Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1981 )

The Attorney General of Texas
April 15, 1981
MARK WHITE
Attorney General
Honorable Frank Hildebrand Opinion No. MN- 3 2 3
Texas Tourist Development Agency
P. 0. Box 12008, Capitol Station Re: Construction of sections 4, 5
Austin, Texas 78711 and 66(c) of article V of the
General Appropriations Act
Dear Mr. Hildebrand:
You have requested our opinion regarding the application of three
provisions of House Bill 558, the current General Appropriations Act, Acts
1979, 66th Legislature, chapter 843, to the Texas Tourist Development
Agency. This agency exists primarily for the purpose of promoting tourism
to Texas and encouraging travel by Texans to the state’s scenic, educational
and recreational attractions. V.T.C.S. art. 6144f. The provisions are as
follows:
None of the moneys appropriated by Articles I, II, III,
and IV of this Act. . . shall be used for influencing the
outcome of any election, or the passage or defeat of
any legislative measure. Acts 1979, 66th Leg., ch.
243, art. V, S4, at 2898.
None of the moneys appropriated under this Act shall
be used by any agency. . . for the purpose of
publicizing or directing attention to any individual
official or employee of any agency of the State
Government. g S5, at 2899.
All units of state government. . . which expend
appropriated State funds to publish periodicals on
quarterly intervals or leas than quarterly.intervals at
no charge shall insert in such periodicals a notice, in
three consecutive issues, indicating that anyone
desiring to continue to receive the publication must
so indicate in writing. The agency shall furnish
publications only to those persons requesting. &
§66(cl, at 2925.
You have posed the following questions:
1. Does section 4 prohibit the agency from preparing
and printing, in its monthly newsletter, stories
P. 1036
- ..,
Honorable Frank Hi&brand - Page Two (KS’{-323)
reporting the formal votes of members of the legislature
during open meetings of the full legislature or its com-
mittees, including any verbal comments that they may make
in open forum?
2. Does section 5 prohibit the agency from printing, in its
monthly newsletter, the name(s) of members of its board or
staff, when the use of their name(s) is necessary for
attribution and/or the reader’s better understanding of the
news story in question?
3. Does section 5 embrace the use of the name(s) of members
of the state legislature in print?
4. Does an agency newsletter fall under the provisions of
section 66(c) if it is published monthly?
Our objective in construing these provisions must be to ascertain the legislature’s
intent. Calvert v. Texas Pipe Line Co., 517 S.W.2d 777 (Tex. 1974). Once the purpose
of a provision has been determined, the provision should be given a fair and sensible
construction which effectuates that purpose. Citizens Bank v. First State Bank, 580
S.W.2d 344 (Tex. 1979); Salas v. State, 592 S.W.2d 653 (Tex. Civ. App. - Austin 1979,
no writ).
With respect to your first question, it is our understanding that the stories in
question contain neutral, factual accounts of votes taken during legislative sessions or
committee meetings and may include verbal comments made by legislators in open
forum. The purpose of the stories is to convey, in an objective, straightforward
manner, information which is a matter of public record.
We do not believe that the legislature intended for stories such as these to fall
within the article V, section 4 prohibition. The clear intent of that provision, as
applied in an instance involving an agency newsletter, is to prohibit deliberate efforts
to sway readers so as to influence an election or to secure the passage or defeat of
legislation, i+ by couching stories in language clearly calculated to evoke a desired
response. Whtle it is inevitable that the stories you describe will occasionally affect a
reader’s attitudes and thereby incidentally produce the prohibited results, this will be
because of the reader’s reaction to the information presented, not to the manner in
which it is presented. We therefore conclude that article V, section 4 does not
prohibit the kind of stories you describe.
Article V, section 5 expressly prohibits agencies from using appropriated funds
“for the purpose of” publicizing or directing attention to agency officials or employees.
In our opinion, the quoted language establishes that in order to violate the provision, an
agency must intend to publicize or direct attention to agency officials or employees.
Accordingly, while in a particular instance the manner in which names are presented in
a story in an agency newsletter may be such that the requisite intent may be inferred,
we think that, as a general rule, the inclusion of these names for attribution or to
P. 1037
. -.
.
Honorable Frank Hildebrand - Page Three (MW-323)
facilitate the reader’s understanding of the story would be permissible. Ultimately,
each situation will have to be judged on its own merits.
You also ask whether article V, section 5 embraces the use of legislators’ names
in print. We conclude that it does. In our view, the legislature is clearly an “agency of
the State Government” within this provision.
With regard to your last question, the phrase “or less than quarterly intervals” is
admittedly ambiguous, and could be construed to mean either less frequently or more
frequently than at quarterly intervals. In our.opinion, however, the latter is the proper
construction. Legislative intent must be determined by examining the entire
enactment, rather than an isolated portion thereof. Merchants Fast Motor Lines, Inc.
v. Railroad Commission, 573 S.W.2d 502 (Tex. 1978). Statutes are to be construed with
reference to their manifest object, and statutorv language which is SusceDtible to two
constructions should be given the construction which-car&es out such object. Citizens
Bank v. First State Bank, w.
When viewed as a whole, article V, section 66(c) seems clearly to have been
intended as a revenue-saving measure. It would make little sense to construe it to
mean that units of government which publish fewer than four issues of a publication
per year, at no charge, may only send them to people who request them, but that units
which publish four or more issues per year may send them to everyone on their mailing
lists without regard to whether the recipient desires the publication or not. Units of
government in the latter category will obviously waste much more money than those in
the former category. We therefore construe the article V, section 66(c) requirement
as applying to those units of government which publish periodicals on a monthly basis.
SUMMARY
Article V, section 4 of the current General Appropriations
Act does not prohibit an agency from publishing, in its monthly
newsletter, stories which contain neutral, factual reports of the
formal votes of members of the legislature and/or verbal
comments which may be made by legislators in open forum. As
a general rule, article V, section 5 does not prohibit an agency
from publishing the name(s) of agency officials or employees in
its newsletter for attribution or to facilitate the reader’s
understanding of a story. That section does embrade the use of
legislators’ names in print. Article V, section 66(c) applies to
units of goverment which publish periodicals on a monthly basis.
a&g
Attorney General of Texas
PO 1038
t..
Honorable Frank Hildebrand - Page Four (MW-323)
JOHN W. FAINTER, JR.
First Assistant Attorney General
RICHARD E. GRAY III
Executive Assistant Attorney General
Prepared by Jon Bible
Assistant Attorney General
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMlTTEE
Susan L. Garrison, Chairman
Jon Bible
Rick Gilpln
Eva Loutzenhiser
Bruce Youngblood
P. 1039