After the special commissioners' hearing, the commissioners will determine the amount of compensation to be paid to the property owner(s). They will fill in the Award of Special Commissioners prepared by the AAG with the amount of compensation, and will date and sign the decision. Their decision must then be filed with the appropriate court no later than the next working day after the hearing is held. The judge will inform the clerk of the court as to the decision of the special commissioners on the day it is filed. On that same date, the clerk will send notice of the filing of the award to all the parties in the proceeding, or to their attorneys of record, at their respective addresses of record.

A party to a condemnation proceeding may object to the findings of the special commissioners by filing with the court a written statement of the objections, and the grounds for doing so. The statement must be filed on or before the first Monday following the 20th day after the day the commissioners' award is filed with the court.

If there is any indication that the parcel may be contaminated including all parcels that have underground tanks, objections to the award should be filed, even if the award is for an amount acceptable to TxDOT, in order to permit further investigation of the contamination, rather than accepting an award based on an “as if clean” value.

If a party files an objection to the findings of the special commissioners, the court will try the case as a (i.e., new trial) in the same manner as other civil causes. This means starting from the beginning with no previous record, as though there had been no special commissioners' hearing.

After the written Award of Special Commissioners has been filed, form will be carefully completed. This form should document all pertinent information regarding the special commissioners' hearing. Information called for on page l should be filled in by the TxDOT representative who assisted the AAG and was present at the hearing.

Information and the recommendation provided by OAG must be considered. Immediately after the hearing, the AAG and ROW PD may discuss the hearing and formulate opinions. The AAG will summarize the evidence produced and make a recommendation as to whether or not the State should appeal an award that exceeds the State's testimony. This will later be confirmed by memorandum from OAG to the TxDOT representative, setting out the factors that were considered in making the recommendation.

After considering the OAG's recommendation as to acceptance or objection to an award, a decision will be made and communicated to OAG and the ROW Program Office by the ROW manager or supervisor, unless the amount of the award exceeds their signature delegation authority limits. TxDOT's recommendations regarding mediations and trial settlements will be processed in the same manner and subject to the same signature authority limits.

For those awards within established signature authority limits, it is the responsibility of the ROW manager/supervisor to consider the findings and recommendations as presented by staff and OAG, and any other facts or information considered pertinent. In the final analysis, the recommendation for acceptance or appeal is to be based on a studied and objective opinion as to the action considered to be in the best interest of TxDOT. Opinions of either staff or OAG are not binding as to accepting or rejecting the award decision or recommendation. Either source alone can afford adequate support, or a separate and independent decision or recommendation can be made if supported by proper justification and explanation.

By contrast, the decision to accept or appeal from a judgment of the court after jury verdict will be the responsibility of OAG, since the possibility of appeal is dependent upon questions of law bearing upon the possible existence of reversible error in the trial of the case. After a trial is held, either before a judge or jury, OAG will advise by memorandum as to the possibility of a reversible error. If no reversible error has been committed, the State has no further recourse and the judgment is final. If there appears to be reversible error, the OAG's memorandum will so advise and set forth their staff opinions and recommendations. In this situation the recommendations of the ROW Program Office will be obtained.