R-971

Ron. Ernest 0. Thompson,Chairman Railroad Commission of Texas Austin, Texas Opinion Bo. V-473
Re: Effect upon outstanding certificates issuedunder Article glib,V.C.S., authorizingmotor carrier operations in certain areas, as a result of the consolidationof the Cities of Pelly and Goose Creek.
Dear Sir:
The factswhich prompted your request for an opinion In connectionwith the above captionedmatter are restated as follows:

On December 8, 1945, the area conxxonlg known as Begtownwas annexed to and became a part of the "homerule" City of Pellg (Cityof Pell v. Water ControlDistrict, 198 9. W. (2dy450, sup. ct. 1946) after, on the 27th of September, 1i46Thtg - Railroad Commissionof Texas issued 1;s order grantinga specializedmotor carrier certificate of convenienceand necessity authorizing the transportationof certain commodities from La Porte,Texas, and points within a tenmile radius thereof,with the exceptlon of the corporate limits of Goose Creek, to all points in Texas, and vice verAt the time this orderwas entered Pel- ?y*and Goose Creek were separate lncorporated cities, but were contiguous to each other. Subsequently,on the 15thday of February, 1947, electionswere held in the Cities of Pellg and Goose Creek resulting in the consolidation of Goose Creek with Pelly, the latterbeing the larger city. The elections resulting in the consolidationwere held under Article 1188,V.C.S., and records of the:

Hon. Ernest 0. Thompson - Page 2 v-473

same have been filedwith the Secretary of State under Article 1192, V.C.S.
Based upon these facts the followingquestion is presented:

As a result of the consolidation of Goose Creekwith Pellg into one city, Is the operator of the specializedmotor carrier certificate in question now authorized to serve the area formerly embracedwithin the corporate limits of Goose Creek?

We assume for the purpose of this opinion that the consolidation of Goose Creek with Pellgwas in accordancewith the existing State laws on the subject. Article 1188,V.C.S., specificallyauthorizes cities, such as Goose Creek and Pelly, to consolidate under one governmentand to take the name of the Larger city. The term "consollds$e"is defined by Article 1191,V.C.S., as meaning e . . the adoption by the smaller cities of the charter and name of the larger of said cities, and the amendment of the charter of the larger cities so as to include in its boundarles the territory of the smaller city or cities so consolidated

. . ." (Rmphasisours) As a result of the consolidation in question,the corporate existence of Goose Creek as a municipalitybecame extinct. 1 &- Quillin MUIdCiDal Corporation, Second Edition,Revised, 877, 8 315.

Sect;on 2 of Article glib,V.C.S., expressly provides that e . .nothing in thisAct or any provlslon thereof shallbe construed or held to In any manner affect, limit or deprive cities and towns from exercising any of the powers granted them by Chapter 147, Pagcls 307 to 318, Inclusive of the General Laws of the State of Texas, passed by the 33rd Leglslature,~ or any amendments thereto." A certificate Issued by the Commission underArticle glib, supra, Is subjecttoall the laws of this State governing cities and towns and their legal right to consolidateand expand by annexaFalls v. Bowen, 143Tex. 45, 182 S. W. (2d)6 tion of additional territory. Compare City o;5Wi;;lta ( 44)0 The certificatebeing subject to the laws respecting cities and towns, the restrictioncontained therein has now ceased to exist, because the area formerly included within the corporate limits of Goose Creek Is now, as aEon. Ernest 0. Thompson - Page 3 v-473

result'of the consolldatlon, legally a part of the carporate limlts of Pelly--a city authorlxed to be served under the certificate.

The restriction contained in the certlflcate excluding servicewithin the.corporate limits of Goose Creek does not; In our opinion,reflect an intentionon the part of the Commission to pr~ohlbltservicewithin this particulararea in the event the Cities of Pelly and Goose Creek were consolidated. The grant of anthorlty to a carrier by the Railroad Commission to serve a particular city (inthis InstancePelly) contemplates the future growth and expansion of the city, not only through normal growth, but throughannexation of additional territoryand all other lawfulmeans authorleed~ ;yl;y State laws. See 1 Pond on Public Utilities 316,

. Certainly It would not be presumed that the Commission intended in~the event Goose Creek was consolidatedwith Pelly,l.as authorizedby law, that the public transportationservice authorized by the certificate would be available to the public in a portion of the consolidatedcity and not to the otherportion. Itwould be extremelydifficult, If not Impossible,to police such an operation. To hold that the Commission Intended such a resultwould be to hold that the Commission intended somethingherewhich we are informed has neverbeen done in the entire history of the adminlstratlon of the Texas Motor CarrierLav.

Based upon the above and foregoing, the question Is accordinglyanswered in the affirmative.

The conclusion reachedmakes unnecessarya discussion of the second question presentedby your request.

The restriction contained la a certfficate issuedby the Railroad Cosnslsslonauthorizing service to and from tlxe City of Pelly. but prohibiting service to or from the corporate limits of the CFty of Goose Creek, is nulllfled by the subsequent consolldatlon of the City of Goose Creekwith the City of Pel1Y. As a result of the consolidationthe o)-

. . orator of the certificate is authorized toHon. Eraast 0,~Thompson - Page 4 *

v-473

serve the entire City of Pelly, Including that portion formerly embraced ln the corporate limits of Goose Creek. Yours~ysry truly
ATTORNEY GE&AL OF TEXAS

-*I C&rles D. Mathews

Assistant CDM:jt

. APPROVED:

ACTING AT!FORIWSY

GENERAL