Texas law on any date › Attorney General opinions
Attorney General Opinion GA-0305
Issued August 23, 2004 · request RQ0262GA
Re: Whether a city may use a Tax Code chapter 311 tax increment fund to reimburse a private developer for certain costs if the expenditures have not been competitively bid
Cites: TX §3, TX §311.013, TX §311.014, TX §311.010, TX §252.022, TX §252, TX §022, TX §311.01
The Attorney General's page · official PDF
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
GREG
ABBOTT
February 16,2005
The Honorable Will Hartnett
Chair, Judiciary Committee
Texas House of Representatives
Post Office Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78768-2910
Opinion No. GA-0305
Re: Whether a city may use a Tax Code chapter
311 tax increment
fund to reimburse
a private
developer
for certain costs if the expenditures
have not been competitively
bid (RQ-0262-GA)
Dear Representative
Hartnett:
You ask whether a city may use a Tax Code chapter 3 11 tax increment fund to reimburse a
private developer for certain costs if the expenditures
have not been competitively
bid.’
I.
Legal Background
A.
Chapter 311 of the Tax Code
Chapter 3 11 of the Tax Code, the Tax Increment Financing Act, authorizes cities to
use tax increment financing to develop certain areas. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. 5 3 11.001 (Vernon
2002) (short title). Section 3 11.003(a) authorizes the governing bodyofa
municipalitybyordinance
to “designate
a contiguous
geographic
area in the jurisdiction
of the municipality
to be a
reinvestment
zone to promote
development
or redevelopment
of the area if the governing body
determines that development
or redevelopment
would not occur solely through private investment
in the reasonably foreseeable future.” Id. 3 3 11.003(a). To be designated as a reinvestment
zone,
the area must meet certain statutory criteria.
See id. 5 3 11.005; see also Tex. Att’y Gen. Gp. No.
JC-0152 (1999) at 8 (noting that article VIII, section l-g(b) limits tax increment financing to an area
that is “unproductive,
underdeveloped,
or blighted” and that Tax Code section 3 11.005 generally
comports with that constitutional
requirement).
Before adopting an ordinance providing for a reinvestment
zone, the governing body, among
other things, must prepare a preliminary reinvestment
zone financing plan, which must be sent to
each taxing unit that levies taxes on real property in the proposed zone, and must hold a public
hearing on the creation of the zone. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. 5 3 11.003(b)-(c) (Vernon 2002). The
‘See Letter from Honorable
Will Hamett,
Chair, Judiciary Committee,
Texas House of Representatives,
to
Honorable
Greg Abbott, Texas Attorney General (Aug. 23, 2004) (on tile with Opinion Committee,
also availnbk
at
http://www.oag.state.hi.us)
[hereinafter
Request Letter].
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 2
(GA-0305)
ordinance designating an area as a reinvestment
zone must, among other things, describe the zone’s
boundaries,
create a board of directors for the zone, and establish a tax increment
fund. See id.
5 311,004(a)(l)-(2),
(6).
Once a reinvestment
zone has been created and a board of directors appointed,
see id.
3 311.009 (board of directors),
the board must adopt a project plan and a reinvestment
zone
financing plan that is “as consistent as possible” with the preliminary plans. Id. 5 3 11 ,011 (a). The
project plan must include a map showing proposed improvements
to real property in the zone and
a list of estimated nonproject
costs. See id. 5 3 11 .Ol l(b). The reinvestment
zone financing plan
must include a detailed list of the estimated project costs and a list of proposed public works or
improvements,
See id. 5 311 .Ol l(c). After their adoption by the board, the municipal
governing
body must by ordinance approve the plans, as well as any subsequent plan amendments.
See id.
5 311.011(d)-(e).
A municipality may “exercise any power necessary and convenient to carry out this chapter”
including, for example, entering into agreements to implement project plans and constructing public
works and improvements
consistent
with the project plan.
See id. 3 3 11,008@)(4)(B).
The
governing body of the municipality
“by ordinance or resolution may authorize the board to exercise
any of the municipality’s
powers with respect to the administration,
management,
or operation ofthe
zone or the implementation
ofthe project plan for the zone,“see id. 5 3 11 .Ol O(a), with the exception
of certain municipal powers, see id. 5 311.010(a), (d), and “may restrict any power granted to the
board” by chapter 3 11, id. 5 3 11 .Ol O(d). Thus, while chapter 3 11 provides a reinvestment
zone
board with certain powers, and a city may delegate certain powers to a board, chapter 3 11 does not
vest powers in the board independent
of the city.
Chapter 3 11 improvements
are financed by the tax increment, either directly or as a revenue
source to retire tax increment bond indebtedness.
After a reinvestment
zone’s creation and for the
zone’s duration, participating
taxing units that tax real property in the reinvestment
zone, with
certain exceptions,
must pay the tax increment
into the tax increment
fund.
See id. § 311.013
(Vernon Supp. 2004-05).* In any particular tax year, the tax increment is calculated by subtracting
‘Whether and to what extent a particular taxing unit is required to pay the tax increment into the tax increment
fond will depend upon a number of factors.
See, e.g., TEX. TAX CODE ANN. $5 3 11.0125(d) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05)
(“If a taxing unit enters into a tax abatement
agreement
authorized
by this section, taxes that are abated under that
agreement are not considered
taxes to be imposed or produced by that taxing unit in calculating
the amount oE (1) the
tax increment of that taxing unit; or (2) that taxing unit’s deposit to the tax increment fond for the reinvestment
zone.“);
3 11.013(b) (“Each taxing unit shall pay into the tax increment
fund for the zone an amount equal to the tax increment
produced by the unit, less the sum of: (1) property taxes produced from the tax increments that are, by contract executed
before the designation
ofthe area as a reinvestment
zone, required to be paid by the unit to another political subdivision;
and (2) a portion, not to exceed 15 percent, of the tax increment produced by the unit as provided by the reinvestment
zone financing
plan or a larger portion as provided by Subsection(f).“);
311.013(d)-(e)
(certain taxing units are not
required to pay a tax increment into the tax increment
fund if improvements
are not undertaken
in the zone within three
years); 3 11.013(f) (“A taxing unit is not required to pay into the tax increment
fond any of its tax increment
produced
from property located in a reinvestment
zone designated under Section 3 11.005(a) or in an area added to a reinvestment
zone under Section 3 Il.007
unless the taxing unit enters into an agreement
to do so with the governing
body of the
(continued...)
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 3
(GA-0305)
“the tax increment
base,” which is the total appraised value of taxable real property
in the
reinvestment
zone for the year in which the zone was designated,
from the current total appraised
value of taxable real property in the reinvestment
zone. See id. 5 311.012.
“In general, the ‘tax
increments’ are taxes derived by a taxing unit from the difference between the appraised value of all
taxable real property located in a reinvestment
zone for that year less the appraised value of the
property when the zone was established.
In other words, they are taxes attributable to the increased
value of the real property in the zone presumably due to its development.”
Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. No.
JC-0300 (2000) at 8 n.8 (citing Tax Code section 311.012).
In addition, a municipality
may issue tax increment bonds and notes, the proceeds of which
are used to pay project costs for the zone. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN. 9 311.015(a) (Vernon 2002).
Revenues from tax increment bond sales must be deposited in the tax increment fund, along with the
tax increments collected by participating
taxing units. See id. 3 311.014(a).
The tax increment fund is used to finance improvements
within the zone consistent with the
plans. See id. 5 311.014(a)-(c).
Section 311.014(b) provides that “[mloneymay
be disbursed from
the fund only to satisfy claims of holders of tax increment bonds or notes issued for the zone, to pay
project costs for the zone, or to make payments pursuant to an agreement made under Section
311.010(b) dedicating revenue from the tax increment fund.” Id. 5 311.014(b) (emphasis added).
For purposes of the Act, the term “project costs” means
the expenditures
made or estimated
to be made and monetary
obligations incurred or estimated to be incurred by the municipality
establishing
a reinvestment
zone that are listed in the project plan as
costs ofpublic works orpublic improvements in the zone, plus other
costs incidental to those expenditures and obligations.
Id. 5 311.002(l)
(emphasis added).
The definition further provides that “project costs” include a
varietyofrelatedcosts.
Seeid. 5 311.002(1)(A)-(K).’
Section 311.010(b) authorizes eitherthe board
‘(-continued)
municipality
that created the zone. A taxing unit may enter into an agreement under this subsection
at any time before
or after the zone is created or enlarged.
The agreement may include conditions
for payment of that tax increment
into
the fund and must specify the portion of the tax increment
to be! paid into the fund and the years for which that tax
increment
is to be paid into the fund. The agreement and the conditions in the agreement are binding on the taxing unit,
the municipality,
and the board of directors of the zone.“).
3Specifica11y, subsections
(A) through (K) of section 3 11.002( 1) include within project costs:
(A) capital costs, including
the actual costs of the acquisition
and construction
of public
works, public improvements,
newbuildings,
stmctures, and fixtures; the actual costs ofthe acquisition,
demolition,
alteration,
remodeling,
repair, or reconstruction
of existing buildings,
structures,
and
fixtures; and the actual costs of the acquisition
of land and equipment
and the clearing and grading of
land;
(B) financing
costs, including
all interest paid to holders of evidences
of indebtedness
or
(continued...)
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 4
(GA-0305)
of directors
of a reinvestment
zone or the governing
body of the municipality
that creates a
reinvestment
zone to enter “into agreements as the board or the governing body considers necessary
or convenient to implement the project plan and reinvestment
zone financing plan and achieve their
purposes.”
Id. 9 311.010(b).
It further identifies certain terms that may be included in such an
agreement:
An agreement may provide for the regulation or restriction of the use
of land by imposing conditions,
restrictions,
or covenants
that run
with the land. An agreement may during the term of the agreement
dedicate, pledge, or otherwise provide for the use of revenue in the
tax increment
fund to pay any project
costs that benefit
the
reinvestment
zone, including project costs relating to the cost of
buildings,
schools, or other educational
facilities owned by or on
behalf of a school district,
community
college district,
or other
political
subdivision
of this state, railroad
or transit
facilities,
affordable housing, the remediation
of conditions that contaminate
public or private land or buildings, the preservation
of the facade of
‘(-continued)
other obligations
issued to pay for project costs and any premium paid over the principal
amount of
the obligations
because of the redemption
of the obligations
before maturity;
(C) real property assembly costs;
(D) professional
service
costs,
including
those
incurred
for architectural,
planning,
engineering,
and legal advice and services;
(E) imputed
administrative
costs, including
reasonable
charges for the time spent by
employees
of the municipality
in connection
with the implementation
of a project plan;
(F) relocation
costs;
(Ci) organizational
costs, including
the costs of conducting
environmental
impact studies or
other studies, the cost ofpublicizing
the creation of the zone, and the cost of implementing
the project
plan for the zone;
(H) interestbefore
andduring
constructionandforoneyearaftercompletionofcons~ction~
whether or not capitalized,
(I)
the cost of operating the reinvestment
zone and project facilities;
(J) the amount of any contributions
made by the municipality
from general revenue for the
implementation
of the project plan; and
(K) payments
made at the discretion
of the governing
body of the municipality
that the
municipality
finds necessary or convenient
to the creation of the zone or to the implementation
of the
project plans for the zone.
TEX. TAX CODE ANN. 5 3 I I .002( 1) (Vernon 2002).
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 5
(GA-0305)
a private or public building, or the demolition
of public or private
buildings.
Id. (emphasis added).
B.
Chapter 252 of the Local Government
Code
Municipalities
are generally subject to the competitive procurement
requirements
set
out in chapter 252 of the Local Government
Code.
In addition to establishing
procedures
for
competitive
bidding, chapter 252 permits a municipality
to use alternate competitive
procurement
procedures
in certain circumstances.
See, e.g., TEX. LOC. GOV’T
CODE ANN. $5 252.021(a)(l)
(Vernon Supp. 2004-05) (competitive
sealed bidding or competitive
sealed proposals), (2) (reverse
auction procedure),
(3) (methods prescribed by Local Government
Code, chapter 271, subchapter
H); 252.0415
(requests
for proposals).
For simplicity’s
sake, we refer to these procedures
collectively
as competitive
bidding requirements.
Pursuant to section 252.021, a municipality
must comply with chapter 252’s competitive
bidding requirements
before “enter[ing] into a contract that requires an expenditure
of more than
$25,000 from one or more municipal
funds.”
Id. 5 252.021(a).
Section
252.022 exempts
expenditures
for certain goods and services from the chapter’s scope, see id. 5 252.022, such as “a
procurement
necessary to preserve or protect the public health and safety” and “a procurement
for
personal, professional,
or planning services,” id. § 252,022(a)(2),
(4).4
II.
Analvsis
You ask two questions with respect to a city’s authority to make payments
from the tax
increment fund:
1. May a city reimburse
a private developer
from the tax
increment fund for costs incurred by the developer for environmental
remediation,
renovation, or facade preservation of a private or public
building in the reinvestment
zone, if such project costs have not been
competitively
bid in accordance
with Chapter 252 of the Local
Government
Code?
2. Do any eligible project costs to be reimbursed from the tax
increment fund have to be competitively
bid?
%3xtain conflicting
home-rule city charter provisions
control over a provision
of chapter 252. See TEX. LOC.
GOV’T CODE ANN. 5 252.002 (Vernon 1999) (“Any provision in the charter of a home-rule
municipality
that relates to
the notice of contracts, advertisement
of the notice, requirements
for the taking of sealed bids based on specifications
for public improvements
or purchases, the manner of publicly
opening bids or reading them aloud, or the manner of
letting contracts and that is in conflict with this chapter controls
over this chapter unless the governing
body of the
municipality
elects to have this chapter supersede the charter.“).
The Honorable Will Hartnett - Page 6
(GA-0305)
Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2. Your questions raise three general issues:
whether the tax
increment
fund may be used to pay for environmental
remediation,
renovation,
or facade
preservation
costs; whether a city’s tax increment
fund expenditures
for project costs must be
competitively
bid; and whether a city mayreimburse
a private developer from the tax increment fund
for costs that have not been competitively
bid.
You have not provided us with any information about the city, reinvestment
zone, or private
developer
at issue, and we address these concerns in general terms and not with respect to any
particular fact situation.
We note that you ask about a city’s authority to make expenditures
from
a tax increment
fund to pay costs for specific work performed;
you do not ask about the city’s
authority to designate an area or particular property to be a reinvestment
zone or to adopt a project
plan. We assume that the city at issue has already designated the area as a reinvestment
zone and
has adopted a project plan. We do not address that authority.
A.
Allowable Uses for the Tax Increment Fund
With respect to the first issue, section 311.014(b)
of the Tax Code provides that
money may be disbursed from the tax increment
fund “only to satisfy claims of holders of tax
increment bonds or notes issued for the zone, to pay project costs for the zone, or fo makepayments
pursuant to an agreement made under Section 311.01 O@) dedicating revenue from the tax increment
fund.”
TEX. TAX CODE ANN. 3 3 11.014(b) (Vernon 2002) (emphasis added). Your letter suggests
that section 311.010(b) authorizes using a tax increment fund to pay a private developer for “costs
incurred by the developer for environmental
remediation,
renovation,
or facade preservation
of a
private or public building.”
Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2.
Section 3 11 .Ol O(b) generally authorizes either the board of directors of a reinvestment
zone
or the governing body ofthe municipality
that creates a reinvestment
zone to “enter into agreements
as the board or the governing
body considers necessary or convenient
to implement the project
plan and reinvestment
zone financing plan and achieve their purposes,”
TEX. TAX CODE ANN.
$J 311.010(b)
(Vernon
2002) (emphasis
added), and more specifically
provides
that such an
agreement may “dedicate, pledge, or otherwise provide for the use of revenue in the tax increment
fund topay anyproject
costs that benefit the reinvestment
zone, includingproject
costs relating to
the cost of. . the remediation of conditions that contaminate public or private land or buildings, [or]
the preservation
of the facade of a private or public building,” id. (emphasis added). Thus, while
section 3 11 .Ol O(b) specifically authorizes agreements dedicating tax increment fund revenues to pay
for environmental
remediation
and facade preservation costs, such costs must be project costs. See
id. For this reason, under section 3 11.014(b) or 3 11 .Ol O(b), tax increment fund expenditures,
other
than payments to satisfy claims of holders of tax increment bonds or notes, must be to pay project
costs.
To constitute “project costs,” costs must fall within the section 3 11.002(l) definition of the
term. See id. 5 311.002(l).
Under section 311,002(1),“project
costs”must
be “listed in the project
plan as costs of public works or public improvements
in the zone” or constitute
“other costs
incidental
to those expenditures
and obligations.”
Id. 5 311.002(l).
In addition,
section
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 7
(GA-0305)
311,002(1)(K)
provides
that “project
costs” include “payments
made at the discretion
of the
governing
body of the municipality
that the municipality
finds necessary
or convenient
to the
creation ofthe zone or to the implementation
ofthe project plans for the zone.” Id. 5 3 11.002(1)(K).
Thus, with regard to the first issue you raise, a city may expend tax increment funds to pay
“costs incurred by the developer for environmental
remediation, renovation, or facade preservation
of a private or public building,” Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2, only if the city determines that
the costs constitute “project costs” within the meaning of section 3 11.002( 1). In particular, the costs
must be listed in the project plan or constitute
“other costs incidental to those expenditures
and
obligations.”
TEX. TAX CODE ANN. 5 311.002(l)
(Vernon 2002). The costs may also constitute
“project costs” if the city governing body finds them “necessary or convenient to the creation of the
zone or to the implementation
of the project plans for the zone.” Id. § 311.002(1)(K).
Whether a
particular payment is for project costs involves questions of fact beyond the purview of an attorney
general opinion. Seegenerally
Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. Nos. GA-0128 (2003) at 5 (a question requiring
resolution
of particular
facts is “not one in which this office ordinarily engages in the opinion
process”);
GA-0106 (2003) at 7 (“[tlhis office cannot find facts or resolve fact questions
in an
attorney general opinion”)
B.
Competitive Bidding
You also ask whether a city’s authority to use the tax increment fund to pay a private
developer for costs for environmental
remediation
or facade preservation costs or other project costs
is limited by competitive
bidding statutes.
See Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2. Your questions
indicate that the city, not some other entity, is expending funds. See id. (“May a city reimburse a
private developer from the tax increment fund
?“) (emphasis added). Thus, we assume that the
city and the reinvestment
zone board of directors have not delegated the authority to manage the
reinvestment
zone to a local government
corporation5
The legislature
has adopted statutes that authorize governmental
entities like cities and
counties to establish separate entities to expend tax funds and has provided,
expressly or by clear
implication,
that these separate entities and the money they control are not subject to competitive
bidding laws and similar statutes.
In such cases, this office has concluded that statutes governing
the creating entity’s transactions do not apply. See, e.g., Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. Nos. JC-0335 (2001)
at 4 (concluding that “section 394.904(b) of the Local Government
Code
. excepts contracts of a
local government
corporation
from the Professional
Services Procurement
Act”); JC-0206 (2000)
at 4, 6 (concluding
that Transportation
Code section 431.101(e)
exempts
a local government
corporation
from the competitive
bidding provisions
applicable to the county that created it);
JC-0109 (1999) at 2,6 (concluding
that a section 4B corporation is not subject to the public notice
and bidding requirements
of section 272.001(a) of the Local Government
Code on the basis of
‘Section 311.010(f) provides that the board of directors of a reinvestment
zone and the governing body of the
municipality
“may enter into a contract with a local govemment
corporation
to manage the reinvestment
zone or
implement
the project plan and reinvestment
zone fmancing plan for the term of the agreement.”
TEX. TAX CODE ANN.
5 3 11 .Ol O(f) (Vernon 2002) (“In this subsection,
‘local government
corporation’
means a local govemment
corporation
created by the municipality
under Chapter 43 1, Transportation
Code.“).
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 8
(GA-0305)
section 22 of article 5190.6, which provides that a development
corporation
is not a political
subdivision or a political corporation);
JC-0032 (1999) at 6-7 (concluding
on basis of section 22 of
article 5 190.6 that a section 4A development
corporation is not a political subdivision
subject to the
prevailing wage law, Government
Code chapter 2258).
As these opinions illustrate, whether a statutory requirement applies to a particular entity or
its transactions
must be decided on the basis of the requirement’s
scope and the specific statutes
governing
the entity.
You ask in particular whether project costs paid by a city from the tax
increment fund must be competitively
bid under chapter 252 of the Local Government
Code, see
Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2, and we limit our analysis to that statute. Neither chapter 252 nor
chapter 3 11 of the Tax Code expressly addresses whether tax increment
fund expenditures
are
subject to competitive
bidding under chapter 252. And we have not located any judicial or attorney
general opinion resolving the question.
Section 252.021 of the Local Government
Code generally
requires a municipality
to comply with certain competitive bidding procedures before entering into
a contract that requires an expenditure,
over a certain dollar amount, “from one or more municipal
funds.”
See TEX. Lot.
GOV’T
CODE ANN. 3 252.021(a) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05) (“Before a
municipality
may enter into a contract that requires an expenditure ofmore than $25,000 from one
or more municipal funds, the municipality
must
.“). You ask about a city’s” authority to make
expenditures
from the tax increment fund. Thus, the answer to your question depends upon whether
the tax increment fund is a municipal fund within the meaning of section 252.021.
Chapter 252 of the Local Government
Code does not define the term “municipal fund,” nor
is the term defined in other statutes, cases, or attorney general opinions. Section 252.021(d) provides
that chapter 252 “does not apply to the expenditure
of municipal funds that are derived from an
appropriation,
loan, or grant received by a municipality
from the federal or state government
for
conducting a community
development
program established under Chapter 373 if under the program
items are purchased
under the request-for-proposal
process described by Section 252.042.”
Id.
3 252.021(d).
This section suggests that whether funds are “municipal
funds” is determined by
whether the municipality
possesses and controls the money rather than by the money’s source.
Chapter 3 11 vests the city with possession and control over the tax increment fund. The tax
increment fund, which the city establishes by ordinance, consists of deposits of the “tax increment”
by the city and other participating
units, revenue from the sale of tax increment bonds or notes, and
revenue from sales ofproperty
acquired as part of the tax increment fund. See TEX. TAX CODE ANN.
$5 311.004(a)(6),
,012 (Vernon 2002), ,013 (Vernon Supp. 2004-05). Although other taxing units
may contribute taxes to the tax increment fund, the timd is expended according to plans approved
by the municipal governing body in a city ordinance.
See id. 3 3 11 ,011 (Vernon 2002). Moreover,
‘See Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2. An attorney general opinion has concluded that a city agency or division
is subject to municipal competitive
bidding requirements,
see Tex. Att’y Gen. op. No. MW- 132 (1980) at 2 (concluding
thatcityand
county housing authorities are subject to competitivebidding
requirements
applicable to cities and counties),
and it is likely that a reinvestment
mne board is subject to chapter 252 as a municipal
entity.
Given that you ask about
city expenditures
and that chapter 3 11 clearly Vests the creating municipal governing body with authority to expend the
tax increment
fund, however,
we need not resolve whether municipal
competitive
bidding
requirements
apply to
expenditures
made by a reinvestment
zcme board.
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 9
(GA-0305)
chapter 3 11 does not remove tax increment fund spending from the city’s control. Both the city and
the reinvestment
zone board are expressly authorized to implement
the project and financing plans
and to make agreements pledging tax increment fund revenues, see id. $5 3 11.008(b)(l)
(powers of
the municipality
to implement the plans), ,010 (powers of the board of directors), but the municipal
governing body may restrict any power granted to the board, id. 5 3 11 .OlO(d)( 1). Furthermore,
the
governing body ofthe municipality
is required to provide the other taxing units, the attorney general,
and the comptroller
with financial information
about the tax increment fund on a yearly basis. See
id. § 311.016. In addition, wenote that section 311.014(c)provides
that, subject to the tax increment
bond and note holders’ agreement, “money in a tax increment fund may be temporarily invested in
the same manner as otherfunds
of the municipality.”
Id. 5 311.014(c) (emphasis added).
In sum, the legislature has not provided in chapter 3 11 that the tax reinvestment
zone or its
board is an entity separate from the city, nor has it expressly provided
that tax increment
fund
expenditures
are not subject to competitive bidding statutes and similar laws. Furthermore,
the city
possesses the tax increment fund and controls its use, may commit fund revenues, and is accountable
for the fund’s use to other,entities.
Taken as a whole, chapter 311 suggests that the tax increment
fund is a fund “of the municipality.”
Id.
For these reasons, we conclude that a tax increment
fund is a municipal
fund within the
meaning
of chapter 252 of the Local Government
Code and that chapter
252 may apply to
expenditures from the tax increment fund. Whether a particular expenditure is subject to competitive
bidding will depend upon whether the expenditure
falls within the terms of section 252.021.
See
TEX. Lot. GOV’T CODE ANN. 9 252.021(a) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05) (“Before a municipality
may
enter into a contract that requires an expenditure of more than $25,000 from one or more municipal
funds, the municipality
must [follow certain procedures.]“).
In addition, a particular expenditure
may be exempt from chapter 252 under section 252.022. See id. 4 252.022(a) (“This chapter does
not apply to an expenditure
for [certain goods and services].“).
We have received a brief that contends that chapter 252 should not apply to the tax increment
fund expenditures you ask about because private developers will have no incentive to improve their
property if they must compete with others for reinvestment
zone funding to perform the work?
However,
chapter 252 clearly applies to expenditures
from municipal
funds for real property
improvements
made by private developers
because it includes
a limited
exception
for such
expenditures.
Specifically,
section 252.022(a)(ll)
excepts from chapter 252 an expenditure for “a
payment
under a contract by which a developer
participates
in the construction
of a public
improvement
as provided by Subchapter C, Chapter 212.” Id. 5 252.022(a)(ll).
Subchapter C of
chapter 212 of the Local Government
Code provides
that “a municipality
with 5,000 or more
inhabitants
may make a contract with a developer of a subdivision
or land in the municipality
to
construct public improvements,
not including
a building,
related to the development,”
without
complying
with chapter 252. Id. 5 212.071; see also id. § 212.072(a) (“Under the contract, the
‘see Brief from Bennett Sandlin, Legal Services Director, Texas Municipal
League, to Nancy S. Fuller, Chair,
Opinion Committee,
Office of Attorney General, at 1 (Sept. 24,2004)
( on file with Opinion
Committee)
[hereinafter
TML Brief].
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 10
(GA-0305)
developer shall construct the improvements
and the municipality
shall participate in their cost.“).’
Subchapter C also expressly provides that if the “contract does not meet the requirements
of this
subchapter, Chapter 252 applies to the contract ifthe contract would otherwise be governed by that
chapter.” Id. 5 212.071.
C.
Reimbursement
Finally, we consider whether a city may reimburse a private developer from the tax
increment fund for costs that have not been competitively
bid.
You ask about a city’s authority to reimburse a private developer for project costs, but do not
provide specific facts. See Request Letter, supra note 1, at 2. By “reimbursement,”
you could mean
that the city agreed in advance to pay the private developer for the costs upon completion ofthe work
and that the developer has performed
the work and now seeks payment pursuant to the agreement.
In that case, the expenditure
is permissible
if it is authorized by chapter 3 11 and the agreement to
pay for the work was entered into pursuant to competitive bidding requirements,
if applicable.
On
the other hand, you could mean that the private developer seeks reinvestment
zone funding for costs
for work the developer has already performed but that the city did not agree in advance to pay. We
assume you mean the latter.
As we have concluded, some tax increment fund expenditures
will be subject to competitive
bidding under chapter 252 ofthe Local Government
Code. Under chapter 252, a municipality must
comply with competitive
bidding requirements
before agreeing to pay municipal funds. See TEX.
LOC. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 252.021(a) (Vernon Supp. 2004-05) (“Before a municipality may enter
into LI contract that requires an expenditure ofmore than $25,000 from one or more municipal funds,
the municipality
must [follow certain procedures.]“)
(emphasis
added).
Moreover,
competitive
bidding procedures contemplate potential contractors submitting bids to undertake work that has not
yet been performed,
the city awarding a contract to the lowest responsible
bidder, the successful
bidder performing the work, and the city then paying for the work pursuant to the contract. See, e.g.,
id. § 252.043. If a municipal expenditure is subject to chapter 252, the city would be precluded from
reimbursing
a person for costs incurred for work not performed
pursuant to a competitively
bid
contract.
We have received
a brief that contends
that chapter 252 does not apply when a city
reimburses a private developer because chapter 252 applies to a city’s expenditures
and does not
apply to private entities. See TML Brief, supra note 7, at 1. However, you do not ask about a city’s
authority to require a private developer to procure contracts by competitive bidding but rather about
*See aim TEX. Lot. GOV’T CODE ANN. 5 212.072(b)
(Vernon Supp. 2004-05) (“The contract must establish
the limit of participation by the municipality
at a level not to exceed 30 percent of the total contract price. In addition,
the contract may also allow participation
by the municipality
at a level not to exceed 100 percent of the total cost for any
oversizing
of improvements
required
by the municipality,
including
but not limited
to increased
capacity
of
improvements
to anticipate other ii~ture development
in the area. The municipality
is liable only for the agreed payment
of its share, which shall be determined
in advance either as a lump sum OI as a factor OI percentage
of the total actual
cost as determined
by municipal
ordinance.“).
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 11
(GA-0305)
a city’s authority to pay a private developer for costs the developer has incurred.
We conclude that
when chapter 252 competitive
bidding requirements
apply to an expenditure,
a city is necessarily
precluded
from reimbursing
a private developer.
This conclusion
does not require a private
developer to comply with chapter 252 but rather limits a city’s authority to expend funds without
complying with chapter 252.
Even if tax increment fund expenditures
are not subject to competitive bidding (because they
fall under the section 252.021 threshold or are excepted under section 252.022), reimbursing
a
private developer for work performed without the city’s prior agreement raises additional concerns.
First, chapter 3 11 of the Tax Code contemplates
that the tax increment fund will be used to
pay for project costs outlined in advance in the project plan, WTEX. TAX CODE ANN. $5 3 11.002( 1)
(Vernon 2002) (defining “project costs”), and pursuant to “agreements
to implement the project
plan and reinvestment
zone financing plan, “id. 5 311.010(b).
Seegenerally
id. 3 311.014(b) (Tax
increment fund “[mloney may be disbursed from the fund only to satisfy claims of holders of tax
increment bonds or notes issued for the zone, to payproject
costs for the zone, or to make payments
pursuant to an agreement made under Section 311.01 O(b) dedicating revenue from the tax increment
fund.“) (emphasis
added).
In addition,
money in a tax increment
fund, taxes deposited
by
participating taxing units, is public money subject to constitutional
limitations on the use of public
funds. See TEX. CONST. art. III, 5 52 (“the Legislature shall have no power to authorize any county,
city, town or other political corporation or subdivision ofthe State to lend its credit or to grant public
money or thing of value in aid of, or to any individual, association or corporation
whatsoever, or to
become a stockholder in such corporation, association or company”).
Cf: Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. Nos.
GA-0264 (2004) at 1 O-l 2, JC-0118 (1999) at 9 (concluding that sales and use tax proceeds collected
for economic development
under the Development
Corporation Act of 1979 are public funds subject
to article III, section 52). As a result, a city must ensure that tax increment fund expenditures
are
supported by sufficient
consideration
and are not gratuitous payments.
See Tex. Mun. League
Zntergov’tlRiskPoolv.
Tex. Workers’ Camp. Comm ‘n, 74 S.W.3d 377,383 (Tex. 2002) (“[Slection
52(a)‘s prohibiting the Legislature from authorizing apolitical subdivision
‘to grant public money’
means that the Legislature
cannot require gratuitous
payments
to individuals,
associations,
or
corporations.
A political
subdivision’s
paying public money is not ‘gratuitous’
if the political
subdivision receives return consideration.“)
(citations omitted). In making an expenditure ofpublic
funds that benefits a private person or entity, “a [political subdivision’s
governing body] will avoid
violating article llI, section 52 if it (i) determines in good faith that the expenditure
serves a public
purpose and (ii) places sufficient controls on the transaction, contractual or otherwise, to ensure that
the public purpose is carried out.” Tex. Att’y Gen. Op. No. GA-01 88 (2004) at 4.
Any city tax increment
fund expenditure
must be authorized
by chapter 311 and must
comport with article III, section 52. However, before reimbursing
a private developer
for work
performed without the city’s prior agreement,
we would advise a city to be especially careful to
consider whether the expenditure
(i) is for a project cost authorized by the project plan and (ii) is a
gratuitous payment
prohibited
by article III, section 52, particularly
given that the city is not
contractually obligated to pay.
The Honorable Will Hartnett
- Page 12
(GA-0305)
SUMMARY
A city may use a Tax Code chapter 3 11 tax increment fund to
pay a private developer for environmental
remediation,
renovation,
or facade preservation
costs if the costs constitute
“project costs”
within the scope of section 3 11.002(l).
A tax increment
fund is a
municipal
fund within the meaning
of chapter 252 of the Local
Government
Code,
and
chapter
252’s
competitive
bidding
requirements
may apply to expenditures from the tax increment fund.
Whether a particular expenditure
is subject to competitive
bidding
will depend upon whether the expenditure
falls within the terms of
section 252.021 and whether the expenditure is exempt from chapter
252 under section 252.022.
If a municipal expenditure
is subject to
chapter 252, the city would be precluded from reimbursing
a person
for costs incurred for work not performed pursuant to a competitively
bid contract.
Very truly yours,
BARRY R. MCBEE
First Assistant Attorney General
DON R. WILLETT
Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel
NANCY S. FULLER
Chair, Opinion Committee
Mary R. Crouter
Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee
Attorney General opinions are persuasive, not binding on courts, and answer questions of law, not fact. Text extracted from the official PDF. Not legal advice.