DocketNumber: O-5505
Judges: Gerald Mann
Filed Date: 7/2/1943
Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 2/18/2017
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Xonorsble Clsrk C. l@t?n, EXeautlYe Seam Texas Aatlonal Quard-Armory Board ROUU 1603 - Seoond Xfttlonal Bank Build- I.. Rouston (zone 2), Texea <’ \ Dear Sir: letter of ot this depart- . ‘kp quote the body of your e questiona are the follovlng &Zhap&r 1. Title 8UIlitla’ p, 486, G.L. 06 Is& Art, 5790. nAu~orlzlng the Adjutant General to execute In behalf of the atate a8 Lessee, leasee and sub- leases vith Texas National Guard Armory Board and to renev such leases and sub-leases fran time to tlm?. 520 :lorable Clark C. Wren, Executive Seoretary, Page 2 "Chapter 2. auprs~pp 487 et seq. (The Arnrory Board Aot) ‘Creating the Anuory Board an s body {olltlo and corporate end providing that it shall hare aharge of the acquisItIOn, oon8tructlon, rental, control, maintenance and operation of all- .wl Guard Anuorlcr~ etci ‘poseesr all pavers necessary and convenient for the aaoompll&nnent of such duty’ etc. (Sea 2); ‘enter Into aontraots h oonnectlon vlth any matter vlthln the objoots, purpores or dutleo of the Board’ (Sec. 2b) f *ao- qulre, by gift or purchase, property of any end every deeoriptlon, real, personal or mixed lnolud- lng leasehold estster (Sea 2f); lease and sub- lease its roperty and pledge the revenues there- 0S (Sea 2gP i borrow money and issue bonds and bther evidences of Indebtedness secured by a pledge of the revenuea of Its property etc. (Se0 2h) f exe- cute and deliver lesaes or sub-lessas demising snd leasing to the State of Texsr$ determIne the term of suoh leasea; aud providing .that the lav requiring notice and aompetltlve blds,ahall not 1s to leasing or sub-leasing of auoh property. It I iddthatthe B rd halldt the &%&n&i of renta?to :e paIdebt132 Tex. 613 , 126 S.W. (26) 627, 632, by Suetloe sharp, vho vrote the opinion: "The Clear pU~O84 Of this Aot i8 to give 8tability to the m.iPilitary arm of the State. It provides that the pr8onr acting ae m4Uib0r8 of the 4Xi8tbg Texas National Guard Armory Board 8hsll compose the members Of the Board under this Act. This Aat provides that those who constitute this Board shall be the three rank- member8 of the 'fOXa lPatioaa1 Guard, vhlch ineuro axper- ienced men on the Board to guldo and direct tho affair8 of the Texas Nations1 Guusrd. The meabero of the Board serve without pay, and it la to then a duty of tru8t end honor. The dominant objeat Of thi8 DCU't Of the Act 18 t0 h4VS CCUltirmity Of service on the Board of men of military training, and who have been seleoted for their expsrlenco and merit, in order that the efficiency of the Board may not be Impaired." Slnoe the above ea.84 was dooFd4d tvo odditlonal members have boon added to th.4 Armory Board by the 46th L4gIrlatur4. The tvo additional members ar4 the aenlor active officer of the National Guard of Texas and the realor cavalry officer of said Guard. see Acts 1939, 46th Los., p. 487, Sea. 1. It i8 thU8 apparent 'that the u&8- letUP ha8 sought to 8t8ff the AX%lOl'yBoard with the OUt- rtaadlag mllltary men of the State. !l!ho pavers and authorities vhich ve have quoted frcm the statute are but a 8mall portioa.of the man 4Xpr488 power8 conferi‘ed UpOn the Armory Board b Article 5 90b. Those are the powers and authorities vi t3; vhloh v4 ti ar4 prl- m@ily cO&O4ra4d here, but We She11 h&V0 OOCd.On at a later gi”t in this Opbb& t0 refer t0 other pOWOr pO884slrOd by . The vital function of tha Armory Board, end the obvious pUrpoS8 of the LegIs1ature l.n creating it, 18 to pro- vide a m4ar.18of socurlng amorles to houso the State milltla aad it8 equtpment. In thi8 OO&neCtioa x4, direct your atton- tlon to other langus,ge in the 0884 of Texas National Guard Honorable Clark C. Wren, Exeoutive Seoretary, P8ge 10 Armory Board V.MoCrav, supra, vhloh appeara at page 681 ~1~IvsSouthvestern Reporter olted, and vhioh reads 8s : W vould be dirri0Ult for the mind t0 conceive hov 8x1 army c8n be Faised, equip ad, and disolpllned, 8s oomnwnded by Section &6 0r utiOi6 16 or the (T~XUS c0mitUtion, VithOUt 8ISlOri8S to house t h, amy snd its eqtipment . The pover to provide for the 8my iS left t0 the VisdOIB Or the ~gi6lUtUXt, sub- jeOt Only t0 the linclt8tiOXl that SUOh 18VS 8s ah811 be passed by the Legislature, shall not be ‘Incompatible with the Constitution and Lavs or the united Statea.’ The u73i~18+2~3 has seen f%l to enaot t&f13 lav for the purpose Or proouring s,ites snd erecting armories, and ha&f’urnIshed the method for flnanclng the , The visdcm or the expedlenoy of’ the lav is left exoluslvely to the Legislature to de- termine, and courts al-6 conoernod only vlth it5 Validity," Article 589Ob, to us, evidences the oonsidered purpore or the Texas ugiSl8tUre to place absolute 8nd un- lbited discretion for the aoo~plfslnnent or the objeots therein enumersted in a board ccmpoaed Of men with military buokground. Tiw pavers vhloh have there been oonferred up- on the Armory Board by the Legislature are, in every in- 8t8no8, 8 reared in the broadest poeslble terms, thus fIu- ther reve 3 w the tma&takablp intent of the Legislature that the entire dlsoretlon In matters oonoomed vith secur- w 8muaria8 to how* State milit8z-y eitabllahments rest in the Armory Boa@. !l!boughout this srtlale, the Legialsture bar vith rrorupulous oare stated that nothing oxpressedthere- in is to be oonstrued as a 1LDitation upon tha pover snd au- thoritr vhich the ~rm0a-y Board may need for the aoooniglish- 8b6d 0r it8 purp08e8. A delegation of authority more sweep- ing in its scope, to the end that stability be given to the adlitury arm of the Stete, oannot be lmaglned. yundpul or the purpose ror vhioh the Armory Board V8S Ore8ted and of the plenary powers for aeocanplishlng this Honorable Clark C. Uren, Executive Secretary, Page 11 purpose vhioh have been conferred upon It, and mindful or the IEilitUrJr oharaoter of the Armory Board and of its undeptakfng, we do not believe that the Legislature would Vest any portion of that 8uthorlty in another board without using language clearly expressing tbat intention. Nor do we believe that the 48th Leglalature by enACting Senate Blll No. 266 (Chapter 289, Acts 1943, p8ge 385) intended to take ftrom the Armory Board any of the brond powers and discre- tion vhloh had been theretofore conferred upon It. Article 789Ob placea in the Armory Board the ex- Qreas duty to acquire leasehold estatea and grants to It all powers neoeaaary and convenient for the accomplishment of euoh duty.” If we hold th8t Senate Bill No. 266 applies to the Armory Board, we must necessarily hold that the Legislature intanded.to take from the Armory Board these broad powers and discretions. In Senate Bill No. 266, the 48th Legislature has 918Ced absolute discretion over the need by any agency or department of the rental space whlchTproposea to lease or rent in the Board of Control. Some possible diatinotlon may be made on the basis that Senate Bill No. 266 refers to 8nd applies to rental space, vhile Article 789Ob applies to leasehold estates. However, ve will not quarrel with mere temo1ogy. A8 we have seen, Artlole 58gOb places abaolute dlacretion In the Armory Board over the necessity or desir- ability 0r such leasehold estate a8 it de6iroS to acquire. Llkevise under Article T&Ob selection d sltea is left to the dlsoretlon of the Armory Board ua a neceaaury corollary of the grant of “all power8 necessary and convenient to the 8coompllshment” 0r 14s duties. Under Senete Bill No. 266, selection would be made to depend, ln’part at least, upon the amount bid and other factors Vhfoh may or may not take into oonsfderatlon the desirability Of the site as 8 till- tary installation. Again quoting rrom the oplnlon or Justice Sharp in Texaa National Armory Board v.MoCraw, supra: “It la well to keep in mind that we are dealing with statutes and provlslons of the Conatltution relating to mllltary matters and lonorable Clark C. Wren, Executive Seorotary, Page 12 the power of the State to create an army and provide for ite malntenanoe . . . . This Act 1s a part of the program adopted by the Legls- lature OS Texan relating to the organization and maintenance of the Texas Rational Guard,” We do not believe that In passing Senate Bill Ho. 266, the 48th Legislature intended to enoroaoh upon the broad dlaoretion vhloh it has placed in the military ana of the State end entrust those matters to men vithout mill- targ bpokground. A8 ve have seen, the Legislature in Artiole 789Ob has been oareSu1 to prescribe that only men wlth mill- tary baokground eerve on the Armory Board. The primary funotlon of the Armory Board la to seoure and malntaln ar- aorles and the Armory Board Act places the burden upon the ,?gnory Board to do vhatever is neoessary to carry out its objeots and purpose,s. While Senate Bill Ho. 266, according to its ex- press language, applies to all State agenoles, we are of the r~pinion that properly oonstrued, It does not apply, and vas not intended by the Legislature to apply, to governmental oorporatlons, such as the Arrmory Board, to vhloh the Legls- lature has granted broad and extensive powers for the aaocan- plirhment OS a partiaular and segregated purpolre of the State. J@&.ave already slluded to the fact that the Armory Board, a8 set up by the Legislature, Is oonstituted a body politic &fCZoorporation, which, vhlle it performs funotlons bene- Sl~iZl to the 8tat8, is not in a true sene.e a component and interdependent part OS the admlnlstratlve lnaohinery OS the state government. ------- - -s.,; In Its broadest oonnotation, the expression “atate ageaoy” may and does enoompass all organizations and bodies serving any of +he objeots or purposes OS the State govern- ment. Under thin deffnitlon all organiztitlons whiah are oreated by the State to carry out any one of the many State pwposea, as distinguIshed from those whioh serve strl.$~ private enterprises, are 018ased 88 stste agencies. Lindsey-Btrathmoe Irr. Diet., D, C. Cal.,21 F. Supp. 129. Thus a school dlstrlat, a port oommiaalon, a oity board of eleatlons, an drrigation distriot and a bridge distrlot 53 1 Honorable Clark C. Wren, Rxecutlve Sccretnrg, page 13 havo all been held to be state aganalos. See 40 Words & Phrases (Perm. Rd.) 19. And under this broad definition, even lncor- porated cltlea have been called State nyencles by the oourts of Texas. As pointed out ln Terss National &ard Armory Board V.McGraw, supra: “In its governmental capacity a city Is a political subdivision of the State, and ln many lnstanaes Is oonsldered as an agent of the State; and the State may use such agent In the discharge of its duties. Yett v. Cook,115 Tex. 205,281 S.W. 837; City of Uvalde v, Uvalde Elec. k Ice Co., Tax. Comm. ~pp.,250 S.W. 40; City of Trenton v. Neu Jersey, 262 . U.S. 182 43 s. ct. 534,67 L. Ed. 937,29 A.L.R. 141; 43 C.J., Sec. 5, p. 79, and sec. 179, p. 1i 2 and cases cited in footnotosj Cor- poration of San Fell e De Austin v. State,111 Tex. 108, 229 9.W. i3i5; city of Armlsss Pass V. Keeling,112 Tex. 559,247 S.W. 818; 43 C.J., 880. 5, p. 70.” We doubt that anyone would seriously contend that a oity is a State department or that anyone would seriously urge that the provisions of Senate Bill No. 66 are intended to apply to cities. While cities are, in the broad sense, arms of the State, they are neverthe- less sovereign ln themselves vlthln the llmltatlons lm- posed by the Constitution and statute8 of the State. They are not like those agencies or departments of the state government which perform limited functions as a cog ln the sdmlnlstratlve machinery of state government and vhlch have no sovereignty of’ their own. Yet, If we were seeking an annlogy, ve would oertaldly conclude that the Amory Borrrd is more nearly Ilke a municipal corporation or city than a State depart- mwlt . To all Intents and purposes, the Armory Board is a governmental corporation, with povers and authorities com- mensurate with those possessed by private corporations or Ionorable Clark C. Wren, Executive Secretary, page 14 3unlalp81 corporations. It has been created by the Legis- lature to asrve oertain, llmlted interests OS the State, wselp, the eaquisitlon of armorlea for the State’r armed forces. Artiale 589Ob giver, the Azao Board almost un- Limited over8 to effectuate and aaoomp 7 lsh Its purposes, 9ec tlon i of that article provides thatr “In the exeou- tion and edmlnistratlon OS objeats and purposes herein set forth, the (Armory) Board shall have pover to adopt means and methods reasonably calculated to aooompllsh suoh ob- jects and purposes and this Aat rho11 be oonstrued llberel- ly in order to effectuate such objects and purposes,” Under this statute, it possesses numerous povers vhlch are not ordinsrlly, and, in Sect, most of vhlch are nevq, grwted to ordinary state departments, For exsmple, to n8me a fev of the powers grsnted, the Armory Board has authority to sue or be sued in its ovn name and to enter into contracts in Its oyll nsmej to have and use a oorporate seal1 to 0.x the number of and compensation of its employees; to adopt, change and amend by-lava, rules snd regulations for the conduot of its affairs; to oonstruct buildings and to buy, ovn, sell or exohange property 3.31Its ovn nsmeJ to borrov money and isrue and sell bonds for the purpose OS ao- Quirlng building sites and build-8 snd to oontraot vlth the State as a separate entity. For all of the reasons rtated, ve have oonaluded that Seaate Bill Ro. 266 doe8 not Ppply to the Texas Bstlonal Guard Armory Board and you are 80 respeotSully advised, What we have stated aPaVers all of the questions propounded by you vlth the sxoeption of your questions l(b) and l(o), whloh we will nov oonslder. In the negotiation of all leases and sublease8 be- tveen the Texas Ration81 Quard Msory Board and the State OS Texas the Adjutant Qeneral, under the provlslons of subsea- tlon (i) of Seotlon 2 of Artlale 589Ob, Is authorlted and designated to sot for the State, We quote this subsection 3n full, as follows; -- . Honorable Clark C. Wren, Executive Seoretary, Page 15 “To execute and deliver leases, or aub- leases in the aase of buildings looated upon leasehold estates acquired by the Board, de- mlslng and leasing to the Stats of Texas through the Adjutant General, uho shall exe- cute the same for said State, for such lavSu1 term es may be determined by the Board, any build- or bulldings and the equipment there- In and the site or sites therefor, to be used for Armory and other purposes and to renew such leases or sub-leases from time to time; provided, however, that if at any time the State OS Texas shall Sail or refuse to pay the rental reserved In any suoh lease or sub- lease, or shall fell or refuse to lease or sub-lease any suoh building and site, or to renev any existing lease or sub-lease thereon et the rental provided to be paid, then the Board shall have the power to lease or sub- lease such buildlug and equipment and the site therefor to any person or entity and won such terms as the Board may determine. The law wqtirlng notloe and ao&atltlve bids Board ahhi determine) to be charged the State OS Texas for the use of euoh property leased or sub-leased to It by the Board shall be suffiolent to provide for the operation and maintenance OS the property so leased or sub- lassed, to pay the interest on the bonds, de- bentures or other evidences of indebtedness, IS any; issued for the purpose of acquiring, aonstructing or equipping such property, to provide for the retirement of such bonds, de- bentures or other evidenaes OS indebtedness, If any, and the payLS8nt of the expenses inol- dent to the lesuanoe thereof, es vell es the necessary and proper expenses of the Board not otherwise provided for.” (blnyhaels added) Honorable Clark C. Wren, Wecutlve Seorotary, Page 16 It vi11 be observed that this subsection speclf- Ioally states (see underlined sentence above) that the ‘lav requiring notloe and oompetltive bids shall not apply’ to leases OF sub-leases betveen the Texas National Guard Arc mory Board and the State of Texas. Senate Bill No. 266 on the other hand provides that leases to all departments and agencies of the State shall be made on aompetitive bids by the Board of Control, Ho provision vas made in this bill, however, for either speclfid or general repeal of oonfllcting legislation. If the underlIned provision of submotion (I) bas been repealed by Senate Bill Bo, 266, such repeal must have been accom- plished by Implication since no actual repeal, either speclf- IO or general, is oontained In the Bill as passed by the Leg- islature. Such repeals are not favored by the aourts and vi-l1 not be Invoked unless .the old and the neu law are so antagonistic and repugnant that both oannot stand, the pre- sumption being that the Legislature ln enaatIng the new law Intended for the old provision to remain in sffeat, 39 Tex. Jur. 140, md casea oited in the footnotes. “If by any reasonable oonstructlon two acts or statutory provisions can be reconciled and so construed that both may stand, one will not be held to repeal the other. Espeolallg vhere the older law Is particular and Is ex- pressed In negative terms, and th later stat- enoral, a oonstruotion viz1 be sought late vhiohIS harmon + zes them and leaves both in con- current operation.” 39 Tex. Jur. 141-2, and oases cited In the footnotes. (IS&hasis added) The ;nderlIned provision ln subsection (I) of Sec- tion 2 of Article 58gOb Is expressed in negative tenss. It applies to a partioular type of lease--those for armories- and It Is restrloted to leases betvoen the Armory Board and the Adjutant General, acting as agent for the State. The new law--Senate Bill No. 266--b general. It applies to all leases by all departments and agencies of the State. Honorable Clark C. Uren, Exeautlve Seorotarg, Page 17 Therefore, applying the quoted rule of statutory construotlon, both provisions should be allowed to stand. Subsection (I) of Seation 2 of Artiole 58gOb vi11 be con- sidered an exoeption to the general provisions contained In senate ~111 No. 266. 39 Tex. Jim. 149-50; Townsend v. Terre&118 Tex. 463, 16 9.W. (26) 1063~ Cole v. State, lo6 Tex. 472,170 S.W. 1036, dlsmlsslng error163 S.W. 353; Ellis v. Batts,26 Tex. 703. Your iuqulries are therefore respectfully an- svered as follovs: 1. a No. (b) Yes. (a) Yes. 2. Senate Bill No. 26bh as no affect on the arrangements you outline. 3. Yes. 4. No. Trusting that we hrve fully answered your inquiry and that you will call upon us If we can be of further serv- Ice, ve are Ap’TF:.vT-Dm 3, 1943 Yours very truly ATTOIUEYGENERAL OF T&XAS ~-----bd7 BY _ ~/ C.? *.J Peter ManIsoaloo Assistant PM:ff .
City of Trenton v. New Jersey ( 1923 )
Cole v. State Ex Rel. Cobolini ( 1914 )
City of Aransas Pass v. Keeling ( 1923 )
Cole v. State Ex Rel. Cobolini ( 1914 )
W.D. Yett, Mayor v. Cook ( 1926 )
Corporation of San Felipe De Austin v. State ( 1921 )