Eouorable Roy Blake 

Chairman 

Administration Committee 

Texas State Senate 

P. 0. Box 12068 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Opinion No. SM-684 

Re: Authority of the State Preservation Board to solicit and accept 

gifts, money and items of value 

Dear Senator Blake: 

Pou ask whether the State Preservation Board has the auchoricy to 

solicit and accept gifts. money. and items of value from private 

donors for the purpose of assisting in the restoration of the State 

Capitol. We conclude that the board has such authority. 

In 1983. the leg&slature established the State Preservation Board 

to “preserve, maintain, and restore” the State Capitol. its contents, 

and its grounds. V.T.C.S. art. 6145-14 [hereinafter the act]. 61. 

The board is empowered by ssccion 4 of the act to employ an architect, 

who is in turn empowered by section 6. to employ a curator. Section 6 

of the act sets forth the duties of the architect and the curator and 

provides in part: 

(a) The architect of the Capitol shall: 

. . . . 

(2) develop for approval by the board a master 

plan with a projection of at least 20 years concerning the maintenance, preservation, restoration, and modification of the buildings. their 

contents, and their grounds, including a plan to 

restore the buildings to their original architecture; 

. . . . 

(5) develop a program to purchase or accept by 

donation. permanent loan, or outside funding items 

necessary to implement the master plan; 

p. 3167 
Honorable Roy Blake - Page 2 (JM-684) 

. . . . 

(8) employ a curator of the Capitol who shall 

assist in matters dealing with the preservation of 

historic materials and who must be a persou with a 

minimum of ‘a master’s degree and four years’ 

experience in historic collections administration 

vich a specialization in the material culture of 

this state. 

(b) The curator of the Capitol shall: 

. . . . 

(2) develop a program to purchase ot accept by 

donation, permanent loan, or outside funding items 

of historical significance that were at one time 

in cha buildings. . . . (Emphasis added). 

Section 8 of chs act confers authority ou the board to develop 

programs to solicit gifts and money and sets forth the following: 

Sec. 8. (a) The board shall develop plans and 

programs to solicit gifts, money. and items of 

iralue . 

(b) The board may solicit gifts and money or 

items of value frpm private persons, foundations. 

or organizations. 

(c) All property provided by private persons, 

foundations, or organisations and all money 

donated to the board become the property of the 

state and are under the controi of the board. 

(d) This section does not apply to temporary 

exhibits or property of a person having an off ice 

in the Capitol. 

(e) The board shall use gifts of money made to 

the board for the purpose specified by the 

grantor, if auy. 

The act clearly empowers the board to solicit gifts: your question 

arises because the act fails to stde explicitly that the board may 

accept gifts. 

In order chat a state agency may accept a gift, ic first must be 

authorized by law co do so; absent such authority. it may not accept 

p. 3168 
Honorable Roy Blake - Page 3 (Jh-684) 

gifts or donations. Attorney General Opinions H-1309, H-1180 (1978); 

O-4681 (1942). The legislature has explicitly conferred such authority 

on several state agencies. See e.g., V.T.C.S. arts. 4413d-1 (Office 

of State-Federal Relations); 4413(32f) (Texas Closeup Board); 4413(35) 

(Commission on Fire Protection Personnel Standards and Education); 

4413(44) (Governor’s Commission on Physical Fitness); 4413(47d) (Texas 

National Research Laboratory Comsission); 4413(49) (Criminal Justice 

Policy Council; Criminal Justice Coordinating Council); 4413(51) 

(Interagency Council on Sex Offender Treatment). In each instance 

cited above, the relevant state agency was given explicit authority to 

accept gifts. 

The primary consideration in construing a statute is giving 

effect to legislative intent. Minton v. Frank, 545 S.W.2d 442 (Tax. 

1976); Calvert v. British-American Oil Producing Co., 397 S.W.Zd 839 

(Tex. 1965). The intention of the legislature should be determined by 

examininn the entire act rather than isolated oortions of the act. 

City of Houston v. Morgan Guaranty International’Bank, 666 S.W.Zd 524 

(Tex. App. - Houston [lst Dist.] 1983, writ ref’d n.r.e.). Read as a 

whole, article 6145-14. V.T.C.S., clearly contemplates that the board 

possesses the authority to accept gifts or donations. 

Section 6 of the act confers authority on the architect and the 

curator to develop a program to accept gifts. Section 8 confers like 

authority on the board. Additionally, section 8 explicitly coufers 

authority on the board to “solicit” gifts and money. Generally, 

administrative agencies have by implication such powers as are 

necessary to effectuate the objectives of those powers expressly 

granted to them. City of Corpus Christi v. Public Utility Commission, 

572 S.Y.Zd 290 (Tex. 1978); State v. Jackson. 376 S.W.Zd 341 (Tex. 

1964). We conclude that imulicit in the board’s Dower to “solicit” is 

the power co accept gifts. ‘“Solicit” has been defined to mean 

to approach for something; to ask for the purpose 

of receiving; to endeavor to obtain by asking; to 

importune or implore for the purpose of obtaining; 

co awake or incite to action by acts or conduct 

intended co and calculated to incite the giving. 

People ax rel. Friedman v. Framer, 139 N.Y.S.Zd 331, 33i (N.Y. App. 

Term 1954); see also People v. McCormack. 169 N.Y.S.2d 139, 142 (N.Y. 

App. Term 1957); Schmid v. Langenberg, 526 S.W.Zd 940, 944 (MO. App. 

1975). It would make no sense for the legislature to empower the 

board to “solicit” gifts but then not empower the board to accept a 

gift when the solicitation is successful. We will not construe a 

statute so as to ascribe to the legislature an unreasonable result if 

the stacute is reasonably susceptible of a construction that will not 

accomplish such a result. Anderson V. Penix, 161 S.W.Zd 455 (Tax. 

1942); Trimmirr~v. Carlton, 296 S.W. 1070 (Tax. 1927). Accordingly, 

p. 3169 
Honorable Roy Blake - Page 4 (34-684) 

we conclude that the State Preservation Board is empowered to 

and accept gifts, money. and items of value in furtherance 

statutory duties. 

SUMMARY 

The State Preservation Board is empowered to 

solicit and accept gifts, money, and items of 

value iu furtherance of its statutory duty. 

solicit 

of its 

Very truly you , 

. J-k 

JIM MATTOX 

Attorney General of Texas 

JACR HIGHTOweR 

First Assistant Attorney General 

MARY XFLLER 

Executive Assiscanr Attorney GFneral 

JUDGE ZOLLIE STRAKLgT 

Special Assistant Attorney General 

RICX GILPIN 

Chairman, Opinion Committee 

Prepared by Jim Moellinger 

Assistant Attorney General 

p. 3170