Can a regional transportation council close a transit station inside a Texas city?

Plain-English summary

Back in 1992, the citizens of Richland Hills voted to join the Fort Worth Transportation Authority and have been paying a sales tax to support public transportation. The City later called an election asking voters whether to stay in or leave that arrangement, and it wanted a clear picture of everyone's rights and responsibilities, including over a Trinity Railway Express train station inside the city. Two legislators, on the City's behalf, asked the Attorney General two questions: could the Regional Transportation Council close that station, and could the council make the City repay federal and local air quality funds spent on road and sidewalk improvements near the station?

On closing the station, the answer was no. The Regional Transportation Council is the policy body of the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the region's Metropolitan Planning Organization. The statute that governs regional planning commissions gives neither the council of governments nor the Regional Transportation Council any authority over the transportation system or the station. The power to operate the system, and to decide whether to close a station, belongs to the Fort Worth Transportation Authority under chapter 452 of the Transportation Code. So the Regional Transportation Council could not close the station.

On repayment, the Attorney General gave a more cautious answer. No Texas statute expressly lets the Regional Transportation Council collect reimbursement from a city that withdraws from a transportation authority. Chapter 452 does spell out a withdrawing city's financial obligation, but that obligation runs to the Authority, and the Authority's executive committee, not the Regional Transportation Council, determines the amount. As for federal funds the council may have provided for road and sidewalk improvements, the Attorney General said any right to reimbursement would likely depend on the specific terms of the agreements governing those funds. Because the Attorney General does not construe contracts in an opinion, it did not resolve that part.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2011. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later Attorney General opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

What the opinion meant for those who asked

The City of Richland Hills (as the opinion held for it): The opinion told the City that the Regional Transportation Council had no authority to close the Trinity Railway Express station within the City, because that operating power rests with the Fort Worth Transportation Authority under chapter 452.

On the Regional Transportation Council's role (what the opinion clarified): Under the opinion, the council is the policy body of the region's Metropolitan Planning Organization, and the regional-planning-commission statute grants it no power over the transportation system or the station.

On repayment of federal funds (what the opinion left to the contracts): The opinion explained that no Texas statute expressly gives the council a means to seek reimbursement from a withdrawing city, and that any right to recover federal funds spent on station-related improvements would likely be governed by the terms of the relevant agreements, which the Attorney General does not construe.

Common questions

Can a regional transportation council shut down a transit station inside a city?
The opinion concluded no, because the authority to operate the transportation system and close a station belongs to the transportation authority (here, the Fort Worth Transportation Authority) under chapter 452, not to the regional planning council.

Who decides whether to close a Trinity Railway Express station?
The opinion concluded the Fort Worth Transportation Authority holds that power under chapter 452 of the Transportation Code.

If a city leaves a transportation authority, can the regional council bill it for federal funds?
The opinion concluded no Texas statute expressly grants the council that power, and any right to repayment of federal funds would likely depend on the specific agreements governing the funds.

Who sets a withdrawing city's financial obligation to the authority?
The opinion explained that under section 452.659, the Authority's executive committee determines the amount, and the obligation runs to the Authority.

Background and statutory framework

The Fort Worth Transportation Authority is a regional transportation authority under chapter 452 of the Transportation Code. Tex. Transp. Code Ann. §§ 452.001-.720 (West 2007 & Supp. 2010); see id. §§ 452.561-.563 (West 2007). The Regional Transportation Council is the policy body of the North Central Texas Council of Governments, the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization for the Dallas-Fort Worth region. Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Ann. §§ 391.001-.015 (West 2005 & Supp. 2010); 43 Tex. Admin. Code § 15.2(15) (2010); see 23 U.S.C. § 134 (2006 & Supp. II 2008).

Chapter 391 of the Local Government Code, governing regional planning commissions, contains no provision granting the council of governments or the Regional Transportation Council authority over the transportation system or the transit station. Chapter 452 instead vests the Authority with power over operation of the transportation system, including any power necessary or convenient to carry out the chapter, and directs the Authority to cease providing transportation services in a withdrawn unit of election. Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 452.056(a)(1) (West Supp. 2010); id. § 452.054(a) (West 2007); id. § 452.657(a)(1) (West 2007); see Tri-City Fresh Water Supply Dist. No. 2 of Harris Cnty. v. Mann, 142 S.W.2d 945, 946 (Tex. 1940) (recognizing a special district's implied authority reasonably necessary to accomplish a delegated purpose). So the Attorney General concluded the Regional Transportation Council does not have authority to close the station.

On reimbursement, section 452.659 authorizes the Authority's executive committee to determine the financial obligation of a withdrawing city, an obligation that runs to the Authority. Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 452.659(d) (West 2007); id. § 452.001(5); id. § 452.659(a)(1)-(2) (West 2007). No chapter 452 provision or other Texas statute expressly grants the Regional Transportation Council a means of seeking reimbursement from a withdrawing unit of election. Because the parties cited no particular federal statute or contract, and because the Attorney General does not construe contracts in an opinion, it concluded any right to reimbursement of federal funds would likely be dictated by the terms of the relevant agreements.

Citations

Statutes:

• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. §§ 452.001-.720 (West 2007 & Supp. 2010)
• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. §§ 452.561-.563 (West 2007)
• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 452.056(a)(1) (West Supp. 2010)
• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 452.054(a) (West 2007)
• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 452.657(a)(1) (West 2007)
• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 452.659(a)(1)-(2) (West 2007)
• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 452.659(d) (West 2007)
• Tex. Transp. Code Ann. § 452.001(5)
• Tex. Loc. Gov't Code Ann. §§ 391.001-.015 (West 2005 & Supp. 2010)
• 43 Tex. Admin. Code § 15.2(15) (2010)
• 23 U.S.C. § 134 (2006 & Supp. II 2008)

Cases:

• Tri-City Fresh Water Supply Dist. No. 2 of Harris Cnty. v. Mann, 142 S.W.2d 945, 946 (Tex. 1940)

AG opinions referenced:

• Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0690 (2009)

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/greg-abbott/ga-0836
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/2011/ga0836.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from the official PDF. Minor extraction artifacts were corrected; the linked PDF is authoritative.

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
GREG ABBOTT

January 25, 2011

The Honorable Jane Nelson Opinion No. GA-0836
Chair, Committee on Health
and Human Services Re: Authority of the Regional Transportation
Texas State Senate Council over transit related projects located in
Post Office Box 12068 Richland Hills (RQ-0901-GA)
Austin, Texas 78711-2068

The Honorable Todd Smith
Chair, Committee on Elections
Texas House of Representatives
Post Office Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78768-2910

Dear Senator Nelson and Representative Smith:

On behalf of the City of Richland Hills (the "City"), you each pose two questions about the authority of the Regional Transportation Council over a transit station located in the City.[1] Specifically, you both ask:

1) Does the Regional Transportation Council have the authority to close the Trinity Railway Express train station which is inside the city limits of the City of Richland Hills?

2) Does the Regional Transportation Council have the authority to collect repayment by the City of Richland Hills for federal and local air quality funds spent on improvements to roads and sidewalks in the City of Richland Hills related to the transit station?

Nelson Request Letter at 1; see also Smith Request Letter at 1.

You tell us that in 1992 the citizens of the City "voted to join the Fort Worth Transportation Authority [the "Authority"] to establish public transportation" in the City and that a sales tax has been collected in the City for that purpose. See Smith Request Letter at 1. You also tell us that the City has called for an election "to allow the citizens of the city to choose whether to remain in the agreement with [the Authority] or not." Id. You indicate that your questions are prompted to "get a clear understanding of the rights, privileges and responsibilities of all the parties involved with public transportation within the [City, including the] surface streets and rail." Id. at 2. Notwithstanding the fact that the City did not vote to withdraw from the Authority in the recent election, we address your questions at your ongoing request.

The Authority is a regional transportation authority under chapter 452 of the Transportation Code. See TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. §§ 452.001-.720 (West 2007 & Supp. 2010); see also id. §§ 452.561-.563 (West 2007) (subchapter N entitled "Subregional Board in Authority Having No Municipality with Population of More than 800,000"). You provide no information about the Regional Transportation Council ("RTC"), but briefing we received indicates that it is the policy body[2] of the North Central Texas Council of Governments ("NCTCOG").[3] See TEX. LOC. GOV'T CODE ANN. §§ 391.001-.015 (West 2005 & Supp. 2010) (governing regional planning commissions such as the NCTCOG). The NCTCOG is the designated Metropolitan Planning Organization ("MPO") for the Dallas-Fort Worth region. See 23 U.S.C. § 134 (2006 & Supp. II 2008) ("Metropolitan transportation planning"); see also Governor's Designation of NCTCOG as MPO for Dallas-Fort Worth (Aug. 26, 1988) (copy on file with the Opinion Committee).

At issue is a transit station located in the City that is part of the Trinity Railway Express transit system between Dallas and Fort Worth.[4] See RTC Brief at 1. You first ask about the power of the RTC, not the Authority, to close the station. See Nelson Request Letter at 1; Smith Request Letter at 1. Chapter 391 of the Local Government Code, governing regional planning commissions, contains no provision granting authority to the NCTCOG or the RTC over the transportation system or the transit station. See generally TEX. LOC. GOV'T CODE ANN. §§ 391.001-.015 (West 2005 & Supp. 2010) (governing regional planning commissions). Moreover, chapter 452 vests the Authority with power over operation of the transportation system and, thus, the Authority is the entity with power to determine whether to close the transit station under its mandate to cease providing transportation services in the withdrawn member. See TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. § 452.056(a)(1) (West Supp. 2010) (authorizing authority to operate public transportation system in the territory of the authority), 452.054(a) (West 2007) (granting authority "any power necessary or convenient" to carry out chapter 452); see also Tri-City Fresh Water Supply Dist. No. 2 of Harris Cnty. v. Mann, 142 S.W.2d 945, 946 (Tex. 1940) (recognizing special district's implied authority reasonably necessary to accomplish a delegated purpose); TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. § 452.657(a)(1) (West 2007) (providing that the Authority "shall cease providing transportation services in the withdrawn unit of election"). We therefore conclude that the RTC does not have authority to close the transit station located within the City.

You next inquire about RTC's authority to collect from the City reimbursement for federal and local air quality funds spent on improvements related to the transit station. See Nelson Request Letter at 1; Smith Request Letter at 1-2. Section 452.659 of the Transportation Code authorizes the executive committee of the Authority to determine the amount of the financial obligation[5] of a withdrawing city. See TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. § 452.659(d) (West 2007); see also id. §§ 452.001(5) (defining "executive committee" as the "authority directors who serve as the governing body of the authority"); 452.659(a) (specifying the financial obligation of the withdrawing city is "to the authority"). Neither chapter 452 nor any other Texas statute expressly grants the RTC a means of seeking reimbursement from a unit of election that withdraws from a regional transportation authority. See generally id. §§ 452.001-.720 (West 2007 & Supp. 2010).

It has been suggested that the RTC may seek reimbursement because it provided federal funds to the City for improvements to roads and sidewalks for the Transit Station. See Nelson Request Letter at 1 (inquiring about federal and local air quality funds); Smith Request Letter at 1 (same). Neither you nor the parties submitting briefing in connection with this request cite to a particular federal statute or provide copies of a contract or agreement relevant to the federal funding of the transit station at issue here. Though this office does not construe contracts in attorney general opinions, we believe that RTC's right to reimbursement of federal funds, if any, may be dictated by specific terms of any agreements related to the transit station. See Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. GA-0690 (2009) at 3 (stating that this office does not construe contracts).

SUMMARY

Under chapter 452, Transportation Code, the Regional Transportation Council ("RTC") does not have authority to close the Trinity Railway Express transit station located within the City of Richland Hills (the "City").

Any right in the RTC to seek from the City repayment of federal funds expended in relation to the transit station would likely be determined under existing contracts or agreements governing the provision of those funds.

Very truly yours,

DANIEL T. HODGE
First Assistant Attorney General

DAVID J. SCHENCK
Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel

NANCY S. FULLER
Chair, Opinion Committee

Charlotte M. Harper
Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee

[1] See Jane Nelson Request Letter at 1 [hereinafter Nelson Request Letter]; Todd Smith Request Letter at 2 [hereinafter Smith Request Letter] (available at www.texasattorneygeneral.gov).

[2] See 43 TEX. ADMIN. CODE § 15.2(15) (2010) (Tex. Dep't of Transp., Definitions) (defining "Metropolitan planning organization policy board" as the "forum and committee structure (e.g., Regional Transportation Council, Steering Committee, Policy Advisory Committee) established under Section 134 of Title 23, U.S. Code, Section 5303 of Title 49, U.S. Code, and the Governor's Designation as the group responsible for giving an MPO overall transportation guidance").

[3] Brief from RTC at 1 (Aug. 4, 2010) [hereinafter RTC Brief] (copy on file with the Opinion Committee).

[4] You do not provide any information regarding the ownership of the transit station property. See Nelson Request Letter at 1; Smith Request Letter at 1-2. But see TARRANT COUNTY APPRAISAL RECORDS, Property Data Search (indicating the Fort Worth Transportation Authority owns the transit station property), available at http://www.tad.org/Datasearch/datasearch.cfm (last visited Jan. 21, 2011) (searching under Real Estate and giving "Fort Worth" as the owner).

[5] Section 452.659 supplies the following formula: the "total financial obligation of a withdrawn unit of election to the authority is an amount equal to: (1) the unit's apportioned share of the authority's outstanding obligations; and (2) the amount, not computed in Subsection (a)(1), that is necessary and appropriate to allocate to the unit because of financial obligations of the authority that specifically relate to the unit." TEX. TRANSP. CODE ANN. § 452.659(a)(1)-(2) (West 2007). It further defines the authority's outstanding obligations and the unit's apportioned share of those obligations. See id. §§ 452.659(b) (supplying manner by which to determine "authority's outstanding obligations"), 452.659(d) (supplying manner by which to determine "unit's apportioned share").