, accrued, accorded, or incurred under it;

... ; or (4) any investigation, proceeding, or remedy concerning any privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture, orpunishment; and the investigation, proceeding, orremedymaybeinstituted, continued, or enforced, and the penalty, forfeiture, orpunishment imposed, as if the statute had not been repealed or amended.
TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 311.031(a) (Vernon 2005). The Texas Supreme Court in Quick recognized that the "adoption ofthe general savings clause

... indicates a general legislative policy that the repeal ofany statute shall not affect the prior operation ofthat statute nor extinguish any liability incurred or affect any right accrued or claim arising before the repeal takes effect." Quick, 7 S.W.3d at 125, 129-30. Acting on that legislative policy, the Texas Supreme Court decided in Quick to "presume that the general savings clause applies unless a contrary legislative intent is shown by clear expression or necessary implication." [d. at 130. Based on Quick's assessment of the general savings clause and because we found no legislative intent to the contrary, we reasonedThe Honorable Fred Hill

- Page 4 GA-0631

that an "[a]ction taken before [House Bill 1010] by a taxing unit under section 6.02(b) to have an appraisal district extend its boundaries andprovide its services outside its home county constitutes an action taken under the prior law" preserved by the general savings clause. Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0590 (2008) at 5-6. Andthatreasoning, combinedwith section 31 1.03 I(a)(4)'s dictatethat the amendment or repeal of a statute does not affect any proceeding or remedy concerning any privilege, obligation, or liability, resulted in our conclusion in GA-0590 that an "appraisal district has continuing authorityto defenditselfinlitigationbroughtunderchapter42 andrelatedto territory outside its home county where a multi-county taxing unit chose to participate in the district in compliance with section 6.02 as that section existed prior to [House Bill 1010]." Id. at 6. Attorney General Opinion GA-0590's underlying determination was that the taxing unit's decision to participate in only one appraisal district constitutes "prior action" and that the attendant duties and obligations ofthe district with respect to that decision under section 6.02(b) are savedby the dictates ofsection 31 1.03 I(a)(2) and (4) ofthe Government Code. 

### See id. at 5-6. With respect to yourfirst question, the attendant duties and obligations ofan appraisal district includehearing and acting on taxpayerprotests authorizedby chapter41, Tax Code, and hearing and acting on taxpayer corrective motions authorized by section 25.25, Tax Code. 

### See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. §§ 25.25 (Vernon 2008) (concerning corrections to the appraisal roll), 41.01 (establishing duties ofappraisal review board, including duty to determineprotests and challenges initiatedbyproperty owners and taxing units and acting onmotionto correctappraisalroll), 41.41 (authorizingtaxpayerprotest). The appraisal district's duties and obligations in the overlapping territory stem from the same "prior action" ofthe taxing entity-its decision to participate in only one appraisal district. Thus, as the general savings clause saved the authority ofan appraisal district to continue to defend pending litigationunder chapter42 based on thatprior action, so too does the general savings clause save the authorityofan appraisal districtregardingpendingmotions andprotests underchapter41 and section 

### 25.25. See TSP Dev., Ltd. v. Tex. Natural Res. Conservation Comm 'n, 16 S.W.3d 148, 152-153 (Tex. App.-Austin 2000, no pet.) (applying 

### Quick's interpretation ofthe general savings clause in the context of an administrative rule). We therefore conclude that an appraisal district retains authority overproperty in the overlapping territory as to hearing and determining pending protests and corrective motions that pertain to the 2007, orprior, tax year. Your second question, contingent on an affirmative answer to your first, concerns repealed section 6.025 ofthe Tax Code. 

### See Request Letter, 

### supra note 1, at2; 

### see also Act ofMay 17, 2007, 

### § 5(3), at 1224 (repealing section 6.025), 

### § 7(a), at 1223-25 (providing for effective date ofJanuary 

### 1,2008), supra note 2. Former section 6.025 provided appraisal procedures for property that was located in overlapping territory.4 That statuterequiredthe chiefappraisers ofeach appraisal district to "coordinate their appraisal activities so as to encourage and facilitate the appraisal ofthe same property
... at the same value. "5 In the event the chiefappraisers did not agree on the appraised or market value of a parcel in the overlapping territory, section 6.025(d) required that the "lowest appraised or market value

... as determined by any ofthe chief appraisers" be entered on the

'See Act ofMay 12,1995, 74th Leg., R.S., ch. 186, 1995 Tex. Gen. Laws 1914, 1914-15 (amended in 1997, 1999,2003), repealed by Act ofMay 17, 2007, § 5(3), at 1224, supra note 2. 'Id. § 1, sec. 6.025(c), at 1914.The Honorable Fred Hill

- Page 5 GA-0631

appraisal roll ofeach appraisal district. 6 You inquire whether these procedures are still required of the chiefappraisers. See Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2. House Bill 1010 is silent about whether section 6.025 remains effective for appraisal of property in overlapping territory for tax years prior to the 2008 tax year. See Act ofMay 17, 2007, §§ 1-7, at 1223-25, supra note 2. Again, we look to the Code Construction Act's general savings clause. Section 311.031 plainly provides that the "repeal ofa statute does not affect

... the prior operation ofthe statute" nor any "right, privilege, obligation, or liability previously accorded

... under it." TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. § 31 1.03 1(a)(1)-(2) (Vernon 2005). With respect to pre-2008 tax appraisals, cooperation between the chief appraisers and, in particular, listing the lowest appraisedormarketvalue, arerights orprivileges accordedto the taxpayer. Suchrights orprivileges impose a concomitant duty or obligation onthe appraisal district underthe former statutory scheme. With respect to a tax year that is prior to the 2008 tax year, the concomitant obligation is one previously "accrued, accorded, or incurred" and thus saved by the general savings clause. fd. § 31 1.03 1(a)(2). Accordingly, we conclude that cooperation between chief appraisers regarding property located in the overlapping territory of appraisal districts, as well as the listing on the appraisal rolls ofthe lowest appraised or market value, is still required. Yourremaining questions relate to actions regarding the 2007, orprior, tax year that are not currently pending. See Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2. You describe property located 

### in overlapping territory and subj ect to appraisal by one appraisal district by virtue of extended boundaries under former section 6.02(b). However, withthe enactmentofHouse Bill 101 0, itis now served by another appraisal district-the one in the county in which the property is located. See id. (asking about propertyin "territorythat is transferred [from appraisal districtA] to appraisal district B under HB 1010"). fd. Specifically, your third question concerns the authority ofthe appraisal district which "lost" authority overproperty in the overlapping territory to supplement its appraisal roll to include previously omitted propertyfor atax yearpriorto the 2008 tax year. See id.; see also TEX. TAX CODE ANN. 

### § 25.21 (Vernon 2008) (authorizing chief appraiser discovering property omitted from an appraisal roll for five preceding years to "appraise the property as ofJanuary 1 of each yearthatitwas omittedandenterthe propertyandits appraisedvalueinthe appraisal records"). Withrespectto this transferredproperty, you next askwhetheraprotestorcorrectivemotionrelating to a tax year prior to the 2008 tax year that is filed within the applicable deadline, but after January 1, 2008, is heardby the appraisal review board ofthe appraisal district from which the property was transferred or the appraisal district for the county in which the property is located. See Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2. Section 25.21 authorizes an appraisal district, within a specified time frame, to supplement its appraisal roll to include omitted property. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. § 25.21 (Vernon 2008). Chapter41 authorizes an appraisal districtto hear and determine timely-filedtaxpayerprotests. See id. ch. 41. Actions under section 25.21 and chapter41 pertain to and flow from the appraisal ofthe property as ofJanuary 1 ofeach tax year as well as the January 1 attachment ofthe tax lien to secure the taxes for that tax year. See id. §§ 23.0l(a)(appraisal), 32.01 (tax lien). As discussed above, the general savings clause preserves rights, privileges, obligations, and liabilities previously acquired

6S

ee Act ofJune 1,2003, 78th Leg., RS., eh. 1041, § 1, sec. 6.025(d), 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 2997, 2997.

, I**[~**The Honorable Fred Hill

- Page 6 GA-063I

or accrued as well as proceedings and remedies to preserve the same. See TEX. GOV'T CODE ANN. 

### § 31 1.03 I(a)(2), (4) (Vernon 2005). Accordingly, when corrective motions and taxpayer protests are filed withinthe applicable deadlines and concern the appraisal ofproperty for a tax yearpriorto the 2008 tax year, the appraisal district operating in the overlapping territory under former section 6.02(b) retains authority to hear and determine those motions and actions.The Honorable Fred Hill

- Page 7 GA-063I



### SUMMARY Despite the enactment ofHouse Bill 1010 by the Eightieth Legislature, an appraisal district operatinginoverlapping territoryby operation ofsection 6.02(b) ofthe Tax Coderetains authorityto hear and detennine pending corrective motions and taxpayer protests concerning property in that territory that relate to the 2007, or prior, tax year. Withrespectto appraisal districts with overlappingterritory in the tax years prior to the 2008 tax year, the prior operation of fonner section 6.025 is preserved by the Code Construction Act's general savings clause. An appraisal district operating in overlapping territory under fonner section 6.02(b) retains authority to hear and detennine those timely-filedcorrectivemotions andtaxpayerprotests thatconcernthe appraisal ofproperty for a tax year prior to the 2008 tax year. Very truly yours,

KENT C. SULLIVAN First Assistant Attorney General ANDREW WEBER Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel NANCY S. FULLER Chair, Opinion Committee Charlotte M. Harper Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee