🧪 TEST MODE ACTIVE Use test card: 4242 4242 4242 4242
TX JM-44 July 22, 1983

Could Harris County accept a donated swimming pool, charge pool admission and camping fees, and use the revenue to operate the pool?

Short answer: Yes. JM-44 concluded that the Harris County park board could accept the donated pool, charge admission and camping fees, and use pool-admission revenue for the pool's operation, maintenance, and regulation.

Apply this to your situation

This page answers the general question as of 1983. Ezel answers yours: what it means for your facts, under current Texas law, with citations.

Currency note: this opinion is from 1983
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 AG opinions are persuasive authority in Texas courts but are not binding precedent.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 1983 and relies on statutes then governing Harris County park powers; verify current 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-44: County Park Pool and Camping Fees

Plain-English summary

JM-44 concluded that Harris County's park board could accept a donated swimming pool for an existing county park. Section 11(b) of the statute then governing the board expressly allowed it to accept grants and gratuities for county parks with the approval of the board and commissioners court.

"In our opinion, section 11(b) clearly authorizes the park board to accept the donation of a swimming pool."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

The opinion also concluded that the board could charge admission to the pool. It read the power to make reasonable rules concerning park use as including admission charges for a facility the board was authorized to operate.

"We believe that section 11(a) of article 6079e furnishes the requisite statutory authority for the park board to charge admission to a swimming pool located in a county park."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

"In our view, the authority 'to adopt and promulgate all reasonable regulations and rules concerning the use of any park' includes the authority to charge admission to a facility which the board is empowered to operate."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Admission revenue could be used to maintain and operate the pool and to cover the costs of regulating its use. The same reasoning supported county-imposed camping fees.

"In our opinion, section 11(a) of article 6079e furnishes sufficient authority for the park board to apply any funds derived from admission charges to the maintenance and operation of the pool."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

"If the park board may contract with the concessionaire to operate camping facilities within a county park, it may itself impose camping fees."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1983. 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 did the rotary club offer to donate?

It offered a swimming pool to be built in an existing Harris County park.

"You state that a rotary club has offered to donate a swimming pool to Harris County to be built in an existing county park."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Could the county park board accept the pool?

Yes. The statute authorized the board to accept grants and gratuities for parks it administered, subject to approval by the board and commissioners court.

"The Board is hereby authorized to accept grants and gratuities (for the benefit of any park or parks administered by the Board or for the use of the Board in carrying out its powers and duties with respect to any such park or parks) in any form and from any source approved by the Board and the Commissioners Court."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Why could the board charge pool admission?

JM-44 treated admission charges as reasonable rules concerning use of a park facility that the board had power to operate.

"[T]he authority 'to adopt and promulgate all reasonable regulations and rules concerning the use of any park' includes the authority to charge admission to a facility which the board is empowered to operate."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Could a private concessionaire charge for park facilities?

The opinion read the governing statutes and cited case together as allowing the county to contract for park-facility operation and sell or lease park concessions. It also said the statute impliedly authorized the concessionaire to charge fees.

"Article 6079e has been construed together with article 6081e, V.T.C.S., to mean that a county may: enter into any contract, lease or other agreement with any person, real or artificial, to acquire, construct or operate, etc., any park facilities and to sell or lease park concessions for the operation of all concerns as are consistent with the operation of a public park."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

"Article 6079, V.T.C.S., impliedly authorizes such a concessionaire to charge fees for operating facilities within a county park."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Why could the county charge fees directly if it could use a concessionaire?

The opinion applied the converse of a prior AG opinion's principle: if a county could contract for a service, it could perform the service itself.

"We believe that the converse of the principle announced in Attorney General Opinion H-1123 is equally true: if a county may contract to have services performed, it may perform such services directly."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Could admission revenue pay pool expenses?

Yes. JM-44 said the park board could apply the admission money to pool maintenance and operation.

"[S]ection 11(a) of article 6079e furnishes sufficient authority for the park board to apply any funds derived from admission charges to the maintenance and operation of the pool."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Could Harris County impose camping fees?

Yes, under the same reasoning used for pool fees.

"If the park board may contract with the concessionaire to operate camping facilities within a county park, it may itself impose camping fees."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Background and statutory framework

In 1964, the Harris County Commissioners Court adopted the provision allowing it to exercise a park board's powers.

"In 1964, the commissioners court of Harris County adopted the provisions of section 2 of article 6079e, V.T.C.S., which permit a commissioners court to exercise the powers of a park board."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

The opinion began from the rule that commissioners courts could exercise only powers specifically conferred by the constitution or statutes, while retaining broad discretion in exercising express powers.

"It is well established that commissioners courts may exercise 'only such powers as the Constitution itself or the statutes have specifically conferred upon them.'"
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

"Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has stated that commissioners courts have 'broad discretion in exercising powers expressly conferred on them.'"
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Section 11(a) authorized reasonable rules for use of parks administered by the board, and section 11(b) addressed grants and gratuities. Section 10 separately authorized contracts for park-facility operation.

"The Board shall have the power and authority, subject to the approval of the Commissioners Court, to adopt and promulgate all reasonable regulations and rules concerning the use of any park or parks administered by said Board."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

"Furthermore, the board is specifically empowered by section 10 of article 6079e to contract for the operation of park facilities."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Holding

"Harris County is authorized by section 11(a) of article 6079e, V.T.C.S., to charge fees for admission to a swimming pool located in a county park."
Source: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1983/jm0044.pdf

Citations and references

Statutes discussed by JM-44:

Cases cited by JM-44:

  • "Canales v. Laughlin, 214 S.W.2d 451, 453 (Tex. 1948)" Official PDF
  • "Lovett v. Harris County, 462 S.W.2d 405, 409-410 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 1970, writ ref'd n.r.e.)" Official 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

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General

July 22, 1983

Honorable Mike Driscoll
Harris County Attorney
1001 Preston, Suite 634
Houston, Texas 77002

Opinion No. JM-44

Re: Authority of Harris County to charge admission to swimming pool in county park and related questions

Dear Mr. Driscoll:

You have requested our opinion regarding the authority of Harris County to charge admission to a swimming pool located in a county park, and related questions. You state that a rotary club has offered to donate a swimming pool to Harris County to be built in an existing county park. You first ask whether Harris County may accept such a donation.

In 1964, the commissioners court of Harris County adopted the provisions of section 2 of article 6079e, V.T.C.S., which permit a commissioners court to exercise the powers of a park board. Section 11 of that statute provides:

Sec. 11. (a) The Board shall have the power and authority, subject to the approval of the Commissioners Court, to adopt and promulgate all reasonable regulations and rules concerning the use of any park or parks administered by said Board.

(b) The Board is hereby authorized to accept grants and gratuities (for the benefit of any park or parks administered by the Board or for the use of the Board in carrying out its powers and duties with respect to any such park or parks) in any form and from any source approved by the Board and the Commissioners Court, including the United States Government or any part thereof, the State of Texas or any agency thereof, any private or public corporation, or any other person or persons.

(c) Such Board shall have the right to sue and be sued in its own name.

In our opinion, section 11(b) clearly authorizes the park board to accept the donation of a swimming pool.

You next ask whether Harris County may charge admission to the swimming pool. It is well established that commissioners courts may exercise "only such powers as the Constitution itself or the statutes have 'specifically conferred upon them'." Canales v. Laughlin, 214 S.W.2d 451, 453 (Tex. 1948). Nevertheless, the Supreme Court has stated that commissioners courts have "broad discretion in exercising powers expressly conferred on them." Id. We believe that section 11(a) of article 6079e furnishes the requisite statutory authority for the park board to charge admission to a swimming pool located in a county park. In our view, the authority "to adopt and promulgate all reasonable regulations and rules concerning the use of any park" includes the authority to charge admission to a facility which the board is empowered to operate. V.T.C.S. art. 6079e, §11(a).

Furthermore, the board is specifically empowered by section 10 of article 6079e to contract for the operation of park facilities. Article 6079e has been construed together with article 6081e, V.T.C.S., to mean that a county may:

enter into any contract, lease or other agreement with any person, real or artificial, to acquire, construct or operate, etc., any park facilities and to sell or lease park concessions for the operation of all concerns as are consistent with the operation of a public park.

Lovett v. Harris County, 462 S.W.2d 405, 409-410 (Tex. Civ. App. - Houston [1st Dist.] 1970, writ ref'd n.r.e.). Article 6079, V.T.C.S., impliedly authorizes such a concessionaire to charge fees for operating facilities within a county park.

In Attorney General Opinion H-1123 (1978), this office held that the Dallas County commissioners court was authorized, with the cooperation of the sheriff or criminal district attorney, to provide funds for a contract with a rape crisis center for the performance of services which the county itself might have performed. This conclusion was based on the broad authority of counties in the administration of justice. The opinion stated: "Since the county may perform the services itself, it may contract to have them done."

In our opinion, it would be anomalous to conclude that a county may contract with a concessionaire for the operation of park facilities, including a swimming pool, and that the concessionaire may charge admission fees, but that the county itself may not charge such fees. We believe that the converse of the principle announced in Attorney General Opinion H-1123 is equally true: if a county may contract to have services performed, it may perform such services directly. Thus, the park board is empowered to charge admission fees to the swimming pool.

You also ask whether funds derived from admission to the pool may be used to maintain and operate the pool, and to defray the costs incurred in regulating its use. In our opinion, section 11(a) of article 6079e furnishes sufficient authority for the park board to apply any funds derived from admission charges to the maintenance and operation of the pool.

Your final question is whether Harris County may charge camping fees in connection with the operation of a county park. We believe that the principles discussed above are also applicable here. If the park board may contract with the concessionaire to operate camping facilities within a county park, it may itself impose camping fees.

SUMMARY

Harris County is authorized by section 11(a) of article 6079e, V.T.C.S., to charge fees for admission to a swimming pool located in a county park.

Very truly yours,

JIM MATTOX
Attorney General of Texas

TOM GREEN
First Assistant Attorney General

DAVID R. RICHARDS
Executive Assistant Attorney General

Prepared by Rick Gilpin
Assistant Attorney General

APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE

Rick Gilpin, Acting Chairman
Jon Bible
David Brooks
Susan Garrison
Jim Moellinger

Get today's answer for your situation

You just read a 1983 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.