Can a Texas emergency services district that used to be a rural fire prevention district run a county-wide ambulance service?

Plain-English summary

Johnson County Emergency Services District No. 1 traces back to a county-wide rural fire prevention district that voters created in November 1956. The district worried that it might not be allowed to run a county-wide ambulance service, because the 1956 constitutional provision the voters approved (article III, section 48-d) did not say anything about ambulances. The county attorney asked the Attorney General to sort that out.

The AG walked through the history. In 1949, Texas voters gave the Legislature power to create rural fire prevention districts, and the Legislature first used that power in 1957. A 1973 amendment gave those districts general authority to operate and provide emergency ambulance service. In 2003, the Legislature converted every existing rural fire prevention district into an emergency services district by passing what is now Health and Safety Code section 775.026, and voters repealed the old constitutional section that same year.

The key point is what the conversion did. When a rural fire prevention district became an emergency services district, its old authority ended and it took on the authority of an emergency services district, no more and no less. Chapter 775 of the Health and Safety Code, backed by article III, section 48-e of the Texas Constitution, lets an emergency services district provide emergency medical and ambulance services. So the AG concluded that a court would likely hold the district may generally provide ambulance service, because the statutory text says it can. The original 1956 constitutional language no longer controls; the district's power now comes from chapter 775.

The AG flagged two limits in a footnote. The general rule may not apply where districts have overlapping territory (sections 775.020 and .0205 bar duplicative services in some of those situations), and a district created to provide only limited services under section 775.031(d) might not have the full menu of powers. The county attorney did not say either situation applied here.

What this means for you

If you sit on an emergency services district board

Based on this opinion, an emergency services district operating under chapter 775 generally has authority to provide ambulance service, and that holds even if your district started life as a rural fire prevention district. The district's powers come from chapter 775, not from whatever constitutional or statutory provision was in place when the original district was formed.

If your district was converted from an older rural fire prevention district

The conversion under section 775.026 reset the district's authority to that of an emergency services district. The AG's framing is that the district has the authority of an emergency services district "no more, no less," so you look to chapter 775 to figure out what the district can do, not to the 1956 or 1957 framework.

If you advise a special district on its powers

The opinion is a clean example of the AG declining to give a flat yes where facts could change the answer. It identifies two carve-outs to check before assuming the general rule: overlapping-territory districts barred from duplicative services under sections 775.020 and .0205, and limited-service districts under section 775.031(d). Confirm neither applies before relying on the general authority.

Common questions

Q: Can this district run a county-wide ambulance service?
A: The AG concluded a court would likely say yes. As an emergency services district under chapter 775, it generally has authority to provide ambulance service.

Q: Does it matter that the 1956 vote was to create a fire district, not an ambulance service?
A: No. The 2003 conversion under section 775.026 gave the district the authority of an emergency services district, and that authority (not the 1956 provision) is what governs now.

Q: What changed in 2003?
A: The Legislature converted every rural fire prevention district into an emergency services district under section 775.026, and Texas voters repealed the old constitutional section (article III, section 48-d) authorizing rural fire prevention districts.

Q: Are there situations where the district could not provide ambulance service?
A: The AG noted two. Districts with overlapping territory may be barred from duplicative services under sections 775.020 and .0205, and a district created to provide only limited services under section 775.031(d) may not have full powers. The county attorney did not indicate either applied here.

Background and statutory framework

Texas voters approved a 1949 constitutional amendment (article III, section 48-d) letting the Legislature create rural fire prevention districts. The Legislature first acted in 1957 with article 2351a-6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes, later codified without substantive change as chapter 794 of the Health and Safety Code. A 1973 amendment gave rural fire prevention districts general authority to operate and provide emergency ambulance service, an authority that remained in law (as former section 794.031(11)) until 2003.

In 2003, acting on a 2002 Senate interim report that recommended converting all rural fire prevention districts to emergency services districts because they provided similar services, the Legislature passed Senate Bill 1021, now Health and Safety Code section 775.026. Voters repealed article III, section 48-d that same year. Under section 775.026(a), each rural fire prevention district created under former chapter 794 is converted to an emergency services district operating under chapter 775.

Applying that framework, the AG reasoned that on conversion all authority of a rural fire prevention district ceased and the district had only the authority of an emergency services district. Article III, section 48-e of the Texas Constitution provides that an emergency services district "may provide emergency medical services, emergency ambulance services, rural fire prevention and control services, or other emergency services authorized by the Legislature," and Health and Safety Code sections 775.003 and 775.031(a) carry that into statute. Citing Hogan v. Zoanni, 627 S.W.3d 163 (Tex. 2021), for the principle that statutory text is the first and foremost indication of legislative intent, the AG concluded a court would likely hold that the converted district may generally provide ambulance service.

Citations and references

Statutes:

• Tex. Health & Safety Code § 775.026 — conversion of rural fire prevention districts to emergency services districts
• Tex. Health & Safety Code § 775.031 — powers of an emergency services district
• Tex. Const. art. III, § 48-e — emergency services districts may provide emergency medical and ambulance services

Key cases:

• Hogan v. Zoanni, 627 S.W.3d 163 (Tex. 2021) — statutory text is the first and foremost indication of legislative intent
• City of Corpus Christi v. City of Pleasanton, 276 S.W.2d 798 (Tex. 1955) — a non-self-enacting constitutional amendment leaves implementation to the Legislature

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/ken-paxton/kp-0457
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/2024/kp-0457.pdf

Original opinion text

KEN PAXTON
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

February 16, 2024

The Honorable Bill Moore
Johnson County Attorney
204 South Buffalo Avenue, Suite 410
Cleburne, Texas 76033

Opinion No. KP-0457

Re: Whether Johnson County Emergency Services District No. 1 may operate a county-wide ambulance service (RQ-0513-KP)

Dear Mr. Moore:

You ask about the authority of Johnson County Emergency Services District No. 1 ("ESD") to "operate a county-wide ambulance service."¹ As background regarding the creation of the ESD, you tell us that in November 1956, pursuant to article III, section 48-d of the Texas Constitution, the "Johnson County voters authorized the creation of a single, county-wide rural fire district." Request Letter at 1; see also Tex. Att'y Gen. Op. No. WW-0308 (1957) at 4 (discussing the November 1956 election creating the Johnson County Rural Fire Prevention District). You further explain that, in 2003, the Johnson County Rural Fire Prevention District was converted to an emergency services district by section 775.026 of the Health and Safety Code. Request Letter at 1–2; see also TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 775.026(a) (providing that "[e]ach rural fire prevention district created under former Chapter 794 is converted to an emergency services district operating under this chapter [775]"). You state that the ESD questions "whether it has authority to operate a county-wide ambulance service because" the constitutional provision under which the voters voted to create the Johnson County Rural Fire Prevention District in 1956 did not explicitly authorize the provision of ambulance service. Request Letter at 2. We first consider the history of and legal framework that formerly governed rural fire prevention districts.

History of and Legal Framework Governing Rural Fire Prevention Districts

In 1949, Texas voters approved a constitutional amendment giving the Legislature authority to create rural fire prevention districts. TEX. CONST. art. III, § 48-d(a) (repealed Sept. 13, 2003) (providing "[t]he Legislature shall have the power to provide for the establishment and creation of rural fire prevention districts"). Article III, section 48-d did not specify the services a district could provide, but instead left it to the Legislature to specify the services necessary to implement the provision. See id.; cf. City of Corpus Christi v. City of Pleasanton, 276 S.W.2d 798, 803 (Tex. 1955) (discussing a constitutional amendment that was not self-enacting and stating that "[b]y the very terms of the Amendment the duty was enjoined upon the Legislature to implement the public policy found therein"). The Legislature did not exercise its authority under section 48-d until 1957, when it enacted article 2351a-6, Vernon's Texas Civil Statutes.² See Acts of 1957, 55th Leg., R.S., ch. 57, § 1, 1957 Tex. Gen. Laws 130–35. Relevant here, that legislation also validated, ratified, and confirmed certain rural fire prevention districts created prior to 1957. See id. at 134.

A 1973 amendment to article 2351a-6, section 11, gave rural fire prevention districts the general authority to "operate and provide emergency ambulance service . . . ."³ Act of May 21, 1973, 63d Leg., R.S., ch. 260, § 1, 1973 Tex. Gen. Laws 609, 612. In 2002, the Senate Committee on Intergovernmental Relations issued an interim report recommending that all existing rural fire prevention districts be converted to emergency services districts because, in part, they "provide similar services; both can provide emergency medical services and/or fire services[.]" Senate Comm. on Intergovernmental Relations, Interim Report 78th Legislature at 91 (2002) (emphasis added). The Seventy-eighth Legislature acted upon the recommendation by passing Senate Bill 1021, codified in relevant part at Health and Safety Code section 775.026. See Act of June 20, 2003, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 1204, § 1.003, 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 3419, 3420. Texas voters repealed article III, section 48-d of the Texas Constitution that same year. See Tex. S.J. Res. 45, 78th Leg., R.S., 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 6226.

We next consider the authority of an entity converted from a rural fire prevention district to an emergency services district pursuant to section 775.026.

Entities originally created as rural fire prevention districts and converted to emergency services districts may provide ambulance service to the same extent as entities originally created as emergency services districts.

Section 775.026 of the Health and Safety Code provides that "[e]ach rural fire prevention district created under former Chapter 794 is converted to an emergency services district operating under . . . chapter [775]." TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE § 775.026(a). At the time of conversion, from a rural fire prevention district to an emergency services district, all authority of a rural fire prevention district ceased, and the district had only the authority of an emergency services district, no more, no less. As a general rule, an emergency services district operating under chapter 775 may provide ambulance service.⁴ See TEX. CONST. art. III, § 48-e (providing that an emergency services "district may provide emergency medical services, emergency ambulance services, rural fire prevention and control services, or other emergency services authorized by the Legislature"); TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE §§ 775.003 (authorizing the organization of emergency services districts as provided by article III, section 48-e of the Texas Constitution), 775.031(a) (setting out various powers in order for an emergency services district to "provide emergency services"). Thus, a court would likely conclude that an emergency services district, even one that was converted from a rural fire prevention district like the ESD, may generally provide ambulance service because the statutory text says it can. Hogan v. Zoanni, 627 S.W.3d 163, 169 (Tex. 2021) (providing "the statutory text is the 'first and foremost' indication of the Legislature's intent" (quoting Greater Hous. P'ship v. Paxton, 468 S.W.3d 51, 58 (Tex. 2015))).

¹ Letter from Honorable Bill Moore, Johnson Cnty. Att'y, to the Off. of the Att'y Gen., Op. Comm. at 1 (Sept. 21, 2023) ("Request Letter").

² The provisions of article 2351a–6 governing rural fire prevention districts were eventually codified, without substantive change, as chapter 794 of the Health and Safety Code. See Act of May 16, 1989, 71st Leg., R.S., ch. 678, § 1, 1989 Tex. Gen. Laws 2230, 3122.

³ We find nothing in that legislation that indicates this authority was intended to apply only to districts created after its effective date. See generally Act of May 21, 1973, 63d Leg., R.S., ch. 260, § 1, 1973 Tex. Gen. Laws 609, 612. Rather, the amendment appears to have applied to all districts then existing and subsequently created. The general authority of a rural fire prevention district to operate and provide ambulance services remained in state law until the successor to article 2351a-6 was repealed in 2003. See Act of May 16, 1989, 71st Leg., R.S., ch. 678, § 1, 1989 Tex. Gen. Laws 2230, 3127 (enacting Texas Health and Safety Code subsection 794.031(11)); Act of June 20, 2003, 78th Leg., R.S., ch. 1204, § 3.001(2), 2003 Tex. Gen. Laws 3419, 3422 (repealing Texas Health and Safety Code chapter 794).

⁴ This general rule may not apply in certain districts with overlapping territory. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE §§ 775.020, .0205 (both prohibiting duplicative services in certain districts with overlapping territory). The general rule may also be inapplicable in an emergency service district created to provide limited services. See id. § 775.031(d) (providing that an emergency service district "is not required to perform all the functions authorized by [chapter 775]" but instead "may be created to provide limited services"). You do not provide any information indicating these exceptions apply to the ESD. See generally Request Letter.

SUMMARY

Section 775.026 of the Health and Safety Code provides that each rural fire prevention district created under former chapter 794 of that Code is converted to an emergency services district operating under chapter 775. Emergency services districts operating under chapter 775 of the Health and Safety Code generally have authority to provide ambulance service. Thus, a court would likely conclude that an emergency services district, even one that was converted from a rural fire prevention district like the Johnson County Emergency Services District No. 1, may generally provide ambulance service because the statutory text says it can.

Very truly yours,

KEN PAXTON
Attorney General of Texas

BRENT WEBSTER
First Assistant Attorney General

LESLEY FRENCH
Chief of Staff

D. FORREST BRUMBAUGH
Deputy Attorney General for Legal Counsel

AUSTIN KINGHORN
Chair, Opinion Committee

CHRISTY DRAKE-ADAMS
Assistant Attorney General, Opinion Committee