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 of appraisal

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 of a 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 Opinion GA-0590 describesthe state ofthe lawbefore the enactmentofHouse Bill

1010 as well asthe statutory changes enacted by the bill, and we incorporate that description into 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 correction motion relating to 2007 or an earlier year

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 at http://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 of appraisal district A still be required under Sec. 6.025 to

notify the chiefappraiser ofappraisal district B, and would that chief

appraiser be required to enter the reduced value on the appraisal roll?

3) In the event the chief appraiser 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 district A retain the authority to supplement the

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 of taxes 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.

Generally an appraisal district's boundaries are the same asthe boundaries ofthe county-its

"home" county-for which the appraisal district is established. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. § 6.02(a)

(Vernon 2008); see also id. § 6.01 (a)-(b) (establishing a tax appraisal district in each county). Under

the former version ofsection 6.02 ofthe Tax Code, a taxing unit with boundaries in two or more

counties could "choose to 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

taxing unit made that choice "the boundaries ofthe appraisal districtserving the taxing unit extended

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 of Waller 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 territory was 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 of a multi-county taxing unit to participate in only

one appraisal district. See Act of May 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

territory under former 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 of whether provisions of the

former law were "saved." See id. And, House Bill 1010 did not itself contain 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

action based upon the former law, and pending suits cease," we nonetheless determined in GA-0590

that the WCAD retained authorityto defend the pending litigation because 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 ofAustin, 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) any validation, cure, right, privilege, obligation, or liability

previously acquired, accrued, accorded, or incurred under it;

... ; or

(4) any investigation, proceeding, or remedy concerning any

privilege, obligation, liability, penalty, forfeiture, or punishment; and

the investigation, proceeding, orremedymaybe instituted, continued,

or enforced, and the penalty, forfeiture, or punishment 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 of any 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 reasoned
The 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 and provide 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. And that reasoning, combinedwith section 31 1.03 I(a)(4)'s dictate that

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 authority to defend itselfin litigation brought under chapter 42 and related to 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 saved by

the dictates ofsection 31 1.03 I(a)(2) and (4) ofthe Government Code. See id. at 5-6. With respect

to your first question, the attendant duties and obligations ofan appraisal district include hearing and

acting on taxpayer protests authorized by chapter 41, 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 of appraisal

review board, including duty to determine protests and challenges initiated by property owners and

taxing units and acting onmotion to correct appraisalroll), 41.41 (authorizing taxpayerprotest). 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 of an appraisal district to continue to defend pending

litigation under chapter 42 based on that prior action, so too does the general savings clause save the

authority ofan appraisal districtregarding pendingmotions andprotests under chapter 41 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 over property in the overlapping territory as to hearing and determining pending protests

and corrective motions that pertain to the 2007, or prior, 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 Thatstatute required the 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 chief appraisers 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 of the 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 of each appraisal district. 6 You inquire whether these procedures are still required of

the chief appraisers. 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 of a 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 1.031(a)(1)-(2) (Vernon 2005). With respect to pre-2008

tax appraisals, cooperation between the chief appraisers and, in particular, listing the lowest

appraised ormarket value, are rights or privileges accorded to the taxpayer. Such rights orprivileges

impose a concomitant duty or obligation on the 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 1.031(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.

Your remaining questions relate to actions regarding the 2007, or prior, 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, with the enactment ofHouse 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 property in "territory that is transferred [from appraisal district A] to appraisal district

B under HB 1010"). fd. Specifically, your third question concerns the authority ofthe appraisal

district which "lost" authority over property in the overlapping territory to supplement its appraisal

roll to include previously omitted property for a tax year prior to 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 year that it was omitted and enterthe property and its appraised value in the appraisal records").

With respect to this transferred property, you next ask whether a protest or corrective motion relating

to a tax year prior to the 2008 tax year that is filed within the applicable deadline, but after January

1, 2008, is heard by 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).

Chapter 41 authorizes an appraisal district to hear and determine timely-filed taxpayer protests. See

id. ch. 41. Actions under section 25.21 and chapter 41 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

6See 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 within the applicable deadlines and concern the appraisal ofproperty for a tax year prior to

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 of House Bill 1010 by the Eightieth

Legislature, an appraisal district operating in overlapping territory by

operation ofsection 6.02(b) ofthe Tax Code retains authority to hear

and detennine pending corrective motions and taxpayer protests

concerning property in that territory that relate to the 2007, or prior,

tax year. With respect to appraisal districts with overlapping territory

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-filed corrective motions and taxpayer proteststhat concern the

appraisal of property 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