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 thoroughfareand the additional five feet (anproximate) inside the State property line in order to render the access completely finished up to the curbingat 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 thoroughfareand 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 Commissionmay acquire propertyand enter into such contractsas it deems necessary to build and equip buildings for the use of State agencies.

"(c) Under such terms and conditions.asare now or may be hereafter providedby law, the Commissionmay 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 purposesherein mentioned.

. . . In Attorney General's OpinionNo. ~-585, when the State Highway Departmentwas confrontedwith a similar situation,this officeheld that the authority for the expenditurecomes from the Highway Department's capacity as a land owner, and that money could be spent forMr. H. R. Nieman, Jr., page 

### 2 (ww-7572

a tract of land justas the roof of a building lo-
_.. street improvementsnext to it couldbe spent to repair cated on that land. Such an expenditurewas also upheld for the Texas State Hospitalsand Special Sch,ools in Attorney General'sOpinionNo. S-102 on the basis that it constitutedan Improvementof the property. There is no doubt that the Commissisr! can pay for the paving of the five-footarea on State property under Section 51-b(c),Article III of the Constitution of Texas. The only question iswhether bids must be taken in accordancewith Section 

### 5 of Article 

### 678m ofVernon's Civil Statutes. It Is clear, however, that Article 

### 678mapplies only to the obtaining of building sites and the constructionof buildings on those sites. Itwould not prohibit the Commission from entering into a contract to pay the City of Austin for paving the five-footarea at the west end of the Supreme Court Building.
It is our opinion that the Building Commission is authorized to enter intoa contractwith 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 ItemNo. 10 of the presentbiennium appropriationto the Building Commission.

SUMMARY
The State Building Commission is authorizedto pay its pro rata share of the street paving cost at the west end of the SupremeCourt Building and the addit~ional

cost of paving the five-foot (approximate)area within the State'pro under Section 51-b(cPerty line Article III, Constitution of 4exa.3,andMr. H. R. Nieman, Jr., page 

### 3 (WW-757)

Attorney General'sOpinions 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 JamesR. Irion III Raymond V. LDftin, Jr.
REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: Leonard Passmore