HomeMy WebLinkAbout00072237cn
C
CD
cn
3
N
1
X'
X
cn
0
cn
N
.A
N
O
O
N
O
c c
cC/)
X
CD
m
CD
CD
o o 3 °: m c CD c
m rn E Q
. cn m amvow 0 - 0
cn
O
a)
0 CD
=3
7
cn
C1
° :3 cn > ° `°—�� G�3
n
a)
v
o
O
a
3 (n
-0 cn ' CL � o m N � o c� 0. 0 -0 o
::
cn
•',
S 0 0 '�, 0 cr cn CD C CD cn
w m
D m m°�° q cn v .a m CD S.
.�' N CD N? C D c O O . O N m 2 3 cn
CL 3 u,
_
p � � fl? O � 0 < a M N (°D � v CD =r
CD
o o 3 °: m c CD c
m rn E Q
. cn m amvow 0 - 0
Cl) m ter.
(n o� m m o� B
C -- m CD CD
o
0 CD
: :r CD=r0 = <CD3a:30
v 3 m CD C
>
m
° :3 cn > ° `°—�� G�3
cn
o ��'o`Za, o cr
o c� o C o cn cn a) CD a o:
v
o
m CCD �, v s
3 (n
-0 cn ' CL � o m N � o c� 0. 0 -0 o
d =r O r3 �' C� N
CD �
a N a) A m S _r
O v O > cn
7 Cn CD C 3
+ O_ O T O N O .+ CD
C% a) v
CD `G N a
m c m
Cr v a-
c 0- c g
CD <. M m �.
_a N a 3 -
3 < cn n
cD ° 3 ° cn
W m - CD v
CD N O N
c CD a c.nn 7.
S i
0 O -h W O
"
j Co v -h
C > .. O
CD 3
CD ;;t X
v " cn m
=3 cn
C1 ? CD � �•
N a) (D — S
0 . cr v
O (D 7 CD
7 Ca'
n N n 7 X C O• C n O OD r
.� .0 W � �• 0 CD :3 O a) 0 cn
C a� O CD X C N p <
CD .
a) n
j N D d CD .O' � 0 � n v -�+. O.
�., a 3 c ..c °
O O CD CD S ? -� (n 3
a) n? cn — m .0 O� C p O
CD = O a1 Cn O ^ C 3 Cr — °
O n 7 M 3 -' 'D �' " CD O �. CAD CD
a CL m 0 W °- `<< ° C S° m e
d
� =r -' o? Q Q y cn cn S. a
cn C C m
m o o v, m n 3
L 0 3 cn cn o cn o o CD n cn a) = 3 in ..., cn
m cn c p' '" Q c O � cn
cn 3 0 .c � O c 0 0- a) M m s
s m 3 �. 3 o 2) m a a c- CD �.
n cn v `< 0 m N o O w�
,Cr 0 a• -�� _ cn m
3 c , /) )
o Cl) a 0 .�
CD a �' =r
co
v
0
n
a)
0
(D
O
c
O
h
m
C-
v
a)
n
CD
cn
cn
O�
P of
f
e--
O�
U)
c
cr
m
3
v
X
X
p
c
cn
� _ -,
co
(A
CD
X C CD
.ter
O (D Q
O
O
0
0? (D
o
a)
CL
a o 0 o m
Pw
CD -*
n
=r
CD
cl0 (DC
�0 :3 C4
c
m
v=
-
cn
CDC
p
=
c
CD
3N <.
CD a
D
cn
3
a
o 0 0
n
CD
3
CD
-
CD
u
CD
o
l<
CD
m
v
N
O
(D
(D * - n
O
N
(n
(D
7
o
=
� �
n
° --4 cn
O
N
N 3
N
N
O
N
A
N
0
0
s--i
2 CD S
' `< �l
� _ -,
0D
-0 O
CD
X C CD
.ter
O (D Q
O
O
0
0? (D
=r o
' 3&
w (n co 3'
a o 0 o m
(D
CD
C
C
m
=. C C
3
CD
cl0 (DC
�0 :3 C4
c
m;•o�s
v=
-
c m _a
CDC
`� ao 3 3
C
c
°°'N
3N <.
CD a
m
o*
-0 3 CD
o 0 0
n
m 3
cn :3 N)
C)
(D N
n��
o
l<
��,
3�o
N N
m
N
O
(D
(D * - n
O
N
N
m O�
� :E -� � 0_ � --h
(D
W N
� �
n
° --4 cn
O
N
N 3
0 -� c
v, n
N
C/) N
CD CD
=
O p c
co
N
O
CD
N
O N N
:3 CD
o' � m
CD
-o0 3
m m
=• 3' c
p'
N
CL
Ch cn
N
a `G
CD
a N (D
W O � w Q
a) = 0 CD N C
3
3
CD
(�
m
m s
(n Z
N O N fD
Q a (D O=
=r
NO co
a N CD
CY
O
0 0 S a) CD
0
~
�+ O
( 0
O t0 _
O
CD
N CO
S
'+ <
(D
C �.
(D
:v
O
N
A
N
0
0
s--i
cn rn0o
a) i 0) iov 3 i v -'
Z
0D
v S
- m
a) a-0 w o
n" (D O
O
0
0? (D
3
w (n co 3'
a o 0 o m
n
cn � o
°_
CD
cl0 (DC
�0 :3 C4
c
m;•o�s
CDC
`� ao 3 3
m 7 v o - ..'
CD
m o 3 m
=
a
a
n
m 3
cn :3 N)
C)
(D N
O
s� --I
L
a
3 3 ,
o c O
-« — —
C N 0 0
m
a) o
=p N
ON
N c
O
o m 3 m_ 0
m O�
� :E -� � 0_ � --h
�
CD
3' �* m
n(D
° --4 cn
NCC CD O - 0 0 C -nC
m
C X•�
ED
co
m N
o ° °
N'
o' � m
=
a =r
cc o
N o
p'
D
_ o =
0
Ch cn
N
0
w
W O � w Q
a) = 0 CD N C
0
(n Z
N O N fD
Q a (D O=
= C L
O
0 0 S a) CD
a) N m A CL
=r (-S
O t0 _
O
CD
N CO
CD ?
a
C �.
°c m
:v
°" CD cn
3
m CD
= N O
o m
CD m
m c
CD =
CD
=
O C
_
= O n
N N (D
N
:3
�p O0 (p
m
C-
m
m
N
O
N
n
a)
0
CD
O
c
O
h
m
w
0
v
v
1
CD
C
cr
Q
c
:•
F2
C/)
\
\
\
x
&
e
C)
�
/
A
0
a
n
m
2
2
2
T. = m
9
ƒ
R
\
/
2
m
CD
=
a
0
E
3
\
—
«
CD
0
:=Rf
m
=
/ E /
@
2
T. = m
9
/
\ Q
:=Rf
m
=
.1j.
\
/%Q�
\
0
n
0 e _.
=
0
0 c am
/
k
CD
°
ea\
@
/
�
\ \ e
o_
° 0
k
a
00
C D
cr
/
3
/m
0
�
3 @
7 G
CD
\
�/
§ )
R
-
_
S.
]
/
cn
E
\
0
3
£
J
m
a
�
co
§
�
0
§
Iz
A
j
0
E
0
m
/
v
q
CD
cn
C:
cr
�
«
�.
�.
�
M
9
�
�
O
�
�
cn
C
Q
(D
(L1
3
w
m
C
0
m
=r
c CD
CD -
0'
a to
0
X D
cn 0 cn
O
U)
o
co r
<
CD
CD
N
.A
N
O
O
0
cn
0
N( CDD � N j v (D O U N C d X 7 Q C G N
(D fD N �' 3 " CD Q '� O N Cn o 0 O CD D ��? a a 0 CD
C p p T a = ) 3
O N (D �. N p O ? a N O 0
mma u� -« �� p a�oo5 �o.� C _o'CD C
CD CL N to i (D = =ti fn S 3 0 !� p G s
a 0~ a 0 V' 0 0 0 S o (� 0 p S j� o o p o
m o CO i o ° o <• o M� .< rn v a ,< (CD n �. W O
° m o �, ° N c° 7 o v 3 cn m v v rt o M C cn a N
cr
� 7 Q 0 3 N n N cD (� CD n d n< (n N
CD (n `� �' o m o `� CD o o ° s° c. M o N' ° m o° m
0 CD
C o < 0 = D 0 o 0 0 cfl f1 -, (n -{
�* c ° ° te a o' 0 m: v 0 y v 3 °°
S- m S m a ° 0 0 m D p -* a 3 0 CD X ..
CD CD 9 S (D (D ai .� a C CD N (0 7 ~' v (D - -° S' c
0 a c0 O �7 a a O N ( < p° d �n—j n `� 7 0—
a a I ° m v ° c 3 N v x �° m Q �' o m m? m o° �'-� v co
y• 0 r cQ a 0 cQ 7 0 (� -+ N a 0 (o � C (D CD (D `< � C C N
D a S m° S o o a 0 cu a s o �' 3 Q m N
° m W v _ w a* 5 m n ° � o m c m o m n
n a C n-. N N = OS ° ( 7 N =V p Y c) C CD C O o 0. a s Cr CI) ° ca c O. ° m ° a m Fn m o v, 5 ° CL
SD CD
3 m o m o o ai ° m m co ° o n
CD m m v `� m a -1 0° rn O c o c c+ m cD
voi 3. o v a y v m m 3 0 �' a-0 m o
. o' a ° G7 cD n) � v � ° (n m c Q m
W m
co 0 0 m O p 3 a o a ? t a n (D O CD v 0
0 (a w o ° a 3 =, c v ` �' -000 n) CD w ai o
S s 3'R 3 n c 3 o' a m cu p o rn o In
CD 3 . O D 0 Y 0 m C (D 0 p Q a o m
_ 0 DSO n� S D 0 =r � p� R 'o -i
5 5
v =3 ��`��� arc ° �cnD CD (n0mn v CD
° n � cQ m 0• � - ^ �n 0 o cn D cn ° m cn ° w
° m S v S c cn v, ° Q CL 0 c°
CD m v ° v — -* ° `< - 0 5. v S `< m CD
in CD "O n — C c nj C to -+ (D = CD
m rt CD vi =• m a cn = p cn a
ao ° CD n 0 0
U)
0 7
0-
o�
F
r- h
O�
cn
BRUCHEZ, GOSS, THORNTON,
MERONOFF & HAWTHORNE
A Professional Corporation
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
4343 Carter Creek Pkwy, Suite 100
Bryan, Texas 77802
(979) 2684343
FAX: (979) 268 -5323
ERNEST V. BRUCHEZ
Board Certified — Oil, Gas and Mineral Law
Texas Board of Legal Specialization
JAY B. GOSS
Board Certified — Civil Trial Law
- Personal Injury Trial Law
Texas Board of Legal Specialization
March 27, 2002
Via Hand Delivery
Ms. Natalie Ruiz
City of College Station
1101 Texas Avenue
College Station, Texas 77840
PATRICIA K MERONOFF
WILLIAM S. THORNTON, JR
KYLE HAWTHORNE
RE: Agreement Between Brazos County and the City of College Station; ET7
Regulations
Dear Natalie:
Enclosed please find two executed duplicate originals of the Agreement between College
Station and Brazos County relative to the Regulation of Subdivisions within the City's
extraterritorial jurisdiction. This Agreement was approved by Resolution of the County
Commissioners Court on March 26, 2002. As we discussed, this document is identical to the one
that was circulated to the College Station City Council with the exception of paragraph 6. This
paragraph is a termination provision and was added specifically upon request of a number of the
County Commissioners.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Patricia E. Merono
02- 3005:PEM/tdw
Enclosures (as stated)
cc: Roxanne Nemcik
Susan Gandy
02 -3005 Natalie Ruiz.Ltr 3 27 02
April 1, 2002
Patricia E. Meronoff
Bruchez, Goss, Thornton, Meronoff & Hawthorne
Attorneys at Law
4343 Carter Creek Parkway, Suite 100
Bryan, TX 77802
Re: Interlocal agreement between Brazos County & College Station.
Dear Patricia,
Enclosed please find one of two executed originals of the Agreement between College Station
and Brazos County relative to the regulation of Subdivisions within the City's ETJ. This
Agreement was approved by Resolution of the City Council on March 28, 2002.
If you have any questions, please give me a call at (979) 764 -3570.
Sincerely,
Natalie Thomas Ruiz
Development Manager
Enclosures (as stated)
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,
TEXAS, APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF
BURLESON, TEXAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE
INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT, CHAPTER 791, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE
AND HOUSE BILL 1445 ENACTED BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE DURING ITS 77
LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
WHEREAS, City and County are required under CHAPTER 242 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL
GOVERNMENT CODE, as amended by the 77 Legislative Session of the Texas Legislature, to
reach a written agreement on the identity of the governmental entity that is authorized to
regulate subdivision plats and approve related permits in City's extraterritorial jurisdiction on
or before April 1, 2002; and
WHEREAS CHAPTER 242 authorizes the counties and municipalities to enter into an
interlocal agreement pursuant to the provisions of the TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER
791, THE INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT, to grant the authority to regulate subdivision plats
and approve permits in a municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction; and,
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that County's regulations and procedures shall apply to
that portion of City's extraterritorial jurisdiction that lies within Burleson County;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS:
PART 1: That the City Council hereby approves an interlocal agreement with Burleson
County that grants exclusive jurisdiction to Burleson County to regulate
subdivision plats and approve related permits in the City's extraterritorial;
PART 4: That this resolution shall take effect immediately from and after its passage.
ADOPTED this 28th day of March, 2002.
ATTEST:
CONNIE HOOKS, City Secretary
APPROVED:
LYNN McILHANEY, Mayor
APPROVED:
City Attorney
O /group /legal /resolutions /narcotics. doc
3/15/02
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,
TEXAS, APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT WITH THE COUNTY OF
BRAZOS, TEXAS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE INTERLOCAL
COOPERATION ACT, CHAPTER 791, TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE AND HOUSE
BILL 1445 ENACTED BY THE TEXAS LEGISLATURE DURING ITS 77
LEGISLATIVE SESSION.
WHEREAS, City and County are required under CHAPTER 242 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL
GOVERNMENT CODE, as amended by the 77` Legislative Session of the Texas Legislature, to
reach a written agreement on the identity of the governmental entity that is authorized to
regulate subdivision plats and approve related permits in City's extraterritorial jurisdiction on
or before April 1, 2002; and
WHEREAS, CHAPTER 242 authorizes the counties and municipalities to enter into an
interlocal agreement pursuant to the provisions of the TEXAs GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER
791, THE INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT, to grant the authority to regulate subdivision plats
and approve permits in a municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction; and,
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of citizens of Brazos County for the various
government entities in this county to cooperate in the provision of more efficient and higher
quality delivery of government services, which in this case can be more effectively provided
by College Station; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS:
PART 1: That the City Council hereby approves an interlocal agreement with Brazos
County designating College Station as the entity authorized to regulate
subdivision plats and approve related permits within the extraterritorial
jurisdiction of College Station, as provided under CHAPTER 212, LOCAL
GOVERNMENT CODE, except as otherwise provided for joint regulation, and the
office established by College Station for that purpose shall be the exclusive
office for acceptance of such plat and permit applications and all other
transactions involving College Station, the County, and the developer in the
planning process.
PART 2: That this resolution shall take effect immediately from and after its passage.
ADOPTED this 28th day of March, 2002.
ATTEST:
APPROVED:
O /group /legal /resolutions /narcotics. doc
3/15/02
CONNIE HOOKS, City Secretary LYNN McILHANEY, Mayor
APPROVED:
City Attorney
O /group /legal /resolutions /narcotics. doc
3/15/02
Natalie Rui - RESOLUTION - approve interlocal with county re c 242 amendments -plat approval.doc Page 1..1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION APPROVING AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF BRYAN AND
BRAZOS COUNTY DESIGNATING THE CITY OF BRYAN AS THE EXCLUSIVE AUTHORITY TO
REGULATE SUBDIVISION PLATS AND APPROVE RELATED PERMITS IN THE CITY OF BRYAN'S
EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION LOCATED IN BRAZOS COUNTY AND PROVIDING AN
EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the 77 " Legislative Session of the Texas Legislature amended Chapter 242 of the Local
Government Code, entitled, "Authority of Municipality and County to Regulate Subdivisions In and Outside
Municipality's Extraterritorial Jurisdiction ", to require written agreements between those entities that sets forth
which entity regulates developments in extraterritorial jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Bryan and the County Commissioners Court of Brazos County
have reached an agreement to designate the City of Bryan as the governmental entity that has authority to regulate
subdivision plats and approve related permits in the City of Bryan's extraterritorial jurisdiction located in Brazos
County; and
WHEREAS, the written agreement setting forth such designation, the "Interlocal Agreement between the
City of Bryan and Brazos County," is attached as Exhibit "A" to this Resolution; and
TEXAS:
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRYAN,
Section 1. That the City Council hereby approves the Interlocal Agreement which states that Bryan has the
exclusive authority to regulate subdivision plats and approve related permits. This Agreement is attached to this
Resolution as Exhibit "A ".
Section 2. That it is hereby found and determined that the meeting at which this Resolution was adopted
was open to the public as required by law and that notice of the time, place, and purpose of said meeting was given
as required by Chapter 552, Texas Government Code.
Section 3. That this Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption.
ADOPTED BY VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BRYAN, TEXAS at a regular meeting held
on the day of , 2002.
ATTEST: CITY OF BRYAN
Mary Lynne Stratta, City Secretary Jay Don Watson, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Natali Ruiz - RESOLUTION- approve int with county r ch 242 amendments -plat approval.doc Page 2
Michael J. Cosentino, City Attorney
Natali Ruiz - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -COB & Brazos - approve pla Page 1
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
AUTHORITY TO REGULATE SUBDIVISIONS IN CITY OF BRYAN'S EXTRATERRITORIAL
JURISDICTION
LOCATED IN BRAZOS COUNTY
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT is hereby made and entered into this day of
, 2002, by and between the CITY OF BRYAN, TEXAS, a home rule municipal
corporation ( "Bryan ") and BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS ( "County "), each acting by and through its duly
authorized agents;
WHEREAS, the respective participating governments (the "Parties ") are authorized by the
Interlocal Cooperation Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 791, to enter into a joint agreement for the
performance of governmental functions; and
WHEREAS, Bryan and County are required under Chapter 242 of the Texas Local
Government Code, as amended by the 77 " Legislative Session of the Texas Legislature, to reach written
agreement on the identity of the governmental entity that is authorized to regulate subdivision plats and
approve related permits in Bryan's extraterritorial jurisdiction that is located within Brazos County; and
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that Bryan's regulations and procedures should apply to that
portion of Bryan's extraterritorial jurisdiction that lies in Brazos County; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions
contained herein, agree as follows:
I.
That Bryan is the authorized and exclusive governmental entity to regulate subdivision plats and approve
related permits in that portion of Brazos County located in Bryan's extraterritorial jurisdiction.
II.
That Bryan and County agree to cooperate in the development of consolidated and consistent set of
regulations related to plats and subdivisions of land as authorized under the Texas Local Government Code.
III.
That this Agreement does not require any transfer of funds.
IV.
That this Agreement shall continue in force and effect until it is amended or terminated by the Parties or
superseded by Acts of the Texas Legislature.
V.
That it is understood and agreed that this Agreement may be executed in a number of identical counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original for all purposes.
NOW THEREFORE, this Agreement is made and entered into this _ day of , 2002, by and
between Bryan and Brazos County. This Agreement shall be effective when signed by the last party whose
signing makes the Agreement fully executed.
City of Bryan Brazos County
Natali ,Ruiz - INTE AGREEMENT -COB & Brazos - approve pl Page -
Jay Don Watson, Mayor Alvin Jones, County Judge
ATTEST:
ATTEST:
Mary Lynne Stratta, City Secretary Karen McQueen, County Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Michael J. Cosentino, City Attorney
I; Natalie Ruiz - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -COB & Burleson - approve plats - countv has authoritv.doc Page 1 )
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
AUTHORITY TO REGULATE SUBDIVISIONS IN CITY OF BRYAN'S EXTRATERRITORIAL
JURISDICTION
LOCATED IN BURLESON COUNTY
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT is hereby made and entered into this day of
, 2002, by and between the CITY OF BRYAN, TEXAS, a home rule municipal
corporation ( "Bryan ") and BURLESON COUNTY, TEXAS ( "County "), each acting by and through its duly
authorized agents;
WHEREAS, the respective participating governments (the "Parties ") are authorized by the
Interlocal Cooperation Act, Texas Government Code, Chapter 791, to enter into a joint agreement for the
performance of governmental functions; and
WHEREAS, Bryan and County are required under Chapter 242 of the Texas Local
Government Code, as amended by the 77 " Legislative Session of the Texas Legislature, to reach written
agreement on the identity of the governmental entity that is authorized to regulate subdivision plats and
approve related permits in Bryan's extraterritorial jurisdiction that is located within Burleson County; and
WHEREAS, the Parties agree that County's regulations and procedures should apply to that
portion of Bryan's extraterritorial jurisdiction that lies in Burleson County; and
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties, in consideration of the mutual covenants and conditions
contained herein, agree as follows:
I.
That County is the authorized and exclusive governmental entity to regulate subdivision plats and approve
related permits in Bryan's extraterritorial jurisdiction that is located within Burleson County.
II.
That Bryan and County agree to amend this Agreement if Bryan's extraterritorial jurisdiction is expanded or
reduced, as authorized under the Texas Local Government Code.
III.
That this Agreement does not require any transfer of funds.
IV.
That this Agreement shall continue in force and effect until it is amended, terminated or superseded by Acts
of the Texas Legislature.
k "A
That it is understood and agreed that this Agreement may be executed in a number of identical counterparts,
each of which shall be deemed an original for all purposes.
NOW THEREFORE, this Agreement is made and entered into this _ day of , 2002, by and
between Bryan and Burleson County. This Agreement shall be effective when signed by the last party whose
signing makes the Agreement fully executed.
City of Bryan Burleson County
Natalie Ruiz - INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT -COB & Burleson - approve plats- county has authority.doc Page 2
Jay Don Watson, Mayor , County Judge
ATTEST:
ATTEST:
Mary Lynne Stratta, City Secretary , County Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Michael J. Cosentino, City Attorney
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, Section 242.001, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, requires that a county and
municipalities with extraterritorial jurisdiction shall, by April 1, 2002, enter into a written
agreement that identifies the governmental entity authorized to regulate subdivision plats and
approve related permits in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of each such municipality; and
WHEREAS, SECTION 242.001 authorizes a county and municipalities to establish a
consolidated and consistent set of regulations related to plats and subdivisions of land as
authorized by CHAPTERS 212 AND 232 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, as well as other
statutes applicable to both a county and municipalities, that will be enforced in the Extraterritorial
jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of citizens of Brazos County for the various
government entities in this county to cooperate in the provision of more efficient and higher
quality delivery of government services, which in this case can be more effectively provided
College Station; and
WHEREAS, the parties herein have found it advisable to enter into a written agreement
providing for joint regulation of subdivision platting in the extraterritorial jurisdiction by Brazos
County and College Station, as authorized by SECTION 242.001, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants, and agreements
contained herein, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
1. From and after the execution of this Agreement by the parties, College Station shall
be the entity authorized to regulate subdivision plats and approve related permits
within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of College Station, as provided under
CHAPTER 212, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, except as otherwise herein provided
for joint regulation, and the office established by College Station for that purpose
shall be the exclusive office for acceptance of such plat and permit applications and
all other transactions involving College Station, the County, and the developer in
the planning process,
2. College Station may charge appropriate fees as authorized by law related to the
subdivision platting and permitting process, and shall retain those fees,
3. The municipality shall provide to the County a copy of all proposed subdivision
plats in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction, and the County shall be
included in the plat review process and any site inspections as needed. The
municipality shall give due consideration to any comments by the County, although
this review process shall not be construed as limiting the municipality's nor
enhancing the County's authority to approve subdivision plats in College Station's
extraterritorial jurisdiction under this agreement,
4. Any plat for a subdivision in College Station's extraterritorial jurisdiction shall first
require the approval of the appropriate governmental entity established for such
O:group /legal //ETG Platting Agreement Brazos County final.doc
purpose in the municipality, followed by approval by the Brazos County
Commissioners Court upon submission by the municipality of its recommendation,
5. The authority provided by CHAPTER 212, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, to College
Station shall be amended as follows:
A. A plat shall be required for a division of property within the extraterritorial
jurisdiction of College Station wherein the total number of acres proposed to
be divided involved is no more than ten, as permitted under CHAPTER 232,
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, but the only exceptions to that requirement shall
be those found in CHAPTER 212, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE,
B. Prior to acceptance of new streets or other improvements in a subdivision
within College Station's extraterritorial jurisdiction, College Station shall
require of the developer a warranty or cash bond as required by the
Subdivision Regulations of Brazos County, payable to Brazos County, which
shall be in effect for two years from date of acceptance of such streets and /or
improvements. The developer shall be responsible for maintenance of such
streets and for improvements for one year after completion of construction of
said streets and /or improvements as also required by the Subdivision
Regulations of Brazos County. The developer shall also post a utility bond,
payable to College Station, if required by the subdivision regulations of College
Station.
C. Brazos County shall commence maintenance of any new streets and those
drainage outlets that directly impact on street maintenance within the
subdivision on the second anniversary of acceptance of said streets and
drainage outlets, provided any maintenance problems have been satisfactorily
resolved by the developer.
0
That City and County agree to develop a consolidated and consistent set of
regulations related to plats and subdivisions of land as authorized under the
TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 212, and other statutes
applicable to municipalities and counties that will be enforced in the
extraterritorial jurisdiction. Except as otherwise provided herein, until such
time as these revised regulations are adopted by the parties, the current
regulations for the City and County shall remain in full force and effect except
that where these regulations conflict the more restrictive regulation shall
c 4f-4 � �� revail.
This Agreemen Is executed this
�0 .
day f , 2002.
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,
TEXAS, in its meeting held on the 28th day of March 2002, and executed by its authorized
representative.
O:group /legal //ETG Platting Agreement Brazos County final.doc
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,
TEXAS
Lynn McIlhaney, Mayor
ATTEST:
Connie Hooks, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR BRAZOS COUNTY,
TEXAS, in its meeting held on the day of 2002, and executed by its
authorized representative.
BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
am
Al Jones, County Judge
ATTEST:
Karen McQueen, County Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
O:group /legal //ETG Platting Agreement Brazos County final.doc
County Attorney
O:group /legal / /ETG Platting Agreement Brazos County final.doc
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, Section 242.001, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, requires that a county and
municipalities with extraterritorial jurisdiction shall, by April 1, 2002, enter into a written
agreement that identifies the governmental entity authorized to regulate subdivision plats
and approve related permits in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of each such municipality; and
WHEREAS, SECTION 242.001 authorizes a county and municipalities to establish a
consolidated and consistent set of regulations related to plats and subdivisions of land as
authorized by CHAPTERS 212 AND 232 OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, as well as other
statutes applicable to both a county and municipalities, that will be enforced in the
Extraterritorial jurisdiction; and
WHEREAS, it is in the best interest of citizens of Brazos County for the various
government entities in this county to cooperate in the provision of more efficient and higher
quality delivery of government services, which in this case can be more effectively provided
College Station; and
WHEREAS, the parties herein have found it advisable to enter into a written
agreement providing for joint regulation of subdivision platting in the extraterritorial
jurisdiction by Brazos County and College Station, as authorized by SECTION 242.001
(d) (4), LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises, covenants, and agreements
contained herein, the parties hereto mutually agree as follows:
1. From and after the execution of this Agreement by the parties, College
Station shall be the entity authorized to regulate subdivision plats and
approve related permits within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of College
Station, as provided under CHAPTER 212, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE,
except as otherwise herein provided for joint regulation, and the office
established by College Station for that purpose shall be the exclusive office
for acceptance of such plat and permit applications and all other transactions
involving College Station, the County, and the developer in the planning
process,
2. College Station may charge appropriate fees as authorized by law related to
the subdivision platting and permitting process, and shall retain those fees,
3. The municipality shall provide to the County a copy of all proposed
subdivision plats in the municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction, and the
County shall be included in the plat review process and any site inspections
as needed. The municipality shall give due consideration to any comments
by the County, although this review process shall not be construed as limiting
the municipality's nor enhancing the County's authority to approve
subdivision plats in College Station's extraterritorial jurisdiction under this
agreement,
r
4. Any plat for a subdivision in College Station's extraterritorial jurisdiction
shall first require the approval of the appropriate governmental entity
established for such purpose in the municipality, followed by approval by the
Brazos County Commissioners Court upon submission by the municipality
of its recommendation,
5. The authority provided by CHAPTER 212, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, to
College Station shall be amended as follows:
A. A plat shall be required for a division of property within the
extraterritorial jurisdiction of College Station wherein the land proposed
to be divided results in tracts no greater than ten acres in area, as
permitted under CHAP'T'ER 232, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, but the
only exceptions to that requirement shall be those found in CHAPTER
212, LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE,
B. Prior to acceptance of new streets or other improvements in a
subdivision within College Station's extraterritorial jurisdiction, College
Station shall require of the developer a warranty or cash bond as
required by the Subdivision Regulations of Brazos County, payable to
Brazos County, which shall be in effect for two years from date of
acceptance of such streets and /or improvements. The developer shall
be responsible for maintenance of such streets and for improvements
for two year after completion of construction of said streets and /or
improvements as also required by the Subdivision Regulations of Brazos
County. The developer shall also post a utility bond, payable to College
Station, if required by the subdivision regulations of College Station.
C. Brazos County shall commence maintenance of any new streets and
those drainage outlets that directly impact on street maintenance within
the subdivision on the second anniversary of acceptance of said streets
and drainage outlets, provided any maintenance problems have been
satisfactorily resolved by the developer.
D. That City and County agree to develop a consolidated and consistent set
of regulations related to plats and subdivisions of land as authorized
under the TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 242, and other
statutes applicable to municipalities and counties that will be enforced in
the extraterritorial jurisdiction. Except as otherwise provided herein,
until such time as these revised regulations are adopted by the parties,
the current regulations for the City and County shall remain in full force
and effect except that where these regulations conflict the more
restrictive regulation shall prevail.
6. This Agreement is subject to termination by either party by providing ninety
(90) days written notice to the other party.
it
This Agreement is executed thispday of 2002.
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,
TEXAS, in its meeting held on the 28th day of March 2002, and executed by its authorized
representative.
CITY OF COLLEGE
STATION, TEXAS
ATTEST:
Connie Hooks, City Secretary
By.
Lydn McIlhaney, Mayor
APPROVED by the Brazos County Commissioners Court in its meeting held
on March 26, 2002, and executed by its authorized representative.
BRAZOS COUNTY, TEXAS
ATTE :
G
Karen McQueen
B
Judge Al knes, County u e
.: ` The Ci of
Col e 9 e Station Texas
Embracing the Past, Exploring the Future.
Legal Department
P.O. Box 9960 • 1101 Texas Avenue • College Station, TX 77842 • (979) 764 -3507 • FAX: (979) 764 -3481
www.d.college-station.N.us
April 23, 2002
Honorable Bob Doonan
Burleson County Judge
100 West Buck Street, Suite 306
Caldwell, TX 77836
RE: Interlocal Agreement with College Station
Honorable Judge:
Enclosed for your records please find a fully executed copy of the
Interlocal Agreement between College Station and Burleson County granting the
County exclusive jurisdiction to regulate all subdivision plats and the City's ETJ.
Very truly yo rs,
4 Ja Schwartz
egal Assistant
jls
Enclosure
cc: Natalie Ruiz, Development Review Manager w/ encl.
Home of Texas A &M University
Home of the George Bush Presidential Library and Museum
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
THIS INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT (`Agreement') is entered into and in
accordance with the provisions of the INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT, CHAPTER 791,
TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE AND HOUSE, BILL 1445 (`H.B. 1445'), enacted by the
Texas Legislature during its 77` Legislative Session, by and between the CITY OF
COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS (`City'), a political subdivision of the State of Texas,
and the COUNTY OF BURLESON, TEXAS (`County'), also a political subdivision of
the State of Texas.
WHEREAS, the Interlocal Cooperation Act allows local governments to contract
with one another to perform governmental functions such as platting and approval of
related permits; and
WHEREAS, City and County mutually desire to be subject to the provisions of the
TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 791, THE INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT,
specifically § 791.011 regarding contracts to perform governmental functions and
services; and
WHEREAS, H.B. 1445 requires City and County to enter into a written agreement
that identifies the governmental entity authorized to regulate subdivision plats and
approve related permits in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (`ETJ') of City; and
WHEREAS, H.B. 1445 allows City and County to agree that County may be
granted exclusive jurisdiction to regulate, subdivision plats and approve related permits
in the ETJ and may regulate subdivisions under SECTIONS 232.001- 232.005
SUBCHAPTER B OR C, CHAPTER 232 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE, and
other statutes applicable to counties; and
WHEREAS, both City and County desire that County be granted such exclusive
jurisdiction to regulate subdivision plats and approve related permits in City's ETJ, all of
which is provided for in the INTERLOCAL COOPERATION ACT and H.B. 1445.
NOW, THEREFORE, City and County, for the mutual consideration stated herein,
agree and understand as follows:
1. County Granted Exclusive Jurisdiction. County shall be granted exclusive
jurisdiction to regulate all subdivision plats and approve all related permits in City's ETJ
and may regulate subdivisions under SECTIONS 232.001- 232.005 SUBCHAPTER B OR C
OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE and other statutes applicable to counties and
City shall no longer exercise any of these functions in City's ETJ.
2. ETJ Expansion or Reduction. Should City expand or reduce its ETJ, City
shall promptly notify County of such expansion or reduction so that this Agreement may
be amended to take into account the expansion or reduction in City's ETJ. In the event
that City's ETJ should expand or reduce such that the expansion or reduction of ETJ
necessitates the amendment of this Agreement, both City and County agree that County
shall continue to be granted exclusive jurisdiction to regulate subdivision plats and
approve related permits in its ETJ, and to regulate subdivisions under B OF CHAPTER
2L2 OF THE TEXAS LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE and other statutes applicable to
counties, until this Agreement is amended to take into account such ETJ expansion or
reduction.
3. Miscellaneous.
a. This Agreement expresses the entire agreement between the parties
hereto regarding the subject matter contained herein and may not be modified or
amended except by written agreement duly executed by both parties.
b. This Agreement has been duly and properly approved by each
party's governing body and constitutes a binding obligation on each party.
C. This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the laws of
the State of Texas and venue for all purposes hereunder shall be, in Burleson County,
Texas.
d. If any provision hereof is determined by any court of competent
jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, such provision shall be fully severable
herefrom and this Agreement shall be construed and enforced as if such invalid, illegal or
unenforceable provision never comprised a part hereof, and the remaining provisions
shall continue in full force and effect.
e. The Agreement is not intended to extend the liability of the parties
beyond that provided by law. Neither City nor County waives any immunity or defense
that would otherwise be available to it against claims by third parties.
f. This Agreement shall be effective as of April 1, 2002.
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE CITY OF COLLEGE
STATION, TEXAS, in its meeting held on the 28th day of March 2002, and
executed by its authorized representative.
CITY OF COLLEGE STATION,
TEXAS
ATTEST:
t `
Connie Hooks, City Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
• 1
r 4 e L' By:
Lyt McIlhaney, Mayor
APPROVED BY THE COMMISSIONERS COURT FOR BURLESON
COUNTY, TEXAS, in its meeting held on the 8th day of April 2002, and
..,executed by its authorized representative.
^T • ..a:•' �~
(L
a Schielack, County Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
BURLESON COUNTY, TEXAS
i 1 1 X 1 1 1 1 •-
Agenda Item #
ular Item
onsent Item
orkshop Item
Submitted By:
uncil Meeting Date:
irector Approval:
ity Manager Approval:
ebruary 14, 2002
Item: Presentation and discussion on the development and execution of
interlocal agreements between the City of College Station and the counties
of Brazos and Burleson in regard to compliance with Chapter 242 of the
Local Government Code- Regulation of subdivision plats and related permits
in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Item Summary: During the 77 Legislative Session of the Texas
Legislature House Bill 1445 was passed which amended Chapter 242 of the
Local Government Code in regard to regulation of subdivisions in a
municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). The bill requires the County
and the City to reach an agreement (written) as to the governmental entity
that will have authority to regulate subdivisions in the City's ETJ.
Independent joint regulation as currently exists will no longer be allowed.
The bill allows the County and the City to divide regulation with proper
definition. Grimes County is one of fifty -five counties exempt from this
regulation. Agreements must be in place by April 1, 2002.
Item Background: The City of College Station's ETG extends into Burleson
and Grimes County in addition to Brazos County. City of College Station staff
members met with staff from the City of Bryan and Brazos County on August
27 and November 16, 2001 in an effort to clarify and establish acceptable
criteria for interlocal agreements. The three groups were in accord that the
Cities should be designated as the governmental entity responsible for
regulation of subdivisions in the ET] as long as Brazos County is in
agreement with the subdivision standards and the County has maintenance
responsibility. Any future changes would require the approval of the County
Commissioners.
Contact concerning this matter was initially made with Burleson County
Judge Bob Doonan on December 10, 2001. A follow -up letter was sent
January 22, 2002. The City of College Station has been invited to attend the
February 25, 2002 Burleson County Commissioners Court meeting to
address the revised statute requirements.
First draft interlocal agreements and resolutions has been received from the
City of Bryan in regard to their ET] regulation. The three staffs feel it would
be advantageous to have similar documents.
Budgetary and Financial Summary: Primary cost will be the staff time
required to finalize new documents and to revise existing documents.
Staff Recommendation: Staff to prepare final draft documents for Council
review and approval in accordance with direction received from Council and
Legal.
Council Action Options: Provide direction to staff
Supporting Materials:
Enrolled version of HB 1445 -Bill Text
Paper: Questions & Answers- HB 1445: Mandated City- County
Agreement on ET] Platting
Map of ETJ
Page 1 of 2
Agenda Item Cover Sheet
Agenda Item #4
Item: Presentation, discussion and possible action on the development and
execution of interlocal agreements between the City of College Station and the
counties of Brazos and Burleson in regard to compliance with Chapter 242 of the
Local Government Code- Regulation of subdivision plats and related permits in
the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Item Summary: During the 77t Legislative Session of the Texas Legislature,
House Bill 1445 was passed which amended Chapter 242 of the Local
Government Code in regard to regulation of subdivisions in a municipality's
extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). The new state law requires the County and the
City to reach an agreement (written) as to the governmental entity that will
have authority to regulate subdivisions in the City's ETJ. Independent joint
regulation as currently exists will no longer be allowed. The revised Chapter 242
of the Local Government Code allows the County and the City to divide
regulation with proper definition. Grimes County is one of fifty -five counties
exempt from this regulation. Agreements must be in place by April 1, 2002.
Item Background: The City of College Station's ETJ extends into Burleson and
Grimes County in addition to Brazos County. City of College Station staff
http :Hcitynet /Council %20Agendas / 2002 / 020214 / ETJ% 2ORegulations %20- %... /CoverSheet.ht 2/14/02
Regular Item
Consent
Item
Workshop
X
Item
Item: Presentation, discussion and possible action on the development and
execution of interlocal agreements between the City of College Station and the
counties of Brazos and Burleson in regard to compliance with Chapter 242 of the
Local Government Code- Regulation of subdivision plats and related permits in
the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Item Summary: During the 77t Legislative Session of the Texas Legislature,
House Bill 1445 was passed which amended Chapter 242 of the Local
Government Code in regard to regulation of subdivisions in a municipality's
extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). The new state law requires the County and the
City to reach an agreement (written) as to the governmental entity that will
have authority to regulate subdivisions in the City's ETJ. Independent joint
regulation as currently exists will no longer be allowed. The revised Chapter 242
of the Local Government Code allows the County and the City to divide
regulation with proper definition. Grimes County is one of fifty -five counties
exempt from this regulation. Agreements must be in place by April 1, 2002.
Item Background: The City of College Station's ETJ extends into Burleson and
Grimes County in addition to Brazos County. City of College Station staff
http :Hcitynet /Council %20Agendas / 2002 / 020214 / ETJ% 2ORegulations %20- %... /CoverSheet.ht 2/14/02
Page 2 of 2
members met with staff from the City of Bryan and Brazos County on August 27
and November 16, 2001 in an effort to clarify and establish acceptable criteria
for interlocal agreements. The three groups were in accord that the Cities should
be designated as the governmental entities responsible for regulation of
subdivisions in the ETJ, as long as Brazos County is in agreement with the
subdivision standards. The County would continue maintenance responsibility.
Any future changes would require the approval of the County Commissioners.
Contact concerning this matter was initially made with Burleson County Judge
Bob Doonan on December 10, 2001. A follow -up letter was sent January 22,
2002. The City of College Station has been invited to attend the February 25,
2002 Burleson County Commissioners Court meeting to address the revised
statute requirements.
First draft interlocal agreements and resolutions have been received from the
City of Bryan in regard to their ETJ regulation. The three staffs feel it would be
advantageous to have similar documents.
Budgetary and Financial Summary: Primary cost will be the staff time
required to finalize new documents and to revise existing documents.
Staff Recommendation: Staff to prepare final draft documents for Council
review and approval in accordance with direction received from Council.
Council Action Options: Provide direction to staff.
Supporting Materials:
1. Revised Chapter 242 of the Local Government Code
2. Paper _,Que stions & Answe HB 1445: Mandated C ity - Co Agree o ETJ
Platting
3. Map of ETJ
http :Hcitynet /Council %20Agendas / 2002 / 020214 / ETJ% 20Regulations %20- %... /CoverSheet.ht 2/14/02
Agenda Item #
Submitted By: 'Natalie Ruiz, Development Manager
uncil Meeting Date: (March 28, 2002
Director Approval:
Manager Approval:
Item: Discussion, consideration and possible action on an interlocal
agreement between the City of College Station and Brazos County in regard
to compliance with Chapter 242 of the Local Government Code - Regulation
of subdivision plats in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Item Summary: During the 77 Legislative Session of the Texas
Legislature, House Bill 1445 was passed which amended Chapter 242 of the
Local Government Code in regard to regulation of subdivisions in a
municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). The new state law requires
the County and the City to reach an agreement as to the governmental
entity that will have authority to regulate subdivisions in the City's ET]. The
law also provides for joint regulation of subdivisions in which the city and
county jointly review plats under their authority, but provide one office to
file plats, one filing fee, and provide one uniform and consistent set of plat
regulations. The revised Chapter 242 of the Local Government Code allows
the County and the City to divide regulation with proper definition. The City
of College Station's ETJ extends into Brazos, Burleson and Grimes counties.
Agreements with Brazos and Burleson counties must be in place by April 1,
2002. Grimes County is one of fifty -five counties exempt from this
regulation.
Item Background: City of College Station staff members met with staff
from the City of Bryan and Brazos County on August 27 and November 16,
2001 in an effort to clarify and establish acceptable criteria for interlocal
agreements. The three groups agreed that the Cities should be designated
as the governmental entities responsible for regulation of subdivisions in the
ETJ, as long as Brazos County is in agreement with the subdivision
standards. The County will continue maintenance responsibility in the ETJ.
The Brazos County Commissioners Court discussed this proposal in January
of this year and agreed in concept with a strong interest in developing one
set of regulations in the ETJ for both Bryan and College Station.
The City Council discussed this issue at their workshop on February 14,
2002. At that time, staff was directed to continue their negotiations with
Brazos County to finalize an interlocal agreement. The attached interlocal
agreement provides for joint regulation of subdivision platting in the City's
ETJ. The City's Development Services Office is the designated office to
accept plat applications, collect fees and provide one response indicating
approval or denial of the plat application. Currently, the County does not
require an application or inspection fee for plats. However, the interlocal
agreement provides that the City may collect those fees in the future if the
County decides to impose fees. If this happens, all fees (both City and
County) must be collected in one location - the City of College Station. The
interlocal agreement also states that the City will provide the County a copy
of the subdivision plat for their review. Once the plat is approved by the
City, the plat will be scheduled for consideration by the Brazos County
Commissioner's Court. The agreement provides for the development of a
consolidated and consistent set of regulations related to plats and
subdivisions of the ETJ. The staffs of the City of Bryan, City of College
Station and Brazos County plan to work together to draft regulations that
will be consistent in the ETJ of both cities. Until such time as these revised
regulations are adopted, the current regulations for the City and County
shall remain in full effect. Where there are differing standards, the more
restrictive will apply.
The attached interlocal agreement with Brazos County is scheduled to be
considered by the Commissioner's Court at their next meeting.
Budgetary and Financial Summary: Primary cost is the staff time
required to finalize the interlocal agreement and develop new ETJ
regulations for the Cities of Bryan and College Station.
Staff Recommendation: Approve the Interlocal Agreement as presented.
Council Action Options:
1. Approve as submitted.
2. Approve with modifications.
3. Defer action. (According to the new state law, an agreement
must be in place by April 1, 2002.)
4. Deny. (According to the new state law, an agreement must be in
place by April 1, 2002.)
Supporting Materials:
1. Resolution approving Interlocal Agreement with Brazos County
2. Interlocal Agreement with Brazos County
3. Map of the City's ETJ
Agenda Item #
Item: Discussion, consideration and possible action on an interlocal
agreement between the City of College Station and Burleson County in
regard to compliance with Chapter 242 of the Local Government Code -
Regulation of subdivision plats in the City's extraterritorial jurisdiction.
Item Summary: During the 77 Legislative Session of the Texas
Legislature, House Bill 1445 was passed which amended Chapter 242 of the
Local Government Code in regard to regulation of subdivisions in a
municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ). The new state law requires
the County and the City to reach an agreement as to the governmental
entity that will have authority to regulate subdivisions in the City's ET]. The
law also provides for joint regulation of subdivisions in which the city and
county jointly review plats under their authority, but provide one office to
file plats, one filing fee, and provide one uniform and consistent set of plat
regulations. The revised Chapter 242 of the Local Government Code allows
the County and the City to divide regulation with proper definition. The City
of College Station's ETJ extends into Brazos, Burleson and Grimes counties.
Agreements with Brazos and Burleson counties must be in place by April 1,
2002. Grimes County is one of fifty -five counties exempt from this
regulation.
Item Background: There is approximately 6,000 acres of the City's ETJ in
Burleson County, all of which is within the 100 year floodplain and bound by
the Brazos River. At this time, the City's Comprehensive Plan does not
include this area due to the difficulty in providing utilities across the Brazos
River. This area is also not reflected on the Annexation Priority schedule and
there are no plans to annex this property in the near future. Texas A &M
University and Buffalo Ranch are the only two property owners of the 6,000
acres in the City's ETJ. The proposed Interlocal Agreement grants Burleson
County exclusive jurisdiction in the City's ETJ. However, if the City's ETJ
should expand, the agreement may be modified. If in the future the City
decides to annex more property to the west near the Brazos River, this
agreement may be renegotiated.
The City Council discussed this issue at their workshop on February 14, 2002
and concurred with staff's recommendation to designate Burleson County as
the entity responsible for regulation of plats. At that time, Council directed
staff to continue working with Brazos and Burleson counties to finalize the
interlocal agreements. Staff met with the Burleson County Commissioner's
Court on February 25, 2002 and discussed the proposal to designate
Burleson County as the entity responsible for regulation. The Commissioner's
Court agreed and will consider the attached interlocal agreement at their
next meeting.
Budgetary and Financial Summary: Primary cost has been staff time
required to finalize the interlocal agreement.
Staff Recommendation: Approve the interlocal agreement as presented.
Council Action Options:
1. Approve as submitted.
2. Approve with modifications.
3. Defer action. (According to the new state law, an agreement
must be in place by April 1, 2002.)
4. Deny. (According to the new state law, an agreement must be in
place by April 1, 2002.)
Supporting Materials:
1. Resolution approving Interlocal Agreement with Burleson County
2. Interlocal Agreement with Burleson County
3. Map of the City's ETJ
C
(D
cc
3
N
m
x
( g
CD
=r c m
°
o
a °'
cc
X'
ck
C�)
O
N
A
N
O
O
m D
x —
m °
c
•o �
O C:
<
o'
U)
0
u
CL
cn
CD
CD
cc 0
0
W Cr o p a v^ a cn c o o o m v a� o o o cn �-*
cn m m m m o m ° o� c m x a -^ c c v° =r
m cD p� a N N N 0 ti � O N 0 °, a 7 (D
c > > o v m �. c c° ° v° o ° a v - a a) <. <- 0 0
rn' m co —1 S m o ° m a o o o a m CD
a c �, n O a 0 0- N S cn 3 n N ° a s• -,
CD aoa = o r Car n cDo00 o
m o N o o a o ° g �, v rn a ,� o c° 0 0
o v
O v 7" !v a 0 N Y) ? g� o �, c O c � O fOD a N S d y
m c a n c� ° O m o m o° c m O y m °°
° Q o ° m ,< �' c c cvi CD
C O ( O O . .n. ° O-. O? n n ( c c ) o n° -
ccD cn 5 a• m rn v� a a c m° cm c D _" m ° �' con °
C) CD 1 D C d (�D m o° <. = 9! n. O ca o o N
cn c m ° v, �' ° a) a• c o m m ° v °
F) a m ` � m om � c m m cn a ° o n
CL CD m c� 5' c ca
m cn
C cn _ CL
n
0
0
m
W
v
0
U�
o'
�
N
CD
i�
O�
ETJ Subdivision Regulation
Discussion Points C40-
C� 5C
I. Engineering /Infrastructure
a. Streets
1. ROW widths (70' same, 80' vs. 100') � n
2. Street Design Standards (cross section and layout) (Jn6�t CO,41�,
3. Clearing of the ROW (L"ex
4. No utilities in ROW
b. Utility Easements l
1. Clearing of easements
2. Location of easements (all sides vs. back and front)
C. Water
1. Fire Protection - w design .
2. Letter "Willing to Serve" ����� � � �
d. Sewer
a-
�,� Drainage /Storm W ter
S 71. Flood Management
2. Implementation of the City's Drainage Ord.
f. Inspections of Infrastruct re (streets, water, sewer, stormw ter)p�o_
4 x7c 1. Detention Facilities -) %, ��
mA
2. Finished Floor Elevations '� �� �� ��f}-
. 3. The County does not currently inspect streets - requires c re samples
4. Waterlines ? ??
g. Maintenance (County /HOA)
h. Enforcement Chu,- J
i. Approval of Construction Documents
1. Street Design Standards ex. Slope re uu 66ments
9 p q
II. Planning Issues � �, j —v, Z_
a. Lot dimensions
b. Area Requirements
C. Setbacks
III. Administration
a. Guaranty of infrastructure
b. Process (30 vs. 60 Day approval)
C. Time -line for approval of agreement
d. Time -line for approval of standards
e. Cross jurisdictional plats (inside ETJ vs. outside ETJ)
HB 1445: Mandated City- County Agreement on ETJ Platting
Questions & Answers
Prepared by: Donald Lee, Texas Conference of Urban Counties
Shanna Igo, Texas Municipal League
October 30, 2001
What is HB 1445?
HB 1445 is legislation that mandates that cities
and counties develop written agreements that
provide developers of land unified platting review
in the extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ) of cities.
Who authored HB 1445?
HB 1445 was authored by Rep. Bob Turner in the
House and by Sen. Jeff Wentworth in the Senate.
What is ETJ?
Extraterritorial jurisdiction, or ETJ, is land just
outside city limits in which a city may exercise
authority so that it may promote the orderly
growth of the city. A city may regulate
subdivisions through platting within its ETJ. The
size of the ETJ ranges from 'h mile to five miles,
depending on city population.
What problem does HB 1445 address?
HB 1445 addresses complaints from the Texas
Association of Builders that developers were
subject to regulation by both cities and counties
when subdividing within the ETJ.
How does HB 1445 solve the problem?
HB 1445 mandates that cities and counties adopt
interlocal agreements that solve the problem by
choosing from among four options:
Option 1. City Regulation The county ends
authority, and the city reviews all plats under
city standards.
Option 2. County Regulation The city ends
authority, and the county reviews all plats
under county standards.
Option 3. Divided Regulation The city and
county divide the ETJ geographically, each
keeping authority only in one portion.
Option 4. Joint Regulation The city and county
jointly review plats under their authority, but
provide one office to file plats, one filing fee,
and provide one uniform and consistent set of
plat regulations.
Who decides what option is used?
The city and the county must agree on the option
used in each city's ETJ. Neither the city nor
county can decide unilaterally — there must be
agreement.
How is this agreement entered into?
HB 1445 requires that the agreement take the
form of an interlocal contract. The county
commissioners court and the city council must
approve it.
Which cities and counties does HB 1445 apply
to?
HB 1445 applies to every city4n every county,
except the following counties:
"Colonias" Counties Counties near the border
and "EDAP" counties. These are: Andrews,
Bee, Brewster, Brooks, Cameron, Coleman,
Crane, Crockett, Crosby, Culberson, Dimmit,
Duval, Edwards, El Paso, Frio, Grimes, Hall,
Hidalgo, Hudspeth, Jeff Davis, Jim Hogg, Jim
Wells, Kenedy, Kinney, Kleberg, LaSalle,
Leon, Liberty, Marion, Maverick, Mitchell,
Newton, Nolan, Panola, Pecos, Presidio,
Reagan, Reeves, San Augustine, San
Patricio, Scurry, Starr, Sutton, Terrell, Tyler,
Upshur, Upton, Uvalde, Val Verde, Ward,
Webb, Willacy, Winkler, Zapata, and Zavala.
• City of Houston Counties Counties that
contain any ETJ of the City of Houston. These
are: Fort Bend, Harris, Liberty, Montgomery,
and Waller.
How does current law work?
Since the ETJ laws were created in the 1960s,
builders have been subject to the regulation of
both the city and the county within the ETJ. This
means all subdividers in ETJs since that time
have been required to file plats and obtain
approval from both the city and the county under
separate regulations. If the regulations conflict,
the more stringent applies.
When must agreements be completed?
HB 1445 requires that the agreements be in place
by April 1, 2002.
Q & A on HB 1445 Mandated City- County Agreement on ETJ Platting
October 30, 2001
Can both the city and the county continue to
regulate plats in the ETJ?
Yes. Option 4, Joint Regulation, allows both the
city and county to regulate plats in the ETJ. It
does require the city and county to agree on the
following items:
• A single office where plats are filed for
subdivisions within that ETJ;
• A single plat application fee and the allocation
of that fee revenue;
• A process whereby developers get one plat
response of approval or disapproval for their
plat application; and
• A single, unified, and consistent set of
regulations for plats in that ETJ.
Does HB 1445 affect septic tanks or flood
plain enforcement?
No. Permits issued for septic tanks or building
permits for flood plain enforcement, or city
building codes, are not considered part of the
platting process, even if a city or county has
integrated those functions. HB 1445 does not
impact the issuance of those permits.
What if an area is in the ETJ of two cities?
Since August 23, 1963, it has not been legally
possible for ETJs to overlap, and a procedure is
provided in Sec. 42.901, Local Government Code,
for apportionment of ETJs that overlapped prior to
that date. Accordingly, the only ETJs that can
now overlap are those that overlapped before
August 23, 1963 and which were never
apportioned. In such an area, Sec. 212.007,
Local Government Code, provides that the city
with the largest population has the authority to
approve plats in the overlapping ETJ.
There are many cities in our county — do we all
develop one agreement?
The law requires that there be one agreement for
each municipal ETJ in the county. This could be
accomplished with one agreement with multiple
parties — but is not required. More likely, there will
need to be one agreement for each city that has
ETJ.
What happens if a city and county do not
agree?
If no agreement is in place, current law continues
until an agreement is adopted by both entities.
That is, developers will continue to file with both
the city and county. If regulations conflict, the
more stringent applies.
While HB 1445 contains no penalty provisions,
the city and county could be subject to a
mandamus action. More importantly, the
legislature will meet again in 2003 and likely
create penalties for those failing to comply.
Legislative committees have already scheduled
meetings to monitor compliance with HB 1445.
How does this affect road maintenance?
It does not. HB 1445 has no impact on road
maintenance issues. Counties are still
responsible for roads outside of actual city limits
where the road is accepted into the county road
system. Cities are still responsible for roads inside
of city limits.
Who can I call with additional questions?
TML and the Urban Counties have developed a
more detailed document entitled: Matters for
Consideration for Cities and Counties Negotiating
Agreement Under HB 1445. The document is
available at either the TML or Urban Counties
website, which is listed below.
If you have additional questions, contact either:
Can a city and county use a combination of
options within an ETJ — for instance divide the
ETJ in portions and both still regulate?
Yes. Options 3 & 4 can be combined within a
city's ETJ.
Donald Lee
Texas Conference of
Urban Counties
512/476 -6174
donlee[ cuc.org
www.cuc.org
Shanna Igo
Texas Municipal League
512/719 -6300
sigona tml.org
www.tml.org
Matters for Consideration for Cities and Counties
Negotiating Agreements Under H.B. 1445
1. As an initial matter, is the county one that is subject to H.B. 1445?
H.B. 1445 does not apply to certain specified counties: those containing the ETJ of
a city with a population of 1.9 million or more (Harris, Fort Bend, Liberty,
Montgomery, and Walker), or those within 50 miles of an international border or
those defined as economically distressed (Andrews, Bee, Brewster, Brooks,
Cameron, Coleman, Crane, Crockett, Crosby, Culberson, Dimmit, Duval,
Edwards, El Paso, Frio, Grimes, Hall, Hidalgo, Hudspeth, Jeff Davis, Jim Hogg,
Jim Wells, Kenedy, Kinney, Kleberg, La Salle, Leon, Liberty, Marion, Maverick,
Mitchell, Newton, Nolan, Panola, Pecos, Presidio, Reagan, Reeves, San
Augustine, San Patricio, Scurry, Starr, Sutton, Terrell, Tyler, Upshur, Upton,
Uvalde, Val Verde, Ward, Webb, Willacy, Winkler, Zapata, and Zavala). An
agreement between such a county and its cities for subdivision regulation in the
ETJ is not required. Such a county and a city or cities therein, however, could
voluntarily agree to such an agreement.
2. After an agreement is reached, will subdivision regulation within the ETJ be
performed exclusively by the county, exclusively by the city, or on a
geographical basis?
Section 242.001(d), Local Government Code, provides that a city and a county
may agree that either the county or city may be granted exclusive jurisdiction to
regulate subdivision plats and to approve related permits in the ETJ, or they may
apportion the ETJ so that the city regulates in some areas and the county regulates
in the other areas. A fourth option is also possible: the city and county may
establish uniform regulations and a joint office to provide a single point of contact
for subdivision regulation in the ETJ.
3. Who regulates subdivisions prior to an agreement or in the event an
agreement cannot be reached?
H.B. 1445 provides that until an agreement is reached, the former law essentially
remains in effect. That is, a subdivider or developer must continue to obtain the
approval of both the city and county, with the more stringent regulation controlling
in the case of a conflict. While the former law would be continued in case an
agreement is not reached by the statutory deadline (April 1, 2002, in most cases), it
should be noted that the deadline appears mandatory, and failure to reach an
agreement might result in a legislative solution that is unfavorable to both parties.
4. May the agreement to regulate in the ETJ contemplate any exercise of
authority by a city or county that is not granted to the city under Chapter
212, Local Government Code, or to the county under Chapter 232, Local
Government Code?
H.B. 1445 directs cities and counties to enter into agreements for subdivision
regulation within the ETJ. In §242.001(d)(4), the bill provides that the agreement
may establish "a consolidated and consistent set of regulations related to plats and
subdivisions of land as authorized by Chapter 212, Sections 232.001- 232.005,
Subchapters B and C, Chapter 232, and other statutes applicable to municipalities
and counties that will be enforced in the extraterritorial jurisdiction." While it
isn't perfectly clear, this provision seems to grant authority to a city to exercise
relevant authority granted to a county and to grant authority to a county to exercise
relevant authority granted to a city if both parties so agree.
This is different than an agreement under the Interlocal Cooperation Act (Chapter
791, Government Code), which authorizes governmental bodies to contract to
provide functions and services that each party is authorized to perform
individually, but does not allow the parties to expand, by agreement, the
jurisdiction of a governmental body beyond that which is authorized. Because
city authority and county authority to regulate subdivisions in the ETJ differ in
certain respects, the agreement should be specific about any authority a city or
county will exercise that is not currently contained in a statute applicable to the
city or county.
5. What is the term of the agreement or period for review?
H.B. 1445 does not specify that agreements must be for a particular term of years
or in perpetuity. Cities and counties should provide for periodic review, revision,
and renewal of the agreements to address changed circumstances. This may be
accomplished by providing for a specified term of the agreement, a periodic
review, or for review at the request of one party. Changes in the ETJ should
trigger automatic review.
6. Should the agreement incorporate the most stringent authority available?
H.B. 1445 is consistent with prior law by providing that where an agreement is not
in place between a city and a county, the more stringent regulation prevails in the
event of conflict. Accordingly, to the extent that the authority or practice of
particular counties and cities differs, the parties to the agreement should agree to
adoption of the more stringent provisions in order to maintain maximum
regulatory jurisdiction.
7. Is provision made for expansion or reduction of the ETJ?
Section 242.001(c), added by H.B. 1445, provides that the city shall notify the
county of any expansion or reduction of its ETJ and that any change in the ETJ
does not alter the effectiveness of any plat or permit as provided by Chapter 245,
Local Government Code (the "vesting" statute).
2
8. Will there be one office for plat applications, fee payments, and response to
applicants for ETJ property?
The effect of H.B. 1445 will be that a subdivider will need to deal with only one
office for most ETJ platting purposes. That office will either be run by the city,
the county, or jointly by the two. If jointly, the required uniformity of regulations
and fees will make the sharing of authority seem transparent to the applicant.
9. How will fees be divided and distributed?
The agreement should address whether, how, when, and in what proportion fees
that are paid lump -sum will be divided between the county and city, and how such
funds will be paid to the entity not collecting the fees.
10. Do both the city and county require platting of the same types of
subdivisions?
"Subdivision" is not defined in either Chapter 212 or Chapter 232, which apply to
city and county subdivision authority, respectively. Instead, both cities and
counties are authorized to define and classify divisions of land, and the
requirement to plat need not apply to every division otherwise within the scope of
the law. Property may be divided in many ways and for many purposes,
depending, for example, on use, tenure, and method of creation. Texas courts have
held that the term "subdivision" may be broadly construed, and the term should be
defined broadly in order to maintain maximum regulatory jurisdiction. Cities and
counties should compare their platting requirements and reach agreement
regarding any existing differences in the types of subdivisions required to be
platted. Exceptions to platting requirements often create problems both for
landowners and local governments, and the creation of exceptions should be
carefully considered before being included. Appropriate exceptions are more
likely to focus on divisions created through inheritance, large tracts used for
agriculture or open space, large remainders occurring after platting of a portion of
a tract, leaseholds for agricultural purposes or multi- occupant buildings, or
dedications of rights -of -way and public easements. Inappropriate exceptions may
include those based solely upon conveyance to a relative, subdivisions by
governmental entities, or those based upon the fact that no road is being
constructed.
11. What statutory exceptions to platting should be included?
Chapters 212 and 232 each contain certain statutory exceptions to platting, but
counties, which do not adopt and enforce building codes, have ten exceptions.
Cities, which may require a plat as a condition for the issuance of a building
permit, have only three statutory exceptions. The county statutory exceptions are
contained in Sections 232.0015(e) -(k), 232.007, and Subchapter B of Chapter 232
(for economically distressed counties). Municipal statutory exceptions are
contained in Sections 212.004, 212.0046, and Subchapter B of Chapter 212. Cities
and counties should agree on whether all statutory exceptions will be allowed and,
if so, whether the regulating entity has authority to allow the exception.
12. Are development plats currently required by the city, and if so, will
development plats be required in the agreement?
Subchapter B of Chapter 212 (§ §212.041 -050) authorizes cities to adopt an
ordinance establishing a development plat method of subdivision regulation, while
counties have limited or different authority to do so. Development plats were
originally allowed only for Houston, but the subchapter was later amended to
apply to all cities. It is a method by which a city may define the subdivisions to
which their regulations apply (if they are not limited to divisions of land into parts
of less than five acres where each part has access and no public improvement is
being dedicated). An agreement between a county and city operating under
Subchapter B of Ch. 212 should be specific about the extent, if any, to which
development plats will continue to be utilized by the entity exercising exclusive
authority in the ETJ or a part thereof.
13. Is deferred development adequately addressed?
When there are no plans to immediately develop or improve property that is being
divided, the owner typically wishes to avoid platting, particularly if plat approval
requires construction of public improvements, such as roads or utilities. Cities and
counties may establish platting regulations that do not require immediate
construction of public improvements. For example, cities sometimes require
"conveyance plats," which are boundary surveys drawn as plats with easements,
dedications, and reservations recorded thereon, but which do not require
engineering plans. Often, conveyance plats are limited in application to tracts
larger than five acres. County authority for conveyance plats may be implied in
§232.0015(a), but it is not certain, and the agreement between the city and county
should address deferred development and, if necessary, be specific about
conveyance plats or any other type of interim or minor plat.
14. Does the agreement contain adequate, uniform provisions for informing
applicants of requirements for receiving plat approval?
Cities and counties are currently responsible for providing applicants with
understandable and complete information relating to requirements for plat
approval, but Chapters 212 and 232 are not consistent. Chapter 232 requires a
county to issue a written list of the documentation and other information that must
be submitted with a plat application, and not later than the 10` day after receiving
an application, a county must notify the applicant of any missing information.
Chapter 212 does not specify the city's duty to provide the information or the
period of time for notifying the applicant of missing data, although that duty is
0
implied and presumed. The agreement should be specific about such
requirements.
15. Are substantive requirements for public improvements adequately
addressed?
Another difference between city and county subdivision authority is in regard to
the substantive requirements for public improvements, such as planning and
engineering standards. City authority is broader due to the greater complexities of
urban development, whereas county authority is limited to right -of -way, road
construction, drainage, and provision of water (One exception would be counties
operating under new Subchapter E to Chapter 232 —See S.B. 873 —where county
authority is nearly as broad as city authority.). The agreement should be specific
about such requirements and should normally maximize the authority granted to
cities.
16. Is connection of utility service addressed?
Under §212.012, a utility is prohibited from providing service to land unless it is
presented with a certificate that the property is in compliance with the city's
subdivision regulations. There may not be corresponding provision for counties,
due to the necessity of serving unplatted development in unincorporated areas
(again, certain urban counties may now have equivalent authority under S.B. 873).
The agreement should be consistent with §212.012 for land in the ETJ.
17. Are major and minor plats to be utilized?
Cities have authority to classify subdivisions as major or minor depending on the
number of lots and the extent of public improvements, but counties do not have the
same authority. Approval of a minor plat, which is for four or fewer lots facing an
existing street and not requiring a new street or extension of municipal facilities,
may be delegated to a member of the city staff, a procedure that expedites the
approval process. ( §212.0065). The parties to the agreement are encouraged to
incorporate the minor plat requirements and approval process into the agreement.
18. Are plat amendments addressed?
Under §212.016, cities have authority to approve amended plats in order to make
corrections or limited changes to previously approved final plats. County
authority in this area is questionable. The amendment process, which can also be
delegated to a staff member, expedites the approval process, and should be
adequately addressed in the agreement.
ETJ REGULATIONS
The City currently has platting authority in the Extra Territorial Jurisdiction
(approximately 3.5 miles from the city limits).
When property is subdivided in the ETJ, there is a 2 step review process.
• City's Planning & Zoning Commission
• County's Commissioner's Court
Recent changes in state law mandates that cities and counties develop
written agreements that provide developers qf1W unified platting review in
the ETJ. Cities and counties must adopt interlocal agreements by April I s'
thaf� 6 � ° �y` cT oosing from among four options:
• City Regulation — The county ends authority and the city reviews
plats under city standards.
• County Regulation — The city ends authority and the county
reviews all plats under county standards.
• Divided Regulation — The city and county divide the ETJ
geographically each keeping authority only in one portion.
• Joint Regulation — The city and county jointly review plats under
their authority, but provide one office to file plats, one filing fee,
and provide one uniform and consistent set of plat regulations.
Currently, there are three counties represented in our ETJ: Brazos, Burleson
and Grimes counties. Grimes county is exempt from this requirement.
Brazos Coun
We have met with staff from Brazos County and the City of Bryan and all
agree that the cities should be designated as the entity responsible for
regulation of subdivisions in the ETJ as long as Brazos County is in
agreement with the subdivision standards and the County has maintenance
responsibility. It would be desireable if both cities had identical regulations
in their ETJ's in Brazos County. The Brazos County Commissioners Court
discussed this proposal and agreed in concept with the condition that:
• Plats are forwarded to the County Engineer for review & comment.
• The rural construction standards remain in place to allow the County to
maintain roadways. (No curb & gutter)
• Strong interest in developing one set of regulations in the ETJ for both
Bryan and College Station.
Burleson County:
With respect to Burleson County, (highlighted on your individual maps in
yellow), we're recommending that Burleson County be designated as the
entity responsible for regulation as long as the City receives information on
new subdivisions. There is approximately 6,000 acres in the ETJ in
Burleson County with 2 land owners, Texas A &M and a large farming
operation. All 6,000 acres is within the 100 year floodplain.
Need direction from Council as to their preference in regulating subdivisions
in Brazos and Burleson County so that the draft interlocal agreements can be
prepared. (Recommendation for Brazos & Burleson County slides.)
ETJ Platting
Requirements
Current Platting Process
in ETJ
2 Step Process:
Planning & Zoning Commission
Brazos County Commissioner's
Court
Changes in State Law
Mandates that cities & counties
develop written agreements
that provide developers of land
unified platting review in the
ETJ of cities by April 1, 2002.
Four Options in the ETJ
City Regulation
County Regulation
Divided Regulation
Joint Regulation
Three Counties in ETJ
Brazos
Burleson
Grimes (exempt from new law)
Brazos County
Recommendation
City regulate subdivisions.
County receives plats for
review.
Rural construction standards
remain in place to allow County
maintenance.
Future development of unified
ETJ regulations for both cities.
Burleson County
Recommendation
County regulate subdivisions in
the ETJ.
City receives all plats for
review.
Rural construction standards
remain in place to allow County
maintenance.
Timeline
Continue work on interlocal
agreement with Brazos County.
Staff to attend Burleson County
Commissioner's Court on
February 25, 2002.
Interlocal agreements to City
Council in March.
,� "° �'
�. e
r ., ..
��� ,� :.
� �FF � �+
of
J � � >� �"
> r �� .. ' Jy, �'ti.
r
i.�
�. ,.
.. _
..
:.�
> _
:.
��
-�a
.
r
�.
��t A
-
'.
�°
;
.�
,�s,
� ,
�
I.
77(R) HB 1445 Enrolled version - Bill Text
Page 1 of 3
1 -1 AN ACT
1 -2 relating to the authority of municipalities and counties to
1 -3 regulate subdivisions in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a
1 -4 municipality.
1 -5 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
1 -6 SECTION 1. Section 242.001, Local Government Code, is
1 -7 amended to read as follows:
1 -8 Sec. 242.001. REGULATION OF SUBDIVISIONS GENERALLY. (a)
1 -9 This section applies only to a county operating under Sections
1 -10 232.001- 232.005 or Subchapter B or C, Chapter 232. Subsections
1 -11 (b) -(e) do not apply:
1 -12 _ (1) within a county that contains extraterritorial
1 -13 jurisdiction of a municipality with a population of 1.9 million or
1 -14 more; or
1 -15 (2) within a county within 50 miles of an
1 -16 international border, o r to which Subchapter C, Chapter 232,
1 -17 applies.
1 -18 (b) For an area in a municipality's extraterritorial
1 -19 jurisdiction, as defined by Section 212.001, a plat may not be
1 -20 filed with the county clerk without the approval of [] the
1 -21 governmental entity authorized under Subsection (c) or (d) to
1 -22 regulate subdivisions in the area aael ti4e eekil4t
1 -23 � e 4z2r - 44 eee-sf #1488e reve a to €a €-eR- €es egla€rFes a Plat - 8
1 -24 be €}led €ems the sebL4 ieiaee€ a 4 ;;Rg ' � #hp-
2 -1 o-€ #- he en a a€ - aeE4 :614a e ms
2 -2 ciees R8;6 6r -ems €re ;4ie € € ; €eEJ e€ a Plat €er- €i;a#
2 -3 sebd €e €s €ee, tie - eepeRe4ble €er- aPq, -8V €ag -P=ats €ems ;e
2 -4 ;614at deeS R9:6 E €rte #Ie- € €!1€eg sha!� €ssee RR
2 -5 r- ekees€ e£ ;P- semivire a 4. 1E fee --e a a 8tat } 14 g #- 14 A- #- -a
! e , # �
a R r
2-6 p lat o s ^ c ^q =ev� ac €��e� €9�' ��a� 613���SeL }6�eT� -4€ ��2— �$irv r
2 -7 T1;e ee-r- € € € €ea4- iee 1;;e a# aehed €e a-pla€ r- ege e4 €e be a
2-8 4 er # i; i s •mien ] .
2 -9 (c) Except as provided by Subsections (d)(3) and (4), a
2 -10 municipality and a county may not both regulate subdivisions in
2 -11 [fir] the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality after an
2 -12 agreement under Subsection (d) is executed. The municipality and
2 -13 the county shall enter into a written agreement that identifies the
2 -14 governmental entity authorized to regulate subdivision plats and
2 -15 approve related permits in the extraterritorial jurisdiction. For
2 -16 a municipality in existence on September 1, 2001, the municipality
2 -17 and county shall enter into a written agreement under this
2 -18 subsection on or before April 1, 2002. For a municipality
2 -19 incorporated after September 1, 2001, the municipality and county
2 -20 shall enter into a written agreement under this subsection not
2 -21 later than the 120th day after the date the municipality
2 -22 incorporates. The municipality and the county shall adopt the
2 -23 agreement bV order, ordinance, or resolution. The agreement must
2 -24 be amended by the municipality and the county if necessary to take
2 -25 into account an expansion or reduction in the extraterritorial
2 -26 jurisdiction of the municipality. The municipality shall notify
2 -27 the county of any expansion or reduction in the municipality's
3 -1 extraterritorial jurisdiction. Any expansion or reduction in the
3 -2 municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction that affects property
3 -3 that is subject to a preliminary or final plat filed with the
3 -4 municipality or that was previously approved under Section 212.009
3 -5 does not affect any rights accrued under Chapter 245. The approval
3 -6 of the plat or any permit remains effective as provided by Chapter
3 -7 245 regardless of the change in designation as extraterritorial
3 -8 jurisdiction of the municipality.
3 -9 (d) An agreement under Subsection (c) may grant the
3 -10 authority to regulate subdivision plats and approve related permits
3 -11 in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality as follows:
3 -12 (1) [ the municipality may be granted exclusive
... /viewtext.cmd?LEG=77&SESS=R&CHAMBER=H&BILLTYPE=B&BILLSUFFIX=01445&1 1/16/01
i ikr%.) rlrs i r:nruiieu version - tsin text
Page 2 of 3
3 -13 j urisdiction to regulate subdivision plats and approve related
3 -14 permits in the extraterritorial jurisdiction and may regulate
3 -15 subdivisions under Subchapter A of Chapter 212 and other statutes
3 -16 applicable to municipalitiesL
3 -17 (21 [ , an 4 the county may be granted exclusive
3 -18 j urisdiction to regulate subdivision plats and approve related
3 -19 pe rmits i the extraterritorial jurisdiction and may regulate
3 -20 subdivisions under Sections 232.001- 232.005, Subchapter B or C,
3 -21 Chapter 232, and other statutes applicable to counties;
3 -22 (3) the municipality and the county may apportion the
3 -23 area within the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the municipality
3 -24 with the municipality regulating subdivision plats and approving
3 -25 related permits in the area assigned to the municipality and the
3 -26 county regulating subdivision plats and approving related permits
3 -27 in the area assigned to the county; or
4 -1 _( 4) the municipality and the county may enter into an
4 -2 interlocal agreement that:
4 -3 _(A)___ one office that is authorized
4 -4 to:
4 -5 (i) accept plat applications for tracts of
4 -6 land located in the extraterritorial jurisdiction;
4 -7 _ii _ collect municipal and county plat
4 -8 application fees in lump -sum amount; and
4 -9 (iii) provide applicants one response
4 -10 indicating approval or denial of the plat application; and
4 -11 _ (B) establishes a consolidated and consistent
4 -12 set of regulations related to plats and subdivisions of land as
4 -13 authorized by Chapter 212 Sections 232.001- 232.005 Subchapters B
4 -14 and C, Chapter 232, and other statutes applicable to municipalities
4 -15 and counties that will be enforced in the extraterritorial
4 -16 jurisdiction 1€ a men }e }gal r-egulat4weR ee 4 e s ;4# #; a ee;;etY
4 -17 the mere st'-4or3geR q'-eVais .
4 -18 (e) [4-44 -] In an unincorporated area outside the
4 -19 extraterritorial jurisdiction of a municipality, the municipality
4 -20 may not regulate subdivisions or approve the filing of plats,
4 -21 except as provided by The Interlocal Cooperation Act Chapter 791,
4 -22 Government Code [ - (A�t4aele 4419 (92e) , WerRep's — Teii;;.F; oi4
4 -23] .
4 -24 (f) This subsection applies until an agreement is reached
4 -25 under Subsection (d). For an area in a municipality's
4 -26 extraterritorial jurisdiction, as defined by Section 212.001 a
4 -27 p lat may not be filed with the county clerk without the approval of
5 -1 both the municipality and the county. If a municipal regulation
5 -2 and a county regulation relating to plats and subdivisions of land
5 -3 conflict, the more stringent regulation prevails. However, if one
5 -4 g overnmental entity requires a plat to be filed for the subdivision
5 -5 of a particular tract of land in the extraterritorial - jurisdiction
5 -6 of the municipality and the other governmental entity does not
5 -7 require the filing of a plat for that subdivision the authority
5 -8 responsible for approving plats for the governmental entity that
5 -9 does not require the filing shall issue on request of the
5 -10 subdivider a written certification stating that a plat is not
5 -11 required to be filed for that subdivision of the land. The
5 -12 certification must be attached to a plat required to be filed under
5 -13 this subsection.
5 -14 (g) Subsection (f) applies to a county and area to which
5 -15 Subsections (b) -(e) do not apply.
5 -16 SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2001.
President of the Senate Speaker of the House
I certify that H.B. No. 1445 was passed by the House on April
25, 2001, by a non - record vote; and that the House concurred in
Senate amendments to H.B. No. 1445 on May 24, 2001, by a non - record
vote.
/viewtext.cmd? LEG= 77 &SESS =R& CHAMBER= H &BILLTYPE= B &BILLSUFFIX =01445 11/16/01
I /kD-) i1D 1-t'+J I✓luUiiCU VCISIUII - Dill 1CXl
Fage 3 of 3
Chief Clerk of the House
I certify that H.B. No. 1445 was passed by the Senate, with
amendments, on May 21, 2001, by a viva -voce vote.
APPROVED:
Date
Governor
Secretary of the Senate
... /viewtext.cmd ?LEG= 77 &SESS =R& CHAMBER= H &BILLTYPE= B &BILLSUFFIX =01445 11/16/01
§ 241.044
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
(b) The court shall grant any relief, including an
injunction which may be mandatory, as may be proper
under all the facts and circumstances of the case to
accomplish the purposes of this chapter and the regu-
lations adopted and orders and rulings made under it.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987.
[Sections 241.045 to 241.900 reserved for expansion]
SUBCHAPTER Z. MISCELLANEOUS
PROVISIONS
§ 241.901. Conflict of an Airport Hazard Area
Zoning Regulation With Another
Regulation
(a) If an airport hazard area zoning regulation con-
flicts with any other regulation applicable to the same
area, the more stringent limitation or requirement
controls.
(b) Subsection (a) applies to any conflict with re-
spect to the height of a structure or object of natural
growth or any other matter.
(c) Subsection (a) applies to any regulation that
conflicts with an airport hazard area zoning regulation
whether the regulation was adopted by the political
subdivision that adopted the airport zoning regulation
or by another political subdivision.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987.
§ 241.902. Conflict of an Airport Compatible Land
Use Zoning Regulation With Another
Regulation
(a) If an airport compatible land use zoning regula-
tion conflicts with any other regulation applicable to
the same area, the airport compatible land use zoning
regulation controls.
(b) Subsection (a) applies to any conflict with re-
spect to the use of land or any other matter.
(c) Subsection (a) applies to any regulation that
conflicts with an airport compatible land use zoning
regulation, whether the regulation was adopted by the
political subdivision that adopted the airport compati-
ble land use zoning regulation or by another political
subdivision.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987
§ 241.903. Acquisition of Air Rights or Other
Property
(a) A political subdivision may acquire from a per-
son or other political subdivision an air right, aviation
easement, or other estate or interest in property or in
a nonconforming structure or use if.
(1) the acquisition is necessary to accomplish the
purposes of this chapter;
(2) the property or nonconforming structure or
use is located within the political subdivision, the
political subdivision owns the airport, or the political
subdivision is served by the airport; and
(3)(A) the political subdivision desires to remove,
lower, or terminate the nonconforming structure or
use;
(B) airport zoning regulations are not sufficient
to provide necessary approach protection because of
constitutional limitations; or
(C) the acquisition of a property right is more
advisable than an airport zoning regulation in pro-
viding necessary approach protection.
(b) An acquisition under this section may be by
purchase, grant, or condemnation in the manner pro-
vided by Subchapter B, Chapter 21, Property Code.'
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987.
I V.T.C.A Property Code, § 21.011 et seq.
CHAPTER 242. AUTHORITY OF MUNICIPALI-
TY AND COUNTY TO REGULATE SUBDIVI-
SIONS IN AND OUTSIDE MUNICIPALITY'S
EXTRATERRITORIAL JURISDICTION
Section
242.001. Regulation of Subdivisions Generally.
242.002. Regulation of Subdivisions in Populous Counties or
Contiguous Counties.
§ 242.001. Regulation of Subdivisions Generally
Text of subsec. (a) as amended by Acts
2001, 77th Leg., ch. 736, § 2
(a) This section applies only to a county operating
under Sections 232.001- 232.005 or Subchapter B, C, or
E, Chapter 232.
Text of subsec. (a) as amended by Acts
2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1028, § 1
(a) This section applies only to a county operating
under Sections 232.001- 232.005 or Subchapter B or C,
Chapter 232. Subsections (b) —(e) do not apply:
510
LAND USE & RELATED ACTIVITIES
(1) within a county that contains extraterritorial
jurisdiction of a municipality with a population of 1.9
million or more; or
(2) within a county within 50 miles of an interna-
tional border, or to which Subchapter C, Chapter
232, applies.
(b) For an area in a municipality's extraterritorial
jurisdiction, as defined by Section 212.001, a plat may
not be filed with the county clerk without the approval
of the governmental entity authorized under Subsec-
tion (c) or (d) to regulate subdivisions in the area.
Text of subsee. (c) as amended by Acts
2001, 77th Leg., ch. 736, § 2
(c) In the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a munici-
pality, the municipality may regulate subdivisions un-
der Subchapter A of Chapter 212 and other statutes
applicable to municipalities, and the county may regu-
late subdivisions under Sections 232.001- 232.005, Sub-
chapter B, C, or E, Chapter 232, and other statutes
applicable to counties. If a municipal regulation con-
flicts with a county regulation, the more stringent
provisions prevail.
Text of subset. (c) as amended by Acts
2001, 77th Leg., ch. 1028, § 1
(c) Except as provided by Subsections (d)(3) and
(4), a municipality and a county may not both regulate
subdivisions in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a
municipality after an agreement under Subsection (d)
is executed. The municipality and the county shall
enter into a written agreement that identifies the
governmental entity authorized to regulate subdivision
plats and approve related permits in the extraterrito-
rial jurisdiction. For a municipality in existence on
September 1, 2001, the municipality and county shall
enter into a written agreement under this subsection
on or before April 1, 2002. For a municipality incor-
porated after September 1, 2001, the municipality and
county shall enter into a written agreement under this
subsection not later than the 120th day after the date
the municipality incorporates. The municipality and
the county shall adopt the agreement by order, ordi-
nance, or resolution. The agreement must be amend-
ed by the municipality and the county if necessary to
take into account an expansion or reduction in the
extraterritorial jurisdiction of the municipality. The
municipality shall notify the county of any expansion
or reduction in the municipality's extraterritorial juris-
diction. Any expansion or reduction in the municipali-
ty's extraterritorial jurisdiction that affects property
that is subject to a preliminary or final plat filed with
§ 242.001
the municipality or that was previously approved un-
der Section 212.009 does not affect any rights accrued
under Chapter 245. The approval of the plat or any
permit remains effective as provided by Chapter 245
regardless of the change in designation as extraterri-
torial jurisdiction of the municipality.
(d) An agreement under Subsection (c) may grant
the authority to regulate subdivision plats and ap-
prove related permits in the extraterritorial jurisdic-
tion of a municipality as follows:
(1) the municipality may be granted exclusive
jurisdiction to regulate subdivision plats and ap-
prove related permits in the extraterritorial jur-
isdiction and may regulate subdivisions under
Subchapter A of Chapter 212 and other statutes
applicable to municipalities;
(2) the county may be granted exclusive jurisdic-
tion to regulate subdivision plats and approve relat-
ed permits in the extraterritorial jurisdiction and
may regulate subdivisions under Sections
232.001- 232.005, Subchapter. B or C, Chapter 232,
and other statutes applicable to counties;
(3) the municipality and the county may appor-
tion the area within the extraterritorial jurisdiction
of the municipality with the municipality regulating
subdivision plats and approving related permits in
the area assigned to the municipality and the county
regulating subdivision plats and approving related
permits in the area assigned to the county; or
(4) the municipality and the county may enter
into an interlocal agreement that:
(A) establishes one office that is authorized to:
(i) accept plat applications for tracts of land locat-
ed in the extraterritorial jurisdiction;
(ii) collect municipal and county plat application
fees in a lump -sum amount; and
(iii) provide applicants one response indicating
approval or denial of the plat application; and
(B) establishes a consolidated and consistent set
of regulations related to plats and subdivisions of
land as authorized by Chapter 212, Sections
232.001- 232.005, Subchapters B and C, Chapter 232,
and other statutes applicable to municipalities and
counties that will be enforced in the extraterritorial
jurisdiction.
(e) In an unincorporated area outside the extrater-
ritorial jurisdiction of a municipality, the municipality
may not regulate subdivisions or approve the filing of
511
§ 242.001
LOCAL GOVERNMENT CODE
plats, except as provided by The Interlocal Coopera-
tion Act, Chapter 791, Government Code.
(f) This subsection applies until an agreement is
reached under Subsection (d). For an area in a
municipality's extraterritorial jurisdiction, as defined
by Section 212.001, a plat may not be filed with the
county clerk without the approval of both the munici-
pality and the county. If a municipal regulation and a
county regulation relating to plats and subdivisions of
land conflict, the more stringent regulation prevails.
However, if one governmental entity requires a plat to
be filed for the subdivision of a particular tract of land
in the extraterritorial jurisdiction of the municipality
and the other governmental entity does not require
the filing of a plat for that subdivision, the authority
responsible for approving plats for the governmental
entity that does not require the filing shall issue on
request of the subdivider a written certification stat-
ing that a plat is not required to be filed for that
subdivision of the land. The certification must be
attached to a plat required to be filed under this
subsection.
(g) Subsection (f) applies to a county and area to
which Subsections (b) -(e) do not apply.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amend-
ed by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, §§ 46(c), 87(n), eff. Aug. 28,
1989; Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1428, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1997;
Acts 1999, 76th Leg., ch. 404, § 26, eff. Sept. 1, 1999; Acts
2001, 77th Leg., ch. 736, § 2, eff. Sept. 1, 2001; Acts 2001,
77th Leg., ch. 1028, § 1, eff. Sept. 2001.
Section 2 of Acts 1997, 75th Leg., ch. 1428 provides:
"This Act takes effect September 1, 1997, and applies only to a plat
for a subdivision of land that is filed on or after that date."
§ 242.002. Regulation of Subdivisions in Populous
Counties or Contiguous Counties
(a) This section applies only to a county operating
under Section 232.006.
(b) For an area in a municipality's extraterritorial
jurisdiction, as defined by Section 212.001, a subdivi-
sion plat may not be filed with the county clerk
without the approval of the municipality.
(c) In the extraterritorial jurisdiction of a munici-
pality, the municipality has exclusive authority to reg-
ulate subdivisions under Subchapter A of Chapter 212
and other statutes applicable to municipalities.
(d) In an unincorporated area outside the extrater-
ritorial jurisdiction of a municipality, the municipality
may not regulate subdivisions or approve the filing of
plats, except as provided by The Interlocal Coopera-
tion Act (Article 4413(32c), Vernon's Texas Civil Stat-
utes).
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amend-
ed by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 1, §§ 46(d), 87(o), eff. Aug. 28,
1989; Acts 2001, 77th Leg., Ch. 669, § 77, eff. Sept. 1, 2001.
CHAPTER 243. MUNICIPAL AND COUNTY
AUTHORITY TO REGULATE SEXUALLY
ORIENTED BUSINESS
Section
243.001. Purpose; Effect on Other Regulatory Authority.
243.002. Definition.
243.003. Authority to Regulate.
243.004. Exempt Business.
243.005. Business Licensed Under Alcoholic Beverage
Code: Business Having Coin - Operated Ma-
chines.
243.006. Scope of Regulation.
243.007. Licenses or Permits.
243.0075. Notice by Sign.
243.008. Inspection.
243.009. Fees.
243.010. Enforcement.
243.011. Effect on Other Laws.
Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 837 amended this chapter
§ 243.001. Purpose; Effect on Other Regulatory
Authority
(a) The legislature finds that the unrestricted oper-
ation of certain sexually oriented businesses may be
detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare
by contributing to the decline of residential and busi-
ness neighborhoods and the growth of criminal activi-
ty. The purpose of this chapter is to provide local
governments a means of remedying this problem.
(b) This chapter does not diminish the authority of
a local government to regulate sexually oriented busi-
nesses with regard to any matters.
Acts 1987, 70th Leg., ch. 149, § 1, eff. Sept. 1, 1987. Amend-
ed by Acts 1989, 71st Leg., ch. 837, § 1, eff. Aug. 28, 1989.
Section 2(b) of the 1989 amendatory act provides:
"The repeal of Chapter 242, Acts of the 65th Legislature, Regular
Session, 1977 (Article 2372v, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes), does not
affect an order adopted under that law by the commissioners court of
a county if the order is of a type that the commissioners court may
adopt under Chapter 243, Local Government Code, as amended by
this Act. The order is continued in effect as if it had been adopted
under Chapter 243, Local Government Code, as amended by this
Act."
§ 243.002. Definition
In this chapter, "sexually oriented business" means
a sex parlor, nude studio, modeling studio, love parlor,
adult bookstore, adult movie theater, adult video ar-
512
Texas Legislature Online - Bill Text Help Page 1 of 2
Bill Text
A legislator wishing to pass a bill may draft the legislation personally or obtain the professional staff services
of the engrossing and enrolling department of the senate or the Texas Legislative Council. A bill may be
introduced by any member of the legislature in the member's own chamber. A bill passed by one chamber
must proceed to the other for final passage before being sent to the governor for approval or veto.
Legislative Process - How a Bill Originates
Legislative Process - Introducing a Bill
Every bill has specific elements that will appear in the following order:
The heading: The chamber of origin and the bill number. Example: H.B. 1996 or S.B. 1996
The caption or title: The subject of the bill. No bill except general appropriations bills may contain more than
one subject.
The enacting clause: "BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS." This wording
is stated in the Texas Constitution and must appear on all bills.
The body: The portion of the bill appearing after the enacting clause. If the bill adds to an existing portion of
the constitution or statute, the text is underlined If the bill amends or deletes an existing portion of the
constitution or statute, the text appears within brackets and is striskeR through.
The emergency clause: Another important element of a bill, though not a constitutional requirement. This
clause is placed at the end of the bill and is essential if the bill is to be enacted immediately on passage.
SAMPLE BILL
H.Q. NO. 3199 ---- HEADING
1 An ACT
2 relating to the duties of the secretary of state. ---- CAPTION
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF
3 THE STATE OF TEXAS:
----- ENACTING CLAUSE
SECTION 1. Section 405.017, Government Code,
4 is amended by adding Subsection (6) to read as
follows:
Sec. 405.017. MISCELLANEOUS DUTIES. The
5 secretary of state
6 shall:
(1) affix the state seal to all official documents
7 issued from the secretary of state's office;
(2) unless provided otherwise by law, commission
g state officers;
(3) keep in a separate suitable book a register of
9 all state officers;
(4) immediately on receipt, deliver to the person
10 in charge of the state library all books, maps,
charts, printed
volumes of the laws of a nation, territory, or
11 another state, or other political or miscellaneous
publications received in the
Texas Legislature Online - Bill Text Help
12 secretary of states office; [e "] ---- DELETION
(5) immediately on receipt, deliver to the supreme
13 court librarian reports of courts of a nation,
territory, or
14 another state received in the secretary of state's office and -- --
- ADDITIONS
(6) perform such other and further duties as may
15 be directed by the governor
SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1,
16 1995. ----- EFFECTIVE DATE
SECTION 3. The importance of this legislation
17 and the crowded condition of the calendars in
both houses create an
emergency and an imperative public necessity
18 that the constitutional rule
19 requiring bills to be read on three several
days in each house be suspended, and this rule is
hereby suspended.
20 ---- EMERGENCY CLAUSE
Page 2 of 2