Case Information
*1 Honorabia Charles R. Martin
County Auditor
E&rrison canty I Marshall, Texas
Dsar Sir: OPinion No. o-4116 Ril Logallty of the Ear&son County Cmmissioners' Court oamtraoting with the City-of War&all to fur- ruish fire-fighting facilities to cer+%in~defined fire districts only, outside the civ limita but wit&in an eight-mile radius of the aity'a aenter, to the excluizion of the remainder of the oounty; and O. related question.
Your letter requesting the opinion of this department on the quo+
tions stated therein reads ia pwt as fallowrr
"The City of Marshall has made a proposal'to the Cemissionec8' Cauz$ of Harrison County to enter into an agreemexrt~tith the City of Hnrshall, vdzersbg the Countyno~Q$‘bs Tequfred to first organiz#,flre distrioto in .,tbiokly populited outQ$ag settlommts Ilthin L radiusof eight (8) tiles frmthe center of the City of Marshall, Pnd in said agreement the County would be required to pay a stipul&ed sum to the City of Marshall ror each run mad&by the City Fire Da$arta~nt to the designated fire dis- trict (thereby exoluding all other se&ions of the County), and under said contract or agreement the Coun@ in turn would be required to make a aontraot with the individual property owners within the designated fire distriot. That the propew owrs would be required to ppy the ooun*, or rather reimburse the County, for eachnm made *the City Fire Depart- ment for a stipulated SIIBI charged the countg Iy tie City.
"Question No. One: Hould the Commissioners * court of Halvison countg be. authorized under the law to enter Into a contract tith the City of Marshall to provide for fire fighting facilities for oertain defined fire districts outside the city limits, but within the county and within a radius of eight (8) miles from the center of the Citg of Marshall, and at the same time . exclude all other sections of the oountg?
Hon. Charles R. *tin, page 2 (O-4116)
*Question No. Twoa Would the Commissioner8* Court of Earrison County be .' authorized under the law to enter into above contraot with private property owners in certain designated areas outlying the city limits of bkrshall, Texas, and lying within the county and within a radius of eight miles from the center of the City of Marshall, thereby axoluding all othersactions of the county, whereby for a oertain stipulated sum to bs pid toths aounty by certain pr0pm-Q owners in the firo district, the county would, in turn, furnish to the propee owners in said fire distriat, fire fighting facili- ties under the above described contract with the City of Marshall, and thereby exoluding all other motions of the County?"
House Bill Noo. 262, dots of the 47th Legislature, Regular Session, (Article 2351a-1, %ernon's Annotated Civil Statutes) provides in part: " . The Commissioners* Court of any county of this State shall aisc have tlk*authority to enter into oontracts with any city, town, or village within the county and/or adjoining aounties, upon such terms and conditions as shall be agreed upon between the Commissioners ' Court and the governing body of snob city, town, or village, for the use ofthe fire truoks and other fire fight- ing squipnent of the city, town, or village . e ."
Generally speaking, the authority of the oonrmissionars‘ court as the governing body to make oontratcts in its behalf is strictly limited to that conferred either expressly or by fair or necessary implication by the Constitu- tion and law8 of the St+. (Tarrant County vs. Rogers, 125 S.W. 592; Baldwin The authorityto aontraot on behalf of the VS. Travis county, 00 S.H. 480). count is vested in the'comnissioners' oourt in absence of a statute authoxiz- ing some other agency to contraot3 and if an agreement is not made through or sanotioned by suoh agency, it binds neither the county nor the individual.
(Sparks vs. Kaufman QunQ, 194 S.W. 605; Amarioan Disinfecting Co. vs. Free- &one County, 193 S.W. 440: Texas Juriaprodancd, Vol. 11, pe 630). The conmissioners' court must havu authority of law for its contract. and, if the authority has-keen given, a reasonable construction of itwill be given to effect its purpose. (Conmissioners' Court VS. Wkllaae, 15 S.We (2d) 525)a
Article 2351~1-1, supra, specifically authorizes the commissioners' oourt of any county of this State to enter into contracts with aqg oity, toam, or village *thin the county and/or adjoining counties upon suchterms and oonditions as shall be agreed upon %&weaa the oonmissioners' court and the governing body of the city, town, or -village for the use of fire trucks and other flm fighting equipment of the city/town, or village. Therefore, Sa reply to your first question, it is our opinion that the oonmissioners' court of Harrison County is authoriasd under the law to enter into a contract with the city of Marshall to provide for fire fighting facilities for certain defined districts or areas outside of the oity limits whichare tiithin the county and v&thin the radius of sight miles from the center of the City of Marshall, and at the same tIme‘axclude all other sections of the countg.
Eon e mari.ai. It. &&in, psge 3 (O-4116) m think that the distanoa from the oily or the areas to b included are' imnatsrial and that the ccmmissioners' court oan legally contract with the city to provide for fire fighting facilities upon such teams and con- ditions as shall be agreed upon between the commissioners' court and the governing body of the city0
In answer to vour second question, you are rsspsctfuliy advised
that it is our opinion that the commissioners' court of said county has no authozity whatsoever to enter into the alive mentioned oontract or co&r&s tith private property owners for the purposes heretofore mention- ed. There is no authority of law for such contracts.
Trusting that the foregoing fully answers your inquiry, we are Yours very t nlly ATTORNEYGRNERlUOFTS?LLS By /s/Ardell Williams Ardell Williams Assistant APPROVED APRIL '3, 1942
/=I GROVSRSEUERS BFF%?OVRD FIRST AsSISTAm Opinion Cozmuittes A~ORXEYGWEJi&L l&BITE ,.
chpiman ~~'