Case Information

*1 The Attorney, General of Texas Dectrber 21, 1984 JIM MAfTOX

ttorney General Ronorable Jim Mapel Opinion NO. m-257 - ,preme Court Bullding Crlmiual District Axorney 0. aox 12E48 ndstln. TX. 79711-2545 Brasoria County Cowthouse Re: Whether a hospital district 512l47529Ql Angleton, Texas 7’7Ii15 may acquire by lease or purchase vex BlLvS7C1397 real property outside its bound- ,IeCOpi~r 512l4750299 aries ‘*4 Jackson. Sulle 700 Dear Mr. Mapel: illas, TX. 7!!202.45C6 _ r4i742gBU

You aak whether the Sweeny Hospital District may acquire, by

lease or purchase in fee simple. real property located outside boundaries when swb property is deemed necessary for the efficient 124 Alberta Ave.. SUltO 160 .; Paso. TX. 7900527s3 operation of the hospital We conclude that the Sweeny 9151533.S4S4 Hospital District :Lacks the authority to purchase itr boundaries to fulfill the district’s purpose of providing regular aedical and hospital care for its inhabitants. ram. we 700

Hc.~sto”. TX. 770023111 Grants of powr to hospital district8 and limitations on the - mf2233a88

exercise of that ;?ower depend upon the constitution and upon each hospital distrlct’li enabling statute. Attorney General Opinion M-171 595 Broadway. Suite 312 (1967) ; see Moore YL Edna Rosultal District, 449 S.W.Zd 508 (Tax. Civ. ubbock. TX. 79401.2479 APP * - %iii:iSti 1969. writ ref’d n.r.e.). Special purpose 381747.5239 district8 have on3.y the authority which is clearly granted by the legislature. Tri-Xty Fresh Water Supply District No. 2 of Harris ‘309 N. Tenth. Suite S County V. Hannn? S.W.2d 945, 948 (Tex. 1940); Lower Nueces River kAllen. TX. 78501-1085 Water Supply District v. Cartwright. 274 S.W.Zd 199. 207 (Tex. Civ. ,W882-4547 APP . - San Anton:;) 1954, writ ref’d n.r.e.); see Moore v. Edna - HOEPita District, >n. 00 win Pius. suite 490 ian Antonio. TX. 7S2952797 The Fifty-eighth Legislature authorized creation of the Sweeny 51212254191 Hospital District ..n accordance with article IX

Texas Constitution.’ Act8 1963, 58th Leg.. ch. &.‘??l yVP,‘C? art. 4494q-13). The enabling statute provides. in part, as follow: Sec. 2. The hospital district herein author- ized to be created, shall provide for the esta- blishment of a hospital system to furnish medical and hosl~.tsl care to person8 residing in said hospital-district by the purchase, construction, acquisit Tona. repair, or renovation of buildings and impxcvements; and the equipping of same and the adml&tration thereof for hospital purposes. Such district shall assume full responsibility *2 Honorable Jim Mapel - Page 2 (m-257)

providing medical and hospital care its needy inhabitants.

. . . . 9. A hospital organized in Sec. nursuance of this Act shall have the right and power of eminent domain for the purpose of acquiring by condem%ion any and all property any kind or charact&. resl, personal or mixed, or any interest therei,-, including outright ownership of such property in fee simple absolute, within the boundaries of tE8 said district, necessary or convenient to the clxercise of the rights, power, privileges and funcc::lons conferred upon it by this Act, in the manner provided by General Law with respect to condemnal::.on . . . . (Emphssis added).

Acts 1963, 58th Leg., ch. 131i at 361. The only express reference to acquiring real property limitli the district’s power of condemnation to property “within the boundaries of the said district.” Nevertheless, the purpose for the restriction also logically applies to non-condem- nation acquisitions of properl:y.

Thus, neither the enabl:lng statute nor the constitutional pro- vision upon which it is based expressly prohibit8 acquisitions of real property the district. However, because special purpose district8 have only the authority clearly granted by the legislature, the determinative? question is whether the legislature has clearly granted the Sweeny Hospital District the authority to acquire not merely whether real property outside of ~I:II boundaries, legislature has not prohibil:c!d such action. See Attorney General Opinion WW-914 (1960). In c:he Sweeny Hospital-strict’s enabling statute, the legislature gra~,ted authority to acquire

but did not clearly l:he scope of the power.

Because the constitution does not require that the boundaries of a special purpose political subdivision include all area8 in which the c:he legislature may authorize operations subdivision has operations, outside a district’8 San Jacinto River Conservation and Reclamation District V. Sellf:rs, 184 S.W.2d 920. 923-24 (Tex. 1945); State ex rel Grimes County IzFpayers Association v. Texas Municipal Power Agency, 565 S.W.2d 258-(Tex. Civ. App. - Houston [lst Dist.] 1978. no writ); Harris County Water Control and Improvement Dj~strict No. 58 v. City of Houston. 357 S.W.2d 789 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston 1962, writ ref’d n.r.e.); Lover NUaCe8 River Water Supply District v. Cartwright, supra. However- the cases allowing acquisitions of real outside the houndarles of ‘a special district usually deal property with a specific legislative Srant of authority to acquire property vithin or without the district. See, e.g., San Jacinto River

?* 1144

Honorable Jim Mapel - Page 11 (311-257)

Conservation and Reclamntio~ District v. Sellers, rupra; Lower Nueces River Water Supply District~r. Cartwright, B.

The court in State ex Eel Grimes County Taxpayers Association v. Texas Municipal Power Agency. supra , upheld inclusion of a portion of Grimes County within the TlUta8 Municipal Power Agsncy’s [hereinafter TMPA1 operating area that was not within its boundaries although the enabling statute did not expressly authorize acquisitions of property See V.T.C.S. srt. 1435a. 14(2). outside of the TMPA’s boundaries. However, the court emphasized that rwss undisputed that from the inception of planning to establish the TMPA, it was contemplated that certain areas outside its boundaries were to be acquired as sources of lignite coal to carry out the purpose of the TMPA of producing Further, even when a statute does authorize acquisitions electricity.

outside district boundaries, the acquisitions must further the purpose for creation of the district. Harris County Water Control and Improvement DiStriCt No. 28 V. City of Houston. supra; Attorney Therefore, determination of the General oninion WW-914 (1960). legislative intent for c&&n of the Sweeny Hospital District is necessary.

The legislature is not required to set forth in detail all the provisions governing the e.uthority of a political subdivision in carrying out its legislative purpose, State ex rel Grimes County Taxpayers Association v. T~?:tas Municipal Power Agency, supra at 273, and the courts vi11 occa&nally add words or phrase8 to a statute when necessary to give effect to-legislative intent when the intent is clearly disclosed by the ::t!mainder of the statute. Sweeny Hospital District v. Carr, 378 S.W.ld 40, 47 (Tex. 1964). Eowever, we conclude that the lack of an express grant to the Sweeny Hospital District of authority to acquire property outside its boundaries, and the express limit on the exercise of its eminent domain power to vithin its boundaries that the legislature did not intend the to have the implied power to acquire property located outside of its

Further, fundsmcztal purpose for the hospital di8triCt militates against implied authoritation the acquisition of facilities outside the boundaries of the The sole purpose of the Sweeny Hospital District is to provide medical ar.d hospital care to persons residing ,111 the hospital district. Acts 1963. 58th Len.. ch. 135. 52. Conce Stably, a medical facility locat.ed outside th; district’s boundaries ‘&ny dc~near enough to the district to serve its inhabitants efficientl:r.~ Although purchasing an existing facility outside the district could be less expensive than purchasing one inside the district and less expensive than constructing a new facility, the inhabitants of a hospital district will usually best be served through medical fa~::Llities located within their district. A hospital district’s difficulty in serving its inhabitants within its boundaries may indicate a need for a change in district boundaries rather than a need for acquisitions facilities outside *4 Honorable Jim Mapel - Page 4 UM-257)

boundarier. The legislature uay provide a solution to this problem by authorizing expansion of the boundaries of a hospital district even when it is alreadv in creat!.oo and subiect to bonded indebtedness.

See Stamford Hospital District. v. Vinsoi. 517 S.W.Zd 358 (Tex. Civ. App. - Rastland 1974, wit r;f’d n.r.e.1; see also Carter V. Aamlin Hospital District. 538 S.W.211 671 (Tex. Civ. App. - Eastland 1976.

writ ref’d n.r.e. .

Rowever, we note that ill fulfilling its constitutional duty to assume full responsibility for providing medical and hospital care for its needy inhabitants. the hospital district has the authority to pay for the medical expense of cwndlng a needy inhabitant to a medical facility outside the district because of a temporary or emergency lack of sufficient medical or hospital facilities. Attorney General Opinion M-171 (1967); see also Attorney General Opinion h-870 (1971).

We conclude only that the S&eny Hospital District may not acquire located outside the district to fulfill its purpose of providing regular medical and hospital care for inhabitants of the

The Sweeny Hos+tal District has only the :La clearly granted by authority which the legislature. The lack of an express grant to the district of authority to acquire property outside its boundaries, the express limit on the exercise of eminent domain power to within its and th,e fundamental purpose for the providing medical and hospital that hospital care to its inhabitants legislature did not intend the district to have the authority to ac,quire property

of its boundaries.

, J k

Very truly yo iv

JIH MATTOX Attorney General of TLxas TOM GREEN

First Assistant Attorney General

DAVID R. RICHARDS

Executive Assistant Attorney General

RICK GILPIN

Chairman. Opinion Committee *5 (JM-257)

Ronorable Jim &lapel - Page 5

Prepared by Jennifer Riggs

Assistant Attorney General

APPROVED:

OPINION COMMITTEE

Rick Cllpin, Chairman

Co1111 Carl

Susan Garrison

Jim Moellinger

Jennifer Riggs

Nancy Sutton

pi 1147