Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1988 )


Menu:
  • f-.
    April 6, 1988
    Nr. John Hille                   Opinion No.   JR-885
    Acting Executive Director
    Texas National Guard             Re: Construction of certain
    Armory Board                  riders to the current appro-
    P. 0. Box 5218                   priation  for  the National
    Austin, Texas   78763            Guard Armory Board (RQ-1210)
    Dear   Mr. Hille:
    You have requested an opinion construing a rider in
    the current appropriations act which provides that certain
    .expenditures from  appropriations  to the National    Guard
    Armory Board say     be made only     through  interagency
    contracts with the Adjutant General's    Department.    The
    relevant items of appropriation,   found in the combined
    appropriation to the Adjutant General*s    Department   and
    National Guard Armory Board, are as follows:
    ADJUTANT  GENERAL'S   DEPARTMENT/NATIONAL        GUARD
    ARMORY BOARD
    For the Years Ending
    August 31,    August 31,
    19881989
    National Guard Armory Board:
    a. Administration and
    Support Services    $ 2,820,441     $ 2,905,817
    b. Acquisition and
    Construction                          4.670.710
    Total, Facilities
    Acquisition            S 2.820.441    s 7.576.527
    Facilities Maintenance:
    a. National Guard
    Armory Board        $ 2,594,467     $ 2,638,584
    b. Adjutant Generalas
    Department            2,020,513         2,020,513
    C.  Utilities, National
    Guard Armory Board    2.366.709         2.366.709
    Total, Facilities
    Maintenance            S 6.981.689    S 7.025.806
    p. 4323
    Mr. John Hille - Page 2      (JM-885)
    General Appropriations Act, Acts 1987, 70th Leg., 2d C.S.,
    ch. 78, art. I, at 525.   The rider you inquire about is
    rider 17, which provides as follows:
    17. Expenditures from Item 4.b. Acquisi-
    tion and Construction, and Item 5-a. Facili-
    ties Maintenance,    National   Guard  m-Y
    Board, be made    [sic] only through   inter-
    agency contracts with the Adjutant General's
    Department.   In addition,    from Item 4.a.
    Administration and Support Services,   expen-
    ditures of $146,826 in fiscal year 1988 and
    $233,802 in fiscal year 1989 shall be made
    only through interagency contracts with the
    Adjutant General's Department.
    L   at 525.    you suggest that the Adjutant  General's
    Department  lacks authority to engage   in construction
    and that it may not enter into a contract under     the
    Interagency  Cooperation Act   to provide  construction
    services to the National Guard Armory Board.   V.T.C.S.
    art.   4413(32),   53.
    The validity of an appropriations act rider is deter-
    mined by reference to article III, section     35, of the
    Texas Constitution, which provides in part:
    Sec. 35.  (a) No bill, (scent      aenera
    a&mm=-Uon     bills.        mav anbrace   ths
    various subjects uunts.           for ud   on
    aunt    of which monevs   aremriated)
    shall contain     more than   one    subject .
    (Emphasis added.)
    Tex. Const. art.  III, 535. The Texas Supreme Court           has
    explained the underlined language as follows:
    Despite the apparent exception for      general
    appropriations    bills,  it has been        held
    that they too must    be limited to a single
    subject, which is the appropriation of funds
    to be paid from the State Treasury.        a
    , 144   Tey. 537,   
    192 S.W.2d 5
    ;;
    , 
    92 Tex. 451
    ,
    Se?-       Texas Attorney
    General Opinion No. V-1254 (1951).
    Jessen Associates. Inc. v. Bullock    
    531 S.W.2d 593
    , 600
    (Tex. 1975).   An "item of approprjation"   sets aside or
    dedicates funds for a specified purpose,    while a valid
    rider qualifies or directs the use of appropriated funds
    p. 4324
    ,
    Mr. John Hille - Page 3   (Jh-885)
    or is merely    incidental to an appropriation.     Jessen
    Associates. Inc. v. Bullock SDQI~ at 599. To be valid, a
    -   rider must be germane to th; appropriation  of funds. 
    Id. at 601.
    A rider attached to a general appropriation bill
    cannot adopt, repeal, modify, or amend an existing general
    law. Strake v. Court of Anneals, 
    704 S.W.2d 746
         (Tex.
    1986); Moore V.     hem rd 
    192 S.W.2d 5
    59 (Tex. 1946);
    Lind n . Fin1 y      49 aS tr 578   (Tex. 1899); Attorney
    GenezalVOpinioneVL1254 (195;).
    you suggest that rider 17 is invalid on the ground
    that the Adjutant General's Department lacks authority to
    enter into an interagency contract to construct buildings
    for the Armory Board. you argue, in effect, that rider 17
    is invalid because it is inconsistent with provisions of
    general law governing  the Adjut,ant General's Department,
    and it thus attempts to amend general law.
    The   following   provisions   of   the   Interagency
    Cooperation Act are relevant to your argument:
    Sec. 3. Any state agency may enter into
    and perform a written agreement or contract
    with other agencies of the state for fur-
    nishing necessary and authorized special or
    technical services,  including the services
    of employees, the services of materials,  or
    the services of equipment. . . .   Provided,
    however, nothing herein shall authorize  any
    agency to construct any highway,     street,
    road, or other building or structure for any
    other agency, except as otherwise   specifi-
    cally authorized by existing law. . . .
    .   .   .   .
    Sec. 5. No agreement or contract may be
    entered into or performed which will require
    or permit an agency of the State to exceed
    its constitutional or statutory duties and
    responsibilities, or the limitations of its
    appropriated funds.
    V.T.C.S. art. 4413(32), §§3, 5.
    You point out that the Adjutant  General's Department
    has no express authority  to construct any building.   The
    National Guard Armory Board, in contrast, was established
    to acquire sites and build armories to house the Texas
    National Guard and its equipment, and to provide   a means
    of financing the construction of armories. Texas National
    p. 4325
    Mr. John Hille - Page 4   @M-885)
    Guard AzHQrv Board v. McGraw, 126 S.W.Zd 627 (Tex. 1939);
    S&Z Texas Public Buildina Authoritv v. Mattox, 
    686 S.W.2d 924
    (Tex. 1985). The Armory Board
    is a public authority and a body politic    and
    corporate and has all powers necessary      for
    the   acquisition,    construction,    rental,
    control, maintenance, and operation of Texas
    National Guard or Texas State Guard armories,
    including all property   and equipment   neces-
    sary or useful      in connection   with    the
    armories.
    Gov't Code 5435.013.      It may issue bonds to acquire
    building sites or to construct, remodel,    equip, or repair
    buildings  and may      lease buildings  to    the Adjutant
    General's   Department.    Gov't Code §§431.030,    435.023,
    435.041(a)..
    This brief summary of important provisions governing
    the Armory  Board shows, its close connection    with the
    Adjutant General's  Department.  In addition, the Armory
    Board is composed  of three senior officers of the Texas
    National Guard and three members of the general public who
    are appointed by the governor with the advice and consent
    of the Senate. Gov't Code S435.004.
    Although   the Armory Board ha& express power to
    construct buildings for the National   Guard, it does not
    necessarily have exclusive power over construction.    The
    adjutant general has broad powers which, in our opinion,
    include implied authority  to build, maintain,  and repair
    buildings necessary  to carry out his responsibilities.
    He controls the military  department of the state, which
    includes the Texas National Guard and the the Texas
    State Guard. Gov't Code 55431.022, 431.001(3)(4).      The
    adjutant general is subordinate only to the governor, who
    is commander-in-chief of the state military forces. Gov't
    Code 0431.002. He is directed by statute to
    perform for the state as near as practicable
    the duties that pertain to the chiefs of
    staff of the amy     and air force and the
    secretaries of the military services,  under
    regulations and customs of the United States
    armed forces. . . .
    Gov't Code 5431.029(2).    Federal   law   provides that   the
    Secretary of the Army
    p. 4326
    Mr. John Hille - Page 5    (JM-885)
    is responsible  for, and has the authority
    necessary to conduct, all affairs   of the
    Department  of the    Amy,  including  the
    following functions:
    Recruiting.
    Organizing.
    Supplying.
    Equipping (including research and
    development).
    Training.
    I:;    Servicing.
    (7)    Mobilizing.
    (8)    Demobilizing.
    (9)    Administering (including the
    morale and welfare of personnel).
    Maintaining.
    I::;   The construction, outfitting, and
    repair of military equipment.
    (12)   The construction.
    . . maintenance. and
    renair of buildinas. structures,
    and utjJ,j&&g and the acquisition
    of real property and interests in
    real property necessary to carry
    out the responsibilities specified
    in this section.   (Emphasis added.)
    10 U.S.C. 53013. Section 431.029 of the Government Code,
    read together with section 3013 of title 10, United States
    Code, gives the Adjutant General some authority to build,
    maintain and repair buildings as necessary to carry out
    his duties. Moreover, the Adjutant General has authority
    to "employ clerks, employees, and Jaborerg as necessary to
    carry on the operations     of the department."     (Emphasis
    added. ) Gov't Code 8431.028. The ReDOrt to the Sunset
    AdvisoN  Commission by the Adjutant General's      Department
    indicated that the department had responsibility to see
    that facilities to house and train the army and air guard
    units were constructed      and maintained     in SeNicable
    condition.   Adjutant General's   Department, ReDOrt to the
    Sunset AdvisoN   Commission   at 2. The department's annual
    report for 1987 described      the responsibilities   of its
    Directorate of Facilities Engineering as the development,
    acquisition, construction,    maintenance  and operation    of
    facilities for the Texas Army National Guard.        Ad jutant
    General's Department of Texas, Annual ReDOrts,      at 22-23.
    Construction   projects  included a warehouse,       a troop
    medical clinic, and an armory. 
    Id. at 42.
    Texas National
    Guard engineering units performed some of the construction
    and maintenance work. 
    Id. at 23.
    p. 4327
    Mr. John Hille - Page 6   (JW-885)
    The Adjutant      General#s    Department   has    implied
    authority   to construct     and maintain     buildings    when
    necessary to carry out its statutory         responsibilities.
    Rider 17 does not confer general         law powers     on the
    Adjutant General's Department, but instead recognizes that
    it has authority   to provide construction services.        Nor
    does this rider attempt to confer upon the Adjutant
    General's Department    the Armory Board's discretion        to
    decide what construction and repair projects to undertake.
    The rider contemplates that the Armory Board will contract
    with the Adjutant    General's    Department,   instead of a
    private   construction   company,   for the supervision      of
    construction services necessary to implement its decision.
    Rider 17 also requires expenditures for maintenance
    of facilities to be made only through interagency      con-
    tracts with the Adjutant General's     Office. As already
    pointed out, the Adjutant   General's   Office has implied
    authority to maintain  buildings, and the Armory    Board's
    decisions about building maintenance may be implemented by
    a contract with the Adjutant General's Office.    Rider 17
    requires some of the Armory      Board's expenditures   for
    administration and support services to be made through
    interagency contract.   Attorney   General Opinion RW-352
    (1981) decided that the National Guard Armory Board could
    contract with the adjutant general under the Interagency
    Cooperation Act for the services of employees.
    We finally point out that rider 17 differs  from the
    rider which was said to be invalid in Attorney    General
    Opinion RW-585 (1982). The rider at issue in that opinion
    stated in part:
    It is the intent of the Legislature   #at
    an interagency  contract shall be executed
    between the State Board of Barber Examiners
    and the Texas Cosmetology     Commission   to
    reduce duplication of activities in inspec-
    tions, enforcement and examination.
    General Appropriations Act, Acts 1981, 67th Leg., ch. 875,
    art. I, at 3376. This rider was invalid because     it did
    not appropriate    funds, nor did it detail,     limit or
    restrict the use of funds appropriated elsewhere. Instead,
    it directed the State Board of Barber Examiners and the
    Texas Cosmetology Commission to take specific affirmative
    action. Attorney General Opinion  WW-585 (1982).
    Rider 17 is also distinguishable from the rider held
    invalid in Attorney  General Opinion JW-167 (1984). That
    p. 4328
    Mr.   John Hille - Page 7    (JR-885)
    rider to the appropriation for          the State Commission   for
    the Blind provided in part:.
    9. It is the intent of the Legislature
    that out of funds appropriated above in item
    5.~. Older Blind Contract Training an amount
    not to exceed $272,146 each fiscal year
    shall be expended for entering into a con-
    tract with the Texas Lions League or a
    similar organization to provide  rehabilita-
    tive services to blind adults. . . .
    Acts 1983, 68th Leg., ch. 1095, art. II, 59, at 5954. The
    opinion pointed  out that the State Commission for the
    Blind had permissive  authority to cooperate with public
    and private agencies in providing facilities  and services
    for vocational rehabilitation of blind individuals.  Human
    Resources Code 891.052(b)(l).  The rider attempted to make
    mandatory a contract which general   law made permissive.
    It therefore was invalid general legislation  contained in
    an appropriations act in violation of article III, section
    35, of the Texas Constitution.   Attorney  General Opinion
    JM-167 (1984).
    Rider 17 does not attempt to impose a mandatory duty
    on the Armory Board to contract with a private entity, or
    to enter into any contract at all. Instead, it conditions
    the boardrs receipt of appropriated    funds for construc-
    tion and maintenance on the board's contracting    with the
    Adjutant General's Department   to perform the work.    See
    ae rallv Attorney General Opinion V-1254 at 10 (1951)
    (dyzcussinq appropriations    subject   to a    condition).
    General law establishes   a close relationship  between the
    functions of the Armory Board and those of the Adjutant
    General's Office,   and the appropriations act recognizes
    this connection   by giving the two entities a combined
    appropriation.   In view of these circumstances, we believe
    the legislature may allocate     funding to a cooperative
    endeavor between the two entities as it has done in rider
    17. See aenerally Attorney General Opinion JR-256 (1984)
    (power to allocate public funds between   state agencies is
    a legislative power). Rider 17 does not attempt to enact,
    amend, or repeal a general    law in violation of article
    III, section 35(a), of the Texas Constitution.
    SUMMARY
    The Adjutant    General's   Department,
    governed by chapter 431 of the Government
    Code, has    implied authority    to   build
    and maintain facilities.   Rider 17 to the
    p. 4329
    Mr. John Hille - Page 8   (JM-885)
    combined 'appropriation    to the   Adjutant
    General's Department and the National   Guard
    Armory Board in the current appropriation
    act, which provides that an appropriation to
    the Armory   Board    for construction    and
    maintenance  may be     spent only    throuqh
    interagency  cokracts    bith the- Adjutant
    General's Office, does not violate    article
    III, section 35, of the Texas Constitution.
    Attorney General of Texas
    MARYKELLER
    First Assistant Attorney General
    Lou MCCREARY
    Executive Assistant Attorney General
    JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY
    Special Assistant Attorney General
    RICK GILPIN
    Chairman, Opinion Committee
    Prepared by Susan L. Garrison
    Assistant Attorney General
    p. 4330