JIM MATTOX Attorney General

Supreme Court Building P.0. BOX 12548 Austin. TX. 78711.2543 512l4752501 Telex 910/874-1367 Telecopier 512147502SE

714 Jackson, Suite 700 Dallas. TX. 75202.4508 214,742.&M

4824 Alberta Ave.. Suite 160 El Paso. TX. 79905.2793 915/533-344

1Texas. Suite 700 nousto”. TX. 77002.31 t1 713i223-&!s

806 Broadway. Suite 312 Lubbock, TX. 79401.3479 8061747.5238

4309 N.Tenth. Suite S MeAllen. TX. 78501.1885 512,SS2-4547

200 Main Plaza, Suite 400 San Antonio, TX. 782052797 51212254191

An Equal Opportunity/ Affirmative Action Employer 

# The Attorney General of Texas r---------.- June 18, 1984

Mr. John C. Wilson BtecutiveDirector State Commissionfor the Blind P. 0. Box 12866 Austin, Texas 78711 OpinionNO. .TM-167
Ret Whether the State Commission for the Blind my contract with private organIzationa to perform rehabilitativeservicesforblind adults
Dear Mr. Wilson: The General Appropriations Act of the Sixty-eighth Legislature includes the sum of $272,146 for older blind contract training in the appropriation to the State Comission for the Blind for each of the fiscalyears ending August 31, 1984 and August 31, 1985. Acts 1983. 68th Leg., ch. 1095, art. II. 15~. at 5949. The AppropriationsAct also contains the followingrider:

9. It is the intent of the Legislature that out of funds appropriatedabove in item 5.~.Older Blind Contract Training an amount not to exceed $272,146 each fiscal year shall be expended for entering into a contract with the Texas Lions League or a similar organization to provide rehabilitative services to blind adults at the Texas Lions Camp for Crippled Children at Kerrville or at a similar facility locatedoutside Austin. At the end of the 1984 fiscal year, the ExecutiveDirector of the State Commission for the Blind shall submit a fiscal report for consideration by the commission for continuation of such contractbeyond the 1984-1985biennium.
Acts 1983, 68th Leg., ch. 1095,art. II, 19, at 5954. The Texas Lions League for CrippledChildren is discontinuingits trainingprogram for olderblind at Kerrville,Texas, on May 31, 1984. You ask whether the Commission for the Blind may use funds appropriated in item 5.~. to contractwith Lighthouseorganizationsto perform rehabilitationservicestoblind adults. We conclude that the commission is authorized to expend item 5.~. funds with such organizationsfor olderblind contract training.

p. 736- .-,

Mr. John C. Wilson - Page 2 (JM-167)

The Texas Supreme Court has long construed article III, section 35 of the Texas Constitution to prohibit the enactment of general legislation in a general appropriationsbill. See Moore v. Sheppard, 192 S.W.2d 559, 561 (Tex. 1946); Attorney General Opinion V-1253 (1951). Article III, section 35 provides, inpart:

[no] bill, (except general appropriation bills, which may embrace the various subjects and accounts, for and on account of which moneys are appropriated) shall contain more than one subject
. . . . Therefore, as long as a general appropriations bill includes only subjects of appropriating money and limiting the use thereof in harmony with general legislation, it may relate to any number of different "subjectsand accounts." AttorneyGeneralOpinionV-1254 at 6 (1951).
It is well established that a rider to a general appropriation act is valid if its only effect is to "detail, limit or restrict the use of funds therein appropriated" and if it does not conflict with general legislation. See Attorney General Opinions IN-585 (1982); M-1141 (1972);V-1254.v-1253 (1951). Hence, the legislature cannot make mandatoryby a generalappropriationrider thatwhich general law makes permissive or discretionary. Attorney General Opinion MU-104 (1979). The rider in question is not confined to detailing, limiting, or restricting the expenditure of the appropriated sum, but attempts to confer an affirmative duty on the cosasission to expend the appropriated funds to "enter into a contract with the Texas Lions League or a similarorganizationtoprovide rehsbilitationservicesto blind adults at the Texas Lions Camp for Crippled Children at Kerrville or at a similar facility located outside Austin." See Attorney General OpinionsMW-585, MU-104, MW-51 (1979) (holdingvalid a rider that directed use of funds by state agency to construct building and holding invalid a rider directing state agency to take affirmative action to impose certain parking fees); cf. Coatea v. Windham, 613 S.W.2d 572, 575-76 (Tex. Civ. App. - Auxn 1981, no writ); but see Attorney General Opinion Mw-389 (1981). Section 91.052(b)othe Human Resources Code places the decision to enter into such a contractwithin the discretionof the commission. Section 91.052provides, inpertinentpart:

(a) The commission shall conduct a program to provide vocational rehabilitation services to eligibleblind disabled individuals. -,

p. 737. -(

.

Mr. John C. Wilson - Page 3 (JM-167)

(b) To achieve the purposes of the program, the commissionmay: (1) cooperatewith otherpublic and private agencies in studying the problems involved in providing vocational rehabilitation and in establishing, developing, and providing necessary or desirable facilities and services
. . . . Because the general appropriation rider in question attempts to make mandatory that which general law makes permissive or discretionary, we conclude that the rider is invalid general legislation contained in a general appropriationact in violation of article III, section 35 of the Texas Constitution. See Attorney General Opinion MW-585 (1979). We overrule the opinioncontained in Attorney GeneralOpinionMU-389 (1981). Under the authority grantedby section 91.052(b)(l)of the Human Resources Code, the commission, in its discretion, may use funds appropriated in article II, section 5.~. of the current general appropriations act to contract with public or private agencies to provide rehabilitationservicestoblind adults.
SUMMARY The State Commission for the Blind way use funds appropriatedby article II, item S.C., ch. 1095, at 5949 of the Sixty-eighth Legislature to contractwith public or private agencies for older blind contract training. The rider relating to funds appropriated in item 5.~. violates article III, section 35, of the Texas Constitution, in that it attempts tomake mandatory the enteringof a contractwhich ispermissibleunder general law. AttorneyGeneralOpinionMW-389 is overruled.

JIM MATTOX AttorneyGeneral of Texas TOM GREEN FirstAssistantAttorneyGeneral

p. 738Mr. John C. Wilson - Page 4 (JM-167)

DAVID R. RICHARDS ExecutiveAssistantAttorneyGeneral Preparedby Nancy Sutton AssistantAttorneyGeneral
APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE Rick Gilpin, Chairman David Brooks Colin Carl SusanGarrison JimMoellinger Nancy Sutton

p. 739