A large number of truck drivers reside in a small non-incorporated community in my county. They have no place to park, except partially on the street, thereby obstructing highways. Instead of issuing tickets or arresting the truck drivers, one of my commissioners wants to lease some adjacent land offered to the county at $1.00 per year for three years minimum and automatically renewable annually thereafter unless one side gives notice. The commissioner proposes to spend about $1500.00 to provide a gravel base for truck parking. The county will benefit with streets not being partially blocked and streets not being subjected to large trucks, saving on eventual repair costs. Is it legal for a county to enter into such a lease agreement? Is there a better solution?

Even with the de minimis consideration at issue, you'll need to include a "fiscal funding" or "funding out" clause in the lease to satisfy article 11, section 7 of the constitution. Otherwise, the arrangement will be void.

I will include such a clause if the agreement is otherwise proper, which is my real question.

Will the county lease the land back to the truckers or allow them to use it for free?

The commissioners court is charged with maintaining the road system in a manner that is safe for the public. While not the sturdiest hat rack in the world, if your commissioners want to use it, it would probably serve to quiet an inquiry as to the legality of your proposed action.

I think if my Court was contemplating this, I would ask that they have some studies done to back up the need and to show that there are no realistic alternatives. Since we have a practice of requiring persons desiring an area paved to help with the paving cost, we would probably work with the truckers to get them to help with the cost. They will probably prefer parking in this area as opposed to on the street. After all, their wives drive and kids play in the obstructed roadways.

If approved, there would be no charge for the truckers to park there.

To the substance of your inquiry, Lisa's intimation is correct. The commissioners court must have express or necessarily implied authority by virtue of a constitutional provision or statute to act. The only one the comes to mind with regard to your situation, perhaps, is the authority under the Transportation Code for the county to regulate parking on county highways. I think you could probably argue the issue both ways (e.g., provision of safe parking that does not obstruct the highway vs. this being provision of a benefit, not a regulation of parking).