Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OWNICY GENERAL XAS Honorable Jack N. Fant County Attorney El Paso County Courthouse El Paso, Texas Opinion NO. c-482 Re: Whether the Commissioners Court of El Paso County has the authority to grant an easement for construction of a natural gas underground pipeline across Ascarate Park, a county-establishedpark, Dear Mr. Fant: under the facts stated. You have requested the opinion of this office as to whether the CommissionersCourt of El Paso County has the au- thority to grant an easement for constructionof a natural gas undergroundpipeline across Ascarate Park. You advise us that on October 11, 1937, Cordell Hull, as Secretary of State of the United States, conveyed a certain tract of land to the County of El Paso for public recreationalpurposes. In examin- ing this conveyance we note that the term "public recreational purposes" is repeated several times, and that there is contain- ed therein a reversionaryclause, by virtue of which the land is to revert to the United States in the event "that the County of El Paso shall cease to utilize the said described premises for public recreationalpark purposes. . ." (emphasis wed). Th 1 d conveyed by this deed has been and is now known as Ascarzteagark, and has been and is now operated and maintained by the County of El Paso as a public park. A natural gas company has applied for an easement to install an under- ground gas pipeline across a part of Ascarate Park, and you seek our advice as to the prcpriety of the granting of this easement, in view of the reversionaryclause contained in the conveyance from the United States Government. We have been favored by several able briefs by the various parties involved in this question. In one of these briefs, it was contended that Article 2351, Vernon's Civil.Statutes, provides the authority whereby the County of El Paso may properly grant -2281- Hon. Jack N. Fant, page 2 (C-482) s easement, for the reason that Section 19(e) thereof author- till. izes the county to sell, lease or exchange land'receivedfrom the Federal Government. This contentionmust fall, for the rea- son that Section 19(b) thereof authorizes the county to bind it- self to comply with any and all terms and conditions imposed by the Federal Government as a prerequisiteto the transfer of the land. The County of El Paso, in this case, bound itsel$ ;zu;;e- serve the land wholly as a public recreationalarea. appear that the contract, standing alone, would operate to forbid the county to make any use of the land inconsistentwith a wholly public recreationaluse. If further authority were needed, we have only to look to the case of Zachry vs. City of San Antonio, 157 Tex. 551, 305 S.W.2d 558 (1957-n an exhaustive opinion, Justice Griffin re- viewed the law surroundingthe uses which may be made of land which has been dedicated as a public park, as has Ascarate Park. In this particular area of the law, it does not appear to matter whether the governmentalagency involved is a city or a county; the same limits are imposed upon ~bothtypes of governmentalunit. In Zachry, which dealt with a lease to build an,undergroundpark- ing garage beneath Travis Park in,San Antonio, it was held that the,City had no power to lease where there had been a dedication to public park usage. Admittedly, in the Zachry lease there would have been a loss to the public of approximatelyone-fourth of the park area; the decision of the Court was not based upon the loss factor, but upon the City's lease in violation af the dedication to the public. Justice Garwood's concurring opinion stated that he would have reached a different result from the majority had the lease involved on1 the sub-surface,and result- ed in no loss of land to the pubrry-c(use. In the particular case before us, It is apparently not con- templated that there would be any diminution of the land area available to the public. Nevertheless,it is the opinion of this office that the easement in question would not be consistent with the wholly public recreationaluse insisted upon by the contract to which El Paso County bound itself, and to which Ascarate Park has been dedicated. SUMMARY -- Ascarate Park is dedicated to wholly public use both by contract between El Paso County and the Federal Government,and by the actions of the CommissionersCourt of El Paso County. The Commissioners Court has no power to grant an easement across the -2282- Hon. Jack N. Fant, page 3 (c-482) Park to a private corporation for the installationof an undergroundnatural gas pipeline, for such an easement would not be consistent with a wholly public recreationaluse of the Park. Yours very truly, WAGGONER CARR Attorney General By&& Malcolm L. Quick Assistant MLQ:ms APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE W. 0'.Shultz, Chairman Linward Shivers Milton Richardson Ralph Rash C. L. Snow APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL By: T. B. Wright -2283-