May 17, 1% 

Honorable Joe Resweber 

County Attorney 

Harris County Courthouse 

Houston, Texas 77002 

Opinion No. M- 76 

Re: To what extent may the Harris 

County Commissioners Court 

regulate the construction 

and location of .,flre-fighting 

facilities and equipment installed and operated by ,a 

water control and improvement 

district or a fresh water 

supply district when it is 

proposed to locate such 

facilities and. equipment 

in the area1 confines of 

Hear Mr. Resweber: Harris County roads. 

In recent letters to this office you have requested an 

opinion In regard to the above referenced matter. 

The answer to this question is dependent upon whether 

water control and Improvement dlstrlcts or fresh water supply 

districts are authorized to acquire and maintain fire-fighting 

facilities and equipment. While this authority was granted to 

such districts by statutory enactment (water control and improvement districts - Article 7880-1, et seq., Vernon’s Civil Statutes); 

e;zhs;;;;;,u ply districts - Article 7881; et seq., Vernon’s 

? the Texas Supreme Court has held that those port&s of the &tutes granting such authority are unconstitutional 

as regards water control and Improvement districts. 

“Section 52, Article 3, speclfles that’ 

water control and improvement districts may 

Issue bonds for certain purposes. The purposes,enumerated do not include the right to 

purchase, own and operate fire engines, flrefighting equipment and appliances. 

- 344 - 
. I 

Hon. Joe Resweber, Page 2 (M-76) 

‘Section 59(a), Article 16, the other 

constitutional amendment involved here, contains 

no language which would support a holding that 

the people In enacting the amendment contemplated 

that a water control and Improvement district 

created for the purpose of conserving and developing the natural resources of the district would 

have the power to provide fire-fighting equipment 

and appliances for a town within said district. 

“Both constitutional amendmentsspecify the 

circumstances and purposes for which water control 

and Improvement districts may be organized and the 

Legislature is without power to add to or withdraw 

from the circumstances and purposes specified. 

II Deason v. Orange County Water-Control and 

&r&ement Dlst. No. One, 151 Tex. 29, 35; 244 

. * 81, t14 152. 

The Deason case was cited with approval In Harris 

The holding In the Deason case, supra, is equally 

applicable to fresh water supplydistricts. Inasmuch as water 

control and Improvement districts and fresh water supply districts 

do not have the authority to acquire and maintain fire-fighting 

facilities and equipment, the question as to the extent of the 

authority of the Harris County Commissioners Court to regulate 

such dl8trictS as regards the construction and location of such 

facilities and equipment is not reached. 

The term “fire-fighting facilities, and equipment” as 

used In the above holding Is limited to fire engines, fire 

stations and the necessary and usual equipment and appliances 

therefor. 

Such districts have the power to erect and operate a 

sewage disposal plant. Parker v. San Jaclnto County Water Control 

and Improvement District No. 1 154 Tex. 15 2-W . . 2d 586 (1954) 

Tfth dltlt In puisuance to Iti express and implied * 

power:, d&&z 

ti 

t”A ?$ F!ter lines, install outlets for dispensing 

water and other necessary appurtenances, to be located within the 

area1 confines of the county,roads, the Commissioners Court may 

require that the plans and specifications relative thereto, be 

submitted to the County Engineer prior to the construction thereof. 

Attorney General’s Opinion No, ~-56 (1967), mailed to you on April 

lo, 1967. 

- 345 - 
Hon. Joe ReSWeber, Page 3 (M-76) 

SUMMARY 

Water control and Improvement districts and 

fresh water supply districts do not have the authority to acquire and maintain fire-fighting 

facilities and equipment and thus the question as 

to the extent of the authority of the Harris County 

Commissioners Court to regulate such districts as 

regards the construction and location of such 

facilities and equipment Is not reached. The 

laying of water lines and necessary appurtenances, 

in carrying out Its express and implied powers, 

within the area1 confine8 of county roads 18 controlled by Attorney General's Opinion M-56 (1967). 

truly yoursI 

Prepared by Lewis E. Berry, Jk. 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Hawthorne Phillips, Chairman 

W. V. Geppert, Co-Chairman 

Roger Tyler 

Houghton Brownlee, Jr. 

Pat Bailey 

Milton Richardson 

STAFF LEGAL ASSISTANT 

A. J. Carubbl, Jr. 

- 346 -