THE RNEY GENERAL

Honorable Clayton T. Garrison ExecutiveDirector Opinion No. M-1268

Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept. John H. Reagan Building Austin, Texas 78701 Re: Authority of Parks and Wildlife Department to expend an amount greater than the sum specified at Item 10B of its currentAppropriation Bill for development and expan&ion of park facilities,using funds appropriated to the Department by other items of the AppropriationBill.

Dear Mr. Garrison:

You have requestedour opinion concerning the above captionedmatter and pose the following question:

'IIs the Parks and Wildlife Department authorized to expend an amount greater than the sum specified at Item 10B of the currentAppropriatione Bill for developmentand expansion of park facilities at one or all of the parks listed therein, using funds appropriated to the Departmentby other iteme of the Appropriation Bill?"

"Item lOB, page 111-106 of S.B. NO. 11, ae amended by S.B. No. 7, Acts of the 62nd Legislature,Regular Session, 1971 (Current AppropriationsBill) reads as follows:

B. Developmentand expansionof Park facilities for the convenienceof the public, including screendedand group shelters, camp and trailer sites, picnic units, roads,water and electrical systems, rest rooms, park headquarters,the clearing of land, and for other facilities:

-6221-Honorable Clayton T. Garrison,page 2 (M-1268)

(7)
(8) (9) Lyndon Bainee Johnson State Park 1,000,000 Balmorhea State Park 166,500 Longhorn Cavern State Park 79,400 Goliad State Park Mission Tejas State Park 1g, y; > Varner-Hogg Plantation State Park 95,555 Stephen F. Austin State Park 75,000 Lake Somerville State Park 150,000 Washington-on-the-Bra205 State Park 17,000 

# u”::: Kii:
U.B.

U.B.

U.B.
U.B.

U.B."
The unexpendedbalances remaining in Item 10B on August 31, 1972 have been reappropriatedfor the fiscal year beginning September 1, 1972. (See 111-176-177of S.B. No. 1, Acts of the 62nd Legislature,Third-Call&dSession, 1972).

In addition to the above specific reappropriation,we aleo find the following specific appropriationto the Parke and Wildlife Department for the fiscal year ending August 31, 1973, ae ehown at page 111-111, Senate Bill No. 1, Acts, 62nd Legislature, 3rd C.S., 1972:

"21. There ia hereby appropriated from the

Texas Park Fund, pureuant to Article 4 of House Bill 730, Acts of the Sixty-second Legislature,Regular Session, 1972, for all neceseary caste /PI%-$&rgQQ,QQQ-$ep aefltl~6~~~el?-~Fpem-~he=H~gkway-Beaa~~meR~ eE-laAa-Be~Rde~-~y-6e~g~ee~-Ave~~e-~e~e~a~e SfPee~S-lQtk-SfPeef-a~~-~~~h-S~~ee~-~~-~he G~~y-e~-A~sf~R+-Teffa~~-~e~-~eve~0~me~~-e~ sai~-~aR~-ae-a-Sfate-ga~~e~-~a~k7and for the purpose of planning, ac&isition and developmentof other State parks and State historic cites. Such expenditures include,but are not limited to, ealaries and wages, professional services and feee, travel, capital outlay, 4ncluding land and improvementsthereto, and all other necessary costs and expenseswhether by contract or direct payments. $14,500,000"

-6222-Honorable Clayton T. Garrison,page 3 (M-1268)

(Bracketsours. Item of appropriation shown in bracketswas vetoed by the Governor.)
The veto of the $1,500,000 item,however, does not affect the remainderof the appropriation contained in Item 21. Attorney General'sOpinion M-1228(1972).

Your requeet states in part:

?tnorder to provide the nature and extent of facilltiee and improvement&required to meet existingpublic demand, the Department is prepared to expend a greater sum than the amount specifiedby the AppropriationsBill at certain of ,theparks listed in Item 10B. Any additional expenditureabove the sum appropriatedat Item 10B would be taken from other appropriationsmade to the Department. (See Item 20 and 22, page III-log, S.B.No. 11 as amended by S.B. No. 7, Acts of the 62nd Legislature,Third-Called Session, 1972. )
"TheComptroller'sOffice contends that the Department is limited to a specific sum appropriated for each park as listed in Item lOB, so that the total expenditures for developmentprojects in these parks during the currentbiennium cannot exceed the appropriated sum. Your attention is directed to Section 26, page V-45, S.B.No. 11 as amended by S.B.No. 7, Acts of the 62nd Legislature, Regular Session, 1971. This section has been carried forward in the new Appropriations Bill. (See Section 26, page V-44, S.B. No. 1, Acta of the 62nd Legislature,Third-Called Session, 1972.)"
After much study and deliberationof the difficult complex questionpresented,we have concluded that we must answer it in the affirmative. It is well settled that rules of constructionapplicable to statutes equally are deemed to apply to appropriationbills. Attorney General Opinion NO. M-1141(1972)1 81.COTOs. 1225-1226, States, Sec. 166.

-6223-Honorable Clayton T. Garrison,page 4 (M-1268)

Consequently,

II

. . .when it is necessary to construean act in order to determine its propermeaning, it is settled that the Court should first endeavor to ascertain the legislative intent from a general view of the whole enactment,and the enactment alone. The intent having been ascertained, the court will then seek to construe the statute so as to give effect to the purpose of the Legislature,as to the whole and eachmaterial part even though this may involve a departure h&m-the strict letter of the law as written by the Legislature. This is the fundamental canon and the cardinal,primary, and paramount rule of construction,which should always be closely observed and to which all rulesmust yield.

. . .' 53 Tex.Jur.2d 180-185, Statutes, Section 125. Furthermore,not only must a bill be construedas a whole, but all parts of it should be "harmonized"if possible according to the legislative intent and the courts

,t

. . .will endeavor to reconcile the various provisions of the act, insofar as theymay appear to be conflictingor inconsistent,to the end that the enactmentand every word, phrase, clause, and sentencemay have its proper effect.' 53 Tex. Jur.2d 229-231, Statutes, Section 160. Following the above rules of construction,we must note that in current GeneralAppropriationsAct the Legislature not only reappropriated Item lOB, but alsomade the additional appropriation contained in Item 21 above quoted, and we must harmonize thetwo separate appropriations so as to give legal effect to both appropriations. Therefore it is our opinion that Itemmdoes not constitutean 0,verall limitationon the amount of money thatmay be spent for the projects specified therein. Our opinion is that you may spend the monies appropriated in Item 21 on any parks selectedby YOU, which may or may not include one or more or all of those parks designated in Item 10B.

-6224-Honorable Clayton T. Garrison,page 5 (M-1268)

The language in Item 21 appropriating $14,500,000 for the developmentand acquisition "of other State parks and State historic sites" evidentlymeans other than the one "boundedby CongressAvenue, Colorado Street and 11th Stree in the City of Austin," that being the one designated and immediatelyproceeding the language "other state parks." The 'Iother"

does not refer to those state parks set out in Item lOB, which is a separate reappropriation for the fiscal year beginning September 1, 1971.
While the general rule is that the function of an appropriation is to authorize the expenditureof a certain sum of money for a certainpurpose and for no other purpose and thus operates as a limitationon the amount of money thatmay be expended for such purpose (AttorneyGeneral Opinion No. O-4632(1942), this rule is not without exceptions. One such exception is where a contrary legislative intent evidently appears, as in this instancewherein the legislatureby appropriate languagehas made an additionalappropriation for the same purpose. Consequently,the first rule of constructionmust yield to the paramount rule of construction, legislative intent or purpose. See. 125. 53 Tex.Jur.2d 185, Statutes,

-SUMMARYItem 10B of the appropriation to the Parks and Wildlife Department contained in the General AppropriationsAct for the fiscal year ending August 31, 1972 (p. 111-105-106, 3604-3605) and reappropriatedby the current GeneralAppropriations Act (~.III-176-177)for the developmentand expansion of certainpark facilities,does not constitute a limitationon the amount of money thatmay be spent for said purposes and the Parks and Wildlife Departmen,t is authorized to spend othermoneys appropriated for the development and expansion of park facilities in addition to said item of appropriation.

-6225-Honorable Clayton T. Garrislon,page 

### 6 (M-1268)

Prepared by Kerns Taylor Assistant Attorney General

APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE

W. E. Allen, Acting Chairman
3. C. Davis Jack Goodman Jay Floyd Max Hamilton

SAMUEL D. MCDANIEL Staff Legal Assistant

ALFRED WALKER Executive Assistant

NOLA WHITE First Assistant

-6226-