Honorable R. L. Lattlmore Opinion BO. c-760

Criminal District Attorney Hidalgo County Courthouse Rs: Whether or not the Edinburg, Texas approval of the Commissioners’ Court Is necessary before the Housing Authority of Hidalgo County maysell surplus real estate owned by the Authority, Dear Sir: and related question.

You have requested an opinion of this office on the following questions:



### “1;

“2

. If the subject property is declared surplus by the Rousing Authority, does it revert to HidalgO CQunty which maythen sell it in accordance with the provisions set out in Article 

### 1577,V.A.C.S.4 Should it be determined that the property does not revert to Hidalgo County,’ since the Housing Authority o$’ Ridalgo ‘County, Texas, is a division of Hidalgo County existing only with the consent of the county, what procedure should be followed in the sale of the property described above?”
The property described in your opinion request is real property, deeded, by quit claim without warranty,~ to the Housing Authority 

### of the County of Hidalgo by the Public Housing Administration. Noreverter clauses were inserted in said deed.

Seation 230 of Article 

### 1269k,Vernon’s.Civi.1 Statutes, provides as follower ,i‘~,

“In each county of the State there is hereby created a public body corporate and politic to be knownas the ‘Housin Authority! of the 

### -36thHonorableR. L. Lattimore,page 2 (c-760)

county;provided, however, that such housing authority shall not transactany business or exercise its powers hereunderuntil or unless the CommissionersCourt of such county, by proper resolution shall declareat any time hereafter that there is need for a housingauthority to function in such county, which declaration shall be made by such CommissionersCourt for such county in the same manner and subject to the same conditions as the declarationof the governingbody of a city required by Section 4 of the HousingAuthorities Law for the purpose of authorizinga housing authority created for a city to transactbusinessand exercise its powers (except that thepetition referred to in said Section 4 shall be signed by one hundred qualified voters and residents of such county).
"The commissioners of a housing authority created for a countymay be appointed and removed by the CommissionersCourt of the county in the samemanner as the commissionersof a housing authority created fora citymay be appointed and removed by theMayor, and exceptas otherwise provided herein, each housing authority created for a county and the commissioners thereof, within the area of operationof such housing authority
as hereinafter defined, shallhave the same functions, rights, powers, duties; immunities,privileges, and limitationsprovided for housing authorities created for cities and the commissioners of such housing authorities, in the samemanner as thoughall theprovisions of law applicable to housing authorities created for cities were applicable to housing authorities created for counties;provided, that for suchpurposes the term

‘Mayort or 'governingbody' as used in the Housing Authorities Law shallbe construedas meaning 'CommissionersCourt',and the term 'city'as used therein

shall be construedas meaning 'county' unless a differentmeaning clearly appears from the context; and provided further that a housing authority created for a county shallnot be subject to the limitationsprovided in clause,(c) of Section 10 of the HousingAuthorities Law with respect to housing projects for farmers of low income.
"Thearea of operationof a housing authority created for a county shall includeall of the -3658-

.Honorable R. L. Lattimore,page 4 

### (c-760)

state.'
The court in Townsend v. The Housing Authority of City of Dallas, 277 S.W.2d 211 (Tex.Civ.App.,1954, error ref. n.r.e.) upheld the HousingAuthority's right to sell land previously purchased under general warranty deed without restriction,when subsequently the HousingAuthority determined that the land, so acquiredwas excess land and no longer required for the housing project for which it was originallypurchased. A similiar result was reached in Vilbig v. HousingAuthority of Dallas, 

### 287 S.W.2d 323 (Tex. Civ.App. 1996 error ref. n.r.e.). In both of the above cases, it was the HousingAuthority, not the City of Dallas, which disposed of the excess land.

In Miers v. HousingAuthority of Dallas, 

### 266 S.W.2d 

### 487 (Tex.Civ.App.,1954 fi d questions on otherpoints, 

### 266 S.W.2d 842, 

### 153Tex!'2$?&$), it was held:

11 politic. Appellee is a body corporate and

'iousingAuthority of City of Dallas
v. Higginbotham 

### 135 Tex. 

### 158,143 S.W.2d,79 Syl. 

### 15,page 

## 88, 130A.L.R. 

### 1053. It is a division of the City of Dallas and exists only with the consent of the City of Dallas. Consequently it did not have to deposit twice the amount of the award, or make bond." Likewise, inAetna Casualty and Surety Company v. Glidden co., 

### 283 S.W.2d 440 (Tex.Civ.App.,1955); reversed
on other grounds), 291 S.W.2d 

### 315, (Tex.Sup.1956)! Ftwas held that the HousingAuthority of the City of Borger was a division of the city. The court considered the Housing Authority an agent of the City of Borger. Consequently, the HousingAuthority came within the terms ofArticle 

### 5160, Vernon's Civil Statutes, since the "words 'anymunicipality'
as used in said statute includedHousing Authorities created underArticle 1269k."

A prior opinion of this office,No. O-6339 (1945), held that vehicles operated by HousingAuthorities of Texas Cities were not eligible to receive exempt license plates underArticle 6675a-3,Vernon's Civil Statutes. The above statute exempted vehicles used exclusively by theU.S. Government, the State of Texas, counties, cities, or school districts. In light of the holding that a housing authority is
a division of a city or county as the case may be, we hereby overruleOpinion NO. O-6339.

It is well estab1i~;;~Oi.n Texas that a special. I

HonorableR. L. Lattimore,page 

### 3 (c-760)

county in which it is created except thatportion of the county which lies within the territorial boundaries of any city." Consequently, case rulingsaffecting city housing authoritiesmust also be.-applied to countyhousing authorities, as well as the prior sections ofArticle 1269k.

Section 

### 8 of Article 1269k provides in part:

"An authority shall constitutea public body corporateand politic, exercisingpublic and essential governmental functions,and having all thepowers necessary or convenient to carry out and effectuate the purposes and provisions of this Act, including the followingpowers in addition to othershereingranted: 11

. . . "(d) To lease or rent any dwellings,houses, accommodations, lands, buildings, structures, or facilities embraced in any housingproject and (subjectto the limitations contained in thisAct) to establish and revise the rents or charges therefor; to own, hold, and improve real or personal property; to purchase, lease, obtain options upon, acquire by gift, grant, bequest,devise, or otherwise any real or personal property or any interest therein; to acquire by the exercise of thepower of eminent domain any real property; to sell, lease, exchange, transfer, assign, pledge, or disposes of any real or personal property or any interest therein to insure or provide for the insurance of any real or personal property or operationsof the authority against any risks or hazards; to procure insurance or guarantees from the Federal Government of the payment of any debts or parts thereof (whetheror not incurred by said authority) secured by mortgages on any property included in any of its housing projects. 11

. . . "(h) To exerciseall or any part or combination of powers herein granted. No provisions of law with respect to the acquisition, operation, or disposition of property by other public bodies shall be applicable to an authority unless the Legislature shall specifically so -3hSY.-Honorable R. L. Lattimore,page 5 (c-760)

statute will control over a general statute on the same subject. Harris County Drainage Dist. No. 12 vs. City of Houston, 35 S.W.-2d 18 C A pendent Sc~ool'D?~ri%"2$ k.6. 751 3 )*Frass vs. Darrouzett Inde-

[ Tex.Civ.App., 1925, error dism.). In the l:tter case, the court held the provisions of a special act allowing the School District to levy and collect a tax would control over a general statute which allowed the county to act as the taxingauthority. In the present instance,Article 1269k is a special statute granting various enumeratedpowers to thehousing authority and is controlling to that extent.

After a thorough study ofArticle 1269k and the above cited cases, it is the opinion of this office that the HousingAuthority of Hidalgo Countymay by resolution of its Commissionersdeclare such property excess property. Such property will not revert to Hidalgo County. Furthermore, the Legislature specificallygranted the HousingAuthority the right to sell property which it has acquired and such right may not be impaired or restricted by the Commissioners Court of Hidalgo County. However, since the HousingAuthority of Hidalgo County is a division of Hidalgo County and since Article 1269k does not provide a procedure for the sale of excess property, it is the further opinion of this office that the excess property must be sold in accordance with Article 1577, Vernon's Civil Statutes, insofar as that statute relates to public auction, notice and conveyance, and appointment of the commissioner by the Commissioners Court. Just as the Housing Authoritiesmay receive the benefit of statutesapplying to cities and counties, so theymust comply with the statutes applying to cities and counties where such statutes do not conflictwith the powers granted to them in Article 1269k.

SUMMARY ------- The commissioners of the HousingAuthority of Hidalgo County may declare the subjectproperty excess by resolutionand sell said property in accordance with the terms of Article 1577, Vernon's Civil Statutes, insofar as the terms of Article 1577 do not conflict widththe powers granted the Housing Authority inArticle 1269k, Vernon's Civil Statutes. The property will not revert to Hidalgo County, and the Commissioners Court of Hidalgo Countymay not exercise any control over the disposition of the property.

In view of the decisions of the Courts of

-3661--,. .

HonorableR. L. Lattimore,page 6 (c-760)

Civil Appeals holding that a HousingAuthority is a division of the city, Attorney General's OpinionNo. 0-6339 is hereby overruled.
Very trulyyours,
WAGGONER CARR Attorney General of Texas

By: Wade Anderson AssistantAttorney General

WA:mh
APPROVED) OPINION COMMITTBE

W. V. Geppert, Chairman JamesMcCoy John Reeves W. E. Allen Linward Shivers

APPROVEDFOR THRATTORNEXGRRERAL By: T. B. Wright

-3662-