🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
TX JM-201 August 31, 1984

Could Pasadena appoint commissioners to the Port of Houston Authority after its population exceeded 100,000?

Short answer: No. JM-201 concluded that the statutory city appointment power belonged to Houston, the qualifying municipality when the navigation district was created, and did not shift or expand when Pasadena later passed 100,000 residents.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1984. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Texas law, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1984
Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG 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.
Disclaimer: This is an official Texas Attorney General opinion. AG opinions are persuasive authority in Texas courts but are not binding precedent. This summary is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice. The opinion dates from 1984; verify current port-authority, navigation-district, appointment, and municipal law before relying on it.
About this page: The plain-English summary, reader guidance, and Q&A below were written by Ezel based on the official AG opinion. The original opinion (linked on this page as a PDF) is the authoritative source for any reliance.
View original AG opinion (PDF)

Texas AG Opinion JM-201: Pasadena Port Appointments

Plain-English summary

JM-201 concluded that Pasadena's city council could not appoint commissioners to the Port of Houston Authority merely because Pasadena's population had grown beyond 100,000.

"The city council of the city of Pasadena is not entitled to appoint commissioners to the Port of Houston Authority of Harris County."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

The opinion read Water Code section 61.158(b) together with section 61.151. It identified Houston as the qualifying municipality when the navigation district was created and treated Houston as the city holding the appointment authority.

"When the district was created the only city therein with a population of 100,000 or more was Houston. Clearly, the only city then entitled to appoint commissioners was and remains Houston."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

JM-201 also reasoned that the statute fixed a five-member commission. Giving Pasadena another municipal appointment power would increase that number beyond the structure the legislature specified.

"Subsection (a) of section 61.158 provides for the appointment of only five commissioners. If the city of Pasadena were permitted to appoint commissioners, the number would clearly increase, an eventuality which the statute does not contemplate."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1984. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG 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.

Common questions

What appointment power did section 61.158(b) provide?

The quoted statute assigned two commissioner appointments to the city council of the qualifying municipality and two to the county commissioners court.

"Two of the commissioners shall be appointed by a majority of the city council of the municipality having a population of 100,000 or more, and two of the commissioners shall be appointed by a majority of the commissioners court."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

Why did Pasadena's later population growth not trigger appointments?

The opinion said the statutory phrase referred to the municipality identified through the related code provision and the district's creation history, which pointed to Houston.

"The municipality to which section 61.158 refers is the municipality having a population of 100,000 or more set forth in section 61.151 of the code."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

Did the 1921 law cover districts containing a large city later?

Yes, but JM-201 treated that wording as defining which navigation districts fell within the law, not as granting every city that later crossed 100,000 its own appointments.

"The language of Senate Bill No. 93 upon which you rely merely sets forth the brackets of the bill, determining the scope of the statute to districts with a municipality containing 100,000 at the time of, or subsequent to, the bill's passage."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

How many commissioners did the statute contemplate?

Five. Two were appointed by the qualifying city's council, two by the commissioners court, and the fifth served as chairman after election in a joint session.

"The district shall be managed, governed, and controlled by a commission composed of five commissioners."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

Could the AG add Pasadena appointments because the statute did not expressly forbid them?

No. The opinion said that if the legislature intended every municipality reaching the population threshold to appoint commissioners, it would have written that rule.

"If the legislature had intended that every municipality in such district be authorized to appoint commissioners once that municipality reached a population of 100,000, it would have so provided."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

Background and statutory framework

The Port of Houston Authority began as the Harris County Ship Channel Navigation District in 1909 under enabling legislation tied to article III, section 52 of the Texas Constitution.

"The present authority was first created in 1909 as the Harris County Ship Channel Navigation District by enabling legislation passed pursuant to article III, section 52 of the Texas Constitution."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

A 1921 general law applied to navigation districts developing deep-water navigation and containing a municipality of at least 100,000 people. Its commissioner-appointment provision was later codified as Water Code section 61.158.

"Article 8235, V.T.C.S., the statute contained in the 1921 enactment providing for the appointment of commissioners, was, in turn, codified as section 61.158 of the Water Code."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

For statutory interpretation, JM-201 used the words' plain sense and the enactment-time meaning.

"At all times subsequent to its enactment, an act should be given the same meaning that it had at the time of its enactment."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

Citations and references

  • Water Code section 61.158 supplied the five-member commission structure and the city and county appointment provisions.

"Section 61.158. Appointment of Commissioners."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

  • Water Code section 61.151 tied the subchapter to a deep-water navigation district containing the population-qualified city.

"A district, created for the development of deep-water navigation which includes a city with a population of more than 100,000, according to the last preceding federal census, may operate and develop ports and waterways inside the district and extending to the Gulf of Mexico."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

  • Railroad Commission of Texas v. Miller appeared for the plain-sense approach to statutory text.

"Which expresses only the will of the makers of the law, not forced nor strained, but simply such as the words of the law in their plain sense fairly sanction and will clearly sustain."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1984/jm0201.pdf

Source

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain. The linked PDF is authoritative.

The Attorney General of Texas
August 31, 1984
JIM MATTOX
Attorney General

Supreme Court Building Honorable Erwin W. Barton Opinion No. JM-201
P. 0. BOX 12546
Austin. TX. 76711. 2546
Chairman
5121475.2501 Human Services Coa3xittee Re: Whether the city of Pasadena
Telex 9101674.1367 Texas House of Representatives is entitled to representation on
Telecopier 512f475.0266 P. 0. Box 2910 the Port of Houston Authority
Austin, Texas 7t769
714 Jackson, Suite 7CQ
Dallas. TX. 75202.4506 Dear Representative Barton:
214/742-8944
You ask us alwut the appointment of commissioners to the Port of
Houston Authority ,f Harris County, Texas. Section 61.158(b) of the
4024 Alberta Ave., Suite 160
El Paso, TX. 79905.2793
Water Code providc:s that
915/53534sd
[t]wo ol’ the commissioners shall be appointed by a
majorit), of the city council of the municipality
Wl Texas. Suite 700 having zl population of 100,000 or more, and two of
,uston, TX. 77002.3111
the coumd.ssioners shall be appointed by a majority
713/223.5886
of the wmmissioners court.

806 Broadway. Suite 312 You inform us that the population of the city of Pasadena in Harris
Lubbock. TX. 79401.3479 County now exceed:3 100,000 and wish to know whether a majority of the
9W747.5238
city council of Pasadena is thereby entitled to appoint any
conrmlssioners to the board. We conclude that it is not.
4309 N. Tenth. Suite B
McAflen. TX. 76501.1665 The present authority was first created in 1909 as the Harris
51218824547 County Ship Channt!:. Navigation District by enabling legislation passed
pursuant to article III. section 52 of the Texas Constitution. The
200 Main Plaza. Suite 400 legislature enact si. in 1921, Senate Bill No. 93. a general statute
San Antonio. TX. 76205.2797 that applied to nrwigation districts that
512l2254191
have bel!n or may be created for the development of
An Equal Opportunity/
deep w,a:er navigation, ~. having a municipality
Affirmatiw Action Employer contain:ing or hereafter containing one hundred
thousanti population or more as determined by the
last prl:eding census. . . . (Emphasis added).

                           Acts   1921.   37th Lzg..  2nd C.S..   ch. 30, 51, at 53.       Article   8235,
                           V.T.C.S.,    the statute  contained   in the 1921 enactment     providing    for
                           the appointment     cf commissioners.   was. in turn,  codified     as section
                           61.158 of the Watl?:: Code and provides    as follows:

Honorable Erwin W. Barton - Page 2 (JM-201)

             Section      61.158.           Appointment            of   Commissioners

             (a)  If the provisions       of this    subchapter  are                                        .
         adopted   by a d:L.rtrfct.      the  district     shall  be
         managed, governed,    and controlled      by a commission
         composed    of   five  commissioners,       who shall    be
         subject   to   the c;upervlsion     and control      of the
         board.

              (b)     Tvo   of    the    commissioners         shall     be
         appointed    by a madority     of the city council         of the
                                                                                                            I
         municipality      having    a population       of    100,000    or                                 !
         more,    and    two ;‘f    the    cossuissioners       shall    be
         sinted         by a majority         of   the     commissioners
         court.

             (c)   The chad.rman of the commission       shall    be
         the fifth    member ;md shall  be elected   by majority
         vote of the city, council     and commissioners      court
         meeting    in joint   session   called   by the    county
         judge.-   (Emphasis added).

  It is suggested          that    the ‘above underscored        language      from Senate

Bill No. 93 defining the s,:ope of the bill, i.e. districts having a
municipality containing or hereafter containinrO.000 population or
more, indicates legislattir~r intent that the governing body of 9
municipality located within such district which reaches a population
of 100,000 after the creat:ion of the district is entitled to appoint
commissioners. We disagrea: for two reasons.

   When called       upon    to       interpret           a statute,           we can   offer   only   an

interpretation

         which expresses    only the will of the makers of the
         law, not forced     nor strained,     but simply  such as
         the words of thti! law In their       plain  sense fairly
         sanction  and will    clearly  sustain.

Railroad Coxm~ission of Texas v. Miller, 434 S.W.2d 670, 672 (Tex.
1968) quoting Simmons v. I:!=, 220 S.W. 66, 70 (Tex. 1920). At all
times subseauent to its c!r.actment. an act should be given the same
meaning that it had at tha! time of its enactment. Ma&y v. Robison,
56 S.W.2d 438 (Tex. 1932); Townsend v. Terrell. 16 S.W.2d 1063 (Tex.
1929).

   Section    61.158(b)      of       the   code        provides        that

          [t]wo of     the commissioners    shall be appointed    by a
          majority     of the :ity    council    of the municipality

Honorable Erwin W. Barton - :?age 3 (JM-201)

         having a populatl~n          of        100,000     or more.   .   . .
         (Emphasis added).

The municipality to which r,ectlon 61.158 refers IS the municipality
having a population of 100,COO or more set forth in section 61.151 of
the code. Section 61.151 of the code provides the following in
pertinent part:

               (a)    A district,     created    for the development        of
          deep-water      navigation      which includes      a city with a
          population      of more: than 100,000,          according    to the
          last     preceding      federal     census,     may operate      and
          develop      ports   ard waterways         inside    the district
          and extending        to the Gulf of Mexico.               (Emphasis
          added).

When the district was crea’:,! d the only city therein with a population
of 100,000 or more was Houston. Clearly, the only city then entitled
to appoint commissioners wz and remains Houston.

   Moreover,      subsection         (a)    of  section      61.158     provides     for   the

appointment of only five crnmissioners. If the city of Pasadena were
permitted to appoint commir~r;ioners. the number would clearly increase,
an eventuality which the statute does not contemplate. If the
legislature had intended ttat every municipality in such district be
authorized to appoint commissioners once that municipality reached a
population of 100.000, it would have so provided. The language of
Senate Bill No. 93 upon whi:h you rely merely sets forth the brackets
of the bill, determining the scope of the statute to districts with 5
municipality containing 101,000 at the time of, or subsequent to, the
bill’s passage. According.L:r, we conclude that the city of Pasadena is
not entitled to appoint c~smissioners to the district in the manner
set forth in section 61.158:b) of the Water Code.

                                     SUMMARY

              The city   coun:ll   of the city of Pasadena is not
          entitled    to appc’int   commissioners  to the Port of
          Houston Authority      of Harris County.




                                                          JIM      MATTOX
                                                          Attorney  General      of   Texas

TOM GREEN
First Assistant-Attorney General
Honorable Erwin W. Barton - Page 4 (JM-201)

DAVID R. RICHARDS
Executive Assistant Attorney General

Prepared by Jim.Hoellinger
Assistant Attorney General

APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE

Rick Gilpin, Chairman
David Brooks
Colin Carl
Susan Garrison
Jim Moellinger
Nancy Sutton

                                  p.   887

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1984 opinion on this question. Ezel checks the current Texas statutes and case law and answers your specific situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer cites the law it relies on.