The opinion
Honorable R. L. Lattlmore Opinion BO. c-760
Criminal District Attorney
Hidalgo County Courthouse Rs: Whether or not the
Edinburg, Texas approval of the Com-
missioners’ Court Is
necessary before the
Housing Authority of
Hidalgo County may sell
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; If the subject property is declared
surplus by the Rousing Authority,
does it revert to HidalgO CQunty
which may then sell it in accord-
ance with the provisions set out
in Article 1577, V.A.C.S.4
“2. Should it be determined that the
property does not revert to Hidalgo
County,’ since the Housing Authority
o$’ Ridalgo ‘County, Texas, is a divi-
sion 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. No reverter 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 here-
by created a public body corporate and politic
to be known as the ‘Housin Authority! of the
-36th
Honorable R. L. Lattimore, page 2 (c-760)
county; provided, however, that such housing
authority shall not transact any business or
exercise its powers hereunder until or unless
the Commissioners Court of such county, by proper
resolution shall declare at any time hereafter that
there is need for a housing authority to function
in such county, which declaration shall be made by
such Commissioners Court for such county in the same
manner and subject to the same conditions as the
declaration of the governing body of a city required
by Section 4 of the Housing Authorities Law for the
purpose of authorizing a housing authority created
for a city to transact business and exercise its
powers (except that the petition 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 county may be appointed and removed
by the Commissioners Court of the county in the
same manner as the commissioners of a housing
authority created for a city may be appointed
and removed by the Mayor, and except as otherwise
provided herein, each housing authority created
for a county and the commissioners thereof, with-
in the area of operation of such housing authority
as hereinafter defined, shall have the same func-
tions, rights, powers, duties; immunities, privi-
leges, and limitations provided for housing author-
ities created for cities and the commissioners of
such housing authorities, in the same manner as
though all the provisions of law applicable to
housing authorities created for cities were ap-
plicable to housing authorities created for coun-
ties; provided, that for such purposes the term
‘Mayort or 'governing body' as used in the Housing
Authorities Law shall be construed as meaning
'Commissioners Court', and the term 'city' as
used thereinshall be construed as meaning 'county'
unless a different meaning clearly appears from
the context; and provided further that a housing
authority created for a county shall not be sub-
ject to the limitations provided in clause,(c) of
Section 10 of the Housing Authorities Law with re-
spect to housing projects for farmers of low in-
come.
"The area of operation of a housing authority
created for a county shall include all 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 Housing Authority's right to sell
land previously purchased under general warranty deed without
restriction, when subsequently the Housing Authority deter-
mined that the land, so acquired was excess land and no
longer required for the housing project for which it was
originally purchased. A similiar result was reached in
Vilbig v. Housing Authority 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 Housing Authority, not the City of Dallas,
which disposed of the excess land.
In Miers v. Housing Authority of Dallas, 266 S.W.2d
487 (Tex.Civ.App., 1954 fi d questions on other points,
266 S.W.2d 842, 153 Tex!'2$?&$), it was held:
11
Appellee is a body corporate and
politic. ' iousing Authority of City of Dallas
v. Higginbotham 135 Tex. 158, 143 S.W.2d,79
Syl. 15, page 88,130 A.L.R. 1053. It is a
division of the City of Dallas and exists only
with the consent of the City of Dallas. Con-
sequently it did not have to deposit twice
the amount of the award, or make bond."
Likewise, in Aetna 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 Housing Authority 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
Housing Authority came within the terms of Article 5160,
Vernon's Civil Statutes, since the "words 'any municipality'
as used in said statute included Housing Authorities created
under Article 1269k."
A prior opinion of this office, No. O-6339 (1945),
held that vehicles operated by Housing Authorities of Texas
Cities were not eligible to receive exempt license plates
under Article 6675a-3, Vernon's Civil Statutes. The above
statute exempted vehicles used exclusively by the U.S. Govern-
ment, the State of Texas, counties, cities, or school dis-
tricts. In light of the holding that a housing authority is
a division of a city or county as the case may be, we hereby
overrule Opinion NO. O-6339.
It is well estab1i~;;~Oi.nTexas that a special
. I
Honorable R. L. Lattimore, page 3 (c-760)
county in which it is created except that portion
of the county which lies within the territorial
boundaries of any city."
Consequently, case rulingsaffecting city housing
authorities must also be.-appliedto county housing authorities,
as well as the prior sections of Article 1269k.
Section 8 of Article 1269k provides in part:
"An authority shall constitute a public body
corporate and politic, exercising public and
essential governmental functions, and having all
the powers necessary or convenient to carry out
and effectuate the purposes and provisions of this
Act, including the following powers in addition
to othersherein granted:
11
. . .
"(d) To lease or rent any dwellings, houses,
accommodations, lands, buildings, structures, or
facilities embraced in any housing project and
(subject to the limitations contained in this Act)
to establish and revise the rents or charges there-
for; to own, hold, and improve real or personal
property; to purchase, lease, obtain options upon,
acquire by gift, grant, bequest, devise, or other-
wise any real or personal property or any interest
therein; to acquire by the exercise of the power
of eminent domain any real property; to sell, lease,
exchange, transfer, assign, pledge, or disposesof
any real or personal property or any interest there-
in to insure or provide for the insurance of any
real or personal property or operations of the
authority against any risks or hazards; to procure
insurance or guarantees from the Federal Govern-
ment of the payment of any debts or parts thereof
(whether or not incurred by said authority) se-
cured by mortgages on any property included in
any of its housing projects.
11
. . .
"(h) To exercise all or any part or com-
bination of powers herein granted. No pro-
visions 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 sub-
ject. Harris County Drainage Dist. No. 12 vs. City of Houston,
35 S.W.-2d 18 C A 3 )* Frass vs. Darrouzett Inde-
pendent Sc~ool'D?~ri%"2$ k.6. 751 [Tex.Civ.App., 1925,
error dism.). In the l:tter case, the court held the provi-
sions 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 taxing authority. In the
present instance, Article 1269k is a special statute granting
various enumerated powers to the housing authority and is con-
trolling to that extent.
After a thorough study of Article 1269k and the
above cited cases, it is the opinion of this office that the
Housing Authority of Hidalgo County may by resolution of its
Commissioners declare such property excess property. Such
property will not revert to Hidalgo County. Furthermore, the
Legislature specifically granted the Housing Authority 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 Housing Authority 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 stat-
ute relates to public auction, notice and conveyance, and
appointment of the commissioner by the Commissioners Court.
Just as the Housing Authorities may receive the benefit of
statutes applying to cities and counties, so they must com-
ply with the statutes applying to cities and counties where
such statutes do not conflict with the powers granted to
them in Article 1269k.
SUMMARY
-------
The commissioners of the Housing Authority
of Hidalgo County may declare the subject pro-
perty excess by resolution and 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 in Article 1269k,
Vernon's Civil Statutes. The property will not
revert to Hidalgo County, and the Commissioners
Court of Hidalgo County may not exercise any
control over the disposition of the property.
In view of the decisions of the Courts of
-3661-
-,. .
Honorable R. L. Lattimore, page 6 (c-760)
Civil Appeals holding that a Housing Authority
is a division of the city, Attorney General's
Opinion No. 0-6339 is hereby overruled.
Very truly yours,
WAGGONER CARR
Attorney General of Texas
By:
Wade Anderson
Assistant Attorney General
WA:mh
APPROVED)
OPINION COMMITTBE
W. V. Geppert, Chairman
James McCoy
John Reeves
W. E. Allen
Linward Shivers
APPROVEDFOR THRATTORNEXGRRERAL
By: T. B. Wright
-3662-