Satterlee v. Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority
| Citation | 561 S.W.2d 869 |
| Decision Date | 29 December 1977 |
| Docket Number | No. 8025,8025 |
| Parties | Elroy M. SATTERLEE, Tax Assessor-Collector, Pasadena Independent School District, et al., Appellants, v. GULF COAST WASTE DISPOSAL AUTHORITY et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Stanley D. Baskin, Pasadena, Joe Resweber, County Atty., Harris County, Houston, for appellants.
Rufus Wallingford, Frank Harmon, M. L. Skelton, Donald B. McFall, Ben Rice, Lawrence L. Bellatti, Houston, for appellees.
This is an appeal by the appellants, Carl S. Smith, Tax Assessor-Collector, Harris County, Texas, and Elroy M. Satterlee, Tax Assessor-Collector, Pasadena Independent School District, from an adverse judgment rendered by the 152nd District Court of Harris County, Texas, declaring certain real property and improvements thereon, owned by appellee, Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority (hereinafter referred to as "the Authority"), exempt from ad valorem taxation. The other appellees, Champion International Corporation, Atlantic Richfield Company, Air Products & Chemicals, Inc., Crown Central Petroleum Corporation, and Petro-Tex Chemical Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "the participating industries"), were third-party defendants against whom the appellants sought to collect ad valorem taxes on the subject property. The determination by the trial court that the property was exempt from ad valorem taxation resulted in a take nothing judgment with respect to the appellants' third party action.
This was a nonjury trial, and the trial court filed findings of fact and conclusions of law in the following particulars:
1. The Authority is a governmental agency and body politic and corporate of the State of Texas.
2. The Authority is the owner of the property involved herein.
3. The property is devoted exclusively to the use and benefit of the public.
4. The property is exclusively owned by the Authority.
Based upon the above findings, the trial court held that the property is exempt from ad valorem taxation, and that the defendants are not entitled to recover the ad valorem taxes which they have levied and assessed against the property from the plaintiff and the third-party defendants.
Appellants attack the judgment of the trial court on the grounds that the evidence is insufficient to support the finding that the subject property is devoted exclusively to the use and benefit of the public, and that the trial court erred in finding the property to be exclusively owned by the Authority, and erred in holding the property exempt from taxation because there is no constitutional or statutory provision providing for such exemption.
The evidence presented on the trial before the court shows the Authority is a conservation and reclamation district created pursuant to Tex.Const. art. XVI, § 59, and is a governmental agency and body politic and corporate of the State of Texas. Enabling legislation entitled the Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority Act (Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 7621d-2 (Supp. 1970) ) was passed in 1969. The Authority was created by the legislature to develop and implement a waste control management program for Harris, Galveston, and Chambers Counties (art. 7621d-2 § 1.01, Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority Act). The Authority operates approximately twenty plants or facilities, which are engaged in the treatment of both residential and industrial wastes. All of these facilities are operated by the Authority and are staffed with Authority personnel.
Pursuant to Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 7621d-2 (Supp. 1970) the Authority is authorized to acquire facilities by purchase, gift, or lease, and is empowered to issue its bonds for the acquisition and construction of its waste treatment facilities. The Authority has the power of eminent domain and the power to tax. The property in dispute here, known as the Washburn Tunnel Plant, was acquired by the Authority through proceeds from the sale of its bonds.
In accordance with its statutory mandate to abate and prevent water pollution through the operation and ownership of treatment facilities, the Authority purchased approximately thirty-five acres of land in Harris County from Champion International Corporation, and after such purchase, additional waste treatment improvements were constructed thereon, which were also financed through the sale of bonds. In connection with the purchase of the Washburn Tunnel Plant, the Authority entered into an agreement with five industries located on the Houston Ship Channel. These industries are referred to as the participating industries. This agreement obligates the industries to use the plant for treatment of their waste.
While the facilities agreement applies to and obligates the participating industries, the agreement specifically provides that the Authority may enter into contracts with other persons for the treatment of industrial wastes with the approval of the participating industries, which approval cannot be unreasonably withheld.
The plant is designed for the aerobic treatment of industrial waste. The liquids generated by the treatment are discharged into the Houston Ship Channel, and the solids are dealt with by the Authority's sludge handling equipment. The plant is now engaged in treating the wastes of all five of the participating industries, plus the wastes from the General American Transportation Corporation (GATX). Additionally, the Authority regularly reserves approximately ten percent of the capacity of the plant for use by "drop-in" customers. The Authority has entered into a long-term (twenty-five years) contract with GATX for the treatment of its wastes. The Atlantic Richfield Co. has been ordered by a district court to use the Authority's plant facilities. All of the regulatory permits required to discharge the treated wastes are held in the name of the Authority. The Authority is currently negotiating with both the City of Pasadena and Harris County for the treatment of wastes generated by the plant itself and the City of Pasadena's sewage system.
The evidence further shows that no one has exercised any control over the Washburn Tunnel facility other than the employees of the Authority, and the Authority can refuse and has refused to treat the waste of the participating industries. Further, the Authority is responsible for the quality of the waste dumped into the Houston Ship Channel. Tex.Const. art. VIII, § 2(a) provides: ". . . the legislature may, by general laws, exempt from taxation public property used for public purposes . . . ." Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 7150, § 4 (1960) provides: "All property, whether real or personal, belonging exclusively to this State, or any political subdivision thereof . . . ." is exempt from taxation.
Tex.Const. art. VIII, § 2(a) is not self-enacting. It simply authorizes the legislature to exempt property from taxation within the limits of its provisions, namely: public property used for public purposes. This...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Satterlee v. Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority
...decreed that the taxing authorities take nothing under their counter-claims. This judgment was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals. 561 S.W.2d 869. The Authority acquired legal title to the property in a transaction represented by two written instruments: a Facilities Agreement dated Aug......
-
State v. American Legion Post No. 58
...point as taxing authorities are exempt from the payment of court costs in delinquent tax suits. Satterlee v. Gulf Coast Waste Disposal Authority, 561 S.W.2d 869 (Tex.Civ.App. Beaumont 1977), rev'd on other grounds 576 S.W.2d 773 The judgment of the trial Court is reversed and the cause is r......