THEA~O~EY GENERAL 

OF-TEXAS 

Mr. H. R. Nieman, Jr. 

Executive Director 

Opinion No. W-757 

State Building Commission Re: Authorization of the 

Austin, Texas State Building Commission to pay the City of 

Austin for paving its 

half of the existing 

thoroughfare and the additional five feet (anproximate) inside the 

State property line in 

order to render the access completely finished up to the curbing at 

the west end of the SupDear Mr. Nieman: reme Court Building. 

You 'lave requested an opinion of this office concerning the Building Commission's authority to pay the 

City of Austin for paving its half of the existing 

thoroughfare and the additional five feet (approximate) 

inside the State property line at the west end of the 

Supreme Court Building. 

Under Section 51-b(c),'Article III, Constitution of 

Texas, the Commission may acquire property and enter into such contracts as it deems necessary to build and 

equip buildings for the use of State agencies. 

"(c) Under such terms and conditions.as are now or may be hereafter 

provided by law, the Commission may acquire necessary real and personal property, salvage and dispose of property 

unsuitable for State purposes, modernize, 

remodel, build and equip buildings for 

State purposes, and negotiate and make 

contracts necessary to carry out and effectutte the purposes herein mentioned. 

. . . 

In Attorney General's Opinion No. ~-585, when the 

State Highway Department was confronted with a similar 

situation, this office held that the authority for the 

expenditure comes from the Highway Department's capacity as a land owner, and that money could be spent for 
Mr. H. R. Nieman, Jr., page 2 (ww-7572 

a tract of land just as 

the roof of a building lo- _.. 

street improvements next to 

it could be spent to repair 

cated on that land. Such an expenditure was also upheld for the Texas State Hospitals and Special Sch,ools 

in Attorney General's Opinion No. S-102 on the basis 

that it constituted an Improvement of the property. 

There is no doubt that the Commissisr! can pay for 

the paving of the five-foot area on State property 

under Section 51-b(c), Article III of the Constitution 

of Texas. The only question is whether bids must be 

taken in accordance with Section 5 of Article 678m 

of Vernon's Civil Statutes. It Is clear, however, 

that Article 678m applies only to the obtaining of 

building sites and the construction of buildings on 

those sites. It would not prohibit the Commission from 

entering into a contract to pay the City of Austin for 

paving the five-foot area at the west end of the Supreme 

Court Building. 

It is our opinion that the Building Commission is 

authorized to enter into a contract with the City of 

Austin to pave the area outlined In your question. 

Of course, the authority to make the expenditure 

is subject to an appropriation for that purpose. We 

are of the opinion that the expenditure can be made out 

of Item No. 10 of the present biennium appropriation to 

the Building Commission. 

SUMMARY 

The State Building Commission 

is authorized to pay its pro 

rata share of the street paving 

cost at the west end of the 

Supreme Court Building and the 

addit~ional cost of paving the 

five-foot (approximate) area 

within the State'pro 

under Section 51-b(c P 

erty line 

Article 

III, Constitution of 4exa.3, and 
Mr. H. R. Nieman, Jr., page 3 (WW-757) 

Attorney General's Opinions 

NO. w-585 and NO. S-102. 

Very truly yours, 

W?LL WILSON 

Attorney General oi' Texas 

BY 

Assistant 

JSC:ms 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

W. V. Geppert, Chairman 

Henry G. Braswell 

Robert H. Walls 

James R. Irion III 

Raymond V. LDftin, Jr. 

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

BY: Leonard Passmore