Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1953 )


Menu:
  •                   March 12, 1953
    Hon. R. C. Lannlng       CipinlonNo. S-18
    Chairman
    State Board of Control   Re: !Pwoqueetions relating to
    Austin, Texas                the admlniatratlonof the
    school~bue purchasing law
    ;zoihe State Board of Con-
    Dear Sir:                        .
    We refer to your request for an opinion of
    this office which, in eubstance,states the following:
    Certain questionshave arisen concern-
    ing the administrationof the school bus
    purchasing program created by Section 3 of
    Article V, Senate Bill 116, Act@ 51st Deg.,
    R.S. 1949, ch. 334, p. 638 (Art. 634(b):V.
    C.S.) and Section 1 of Senate Bill 90, Act8
    52nd Leg., R.S., 19% ch. 198, p. 325,
    creating the School Bus Revolving Fund, (Art.
    2922-15, Sec. 2, V.C.S.)
    Under present practiceswithin the
    Board of Control, requisitionsfrom local
    school districts for school buses are sent
    to the Board of Control, and then the Board
    of Control purchases from the lowest of com-
    petitive bidders the buses desired. 'The
    local school must certify that it has encum-
    bered sufficient otherwise unencumberedfunds
    to pay for the buses as It requisitions
    them. The Board of Control always has out-
    standing purchase requests for school buties
    in excess of the $25O,OOO.OOdeposit known
    as the School Bus Revolving Fund. As the
    statements from the bus manufacturerscome
    due with the Board of Control they are al-
    ways paid by the collectionsreceived by the
    Board of Control from the local school dls-
    trick? when It delivers the buses to them.
    At no time has the School Bus Revolving Rund
    shown a balance lower than $200,000.00.
    Hon. R.   C. tinting, page 2 (s-18)
    You ask the following questions:
    1. May the State Board of Control
    legally write purchase orders for school
    buses totalllng more than $25O,OOO.O0at
    any one time?
    2. May the Board of Control legally
    award an annual oresemiannualcontract for
    bua bodies and bus ohasais showing an
    estimatednumber of units only and guaran-
    teeing no mlnlmum number?
    Public officers may make only such contracts
    as they'are authorized by law to make.' Fort Worth
    Calvary Club v. Sheppard, 
    125 Tex. 339
    , b3 S.W.2d 660
    . 1935)
    ~--. . Seotion 44 of Article III of the Constitution
    of Texas prohibits the Legislatureappropriatingstate
    money to any Individual unless at the very time the ap-
    propriationIs made there Is already in force some pre-
    existing valid law constitutingthe claim appropriation
    Is made to pay a legal and valid obligationagainst the
    State. By legal obligation la meant such an obligation
    as would form a basis for a judgment against the State
    in a court of competent jurisdictionIn the event the
    Legislatureshould permit It to be sued. Fort Worth
    Calvary Club v. 
    Sheppard, supra
    . Public officersare
    limited In theirrlaht to contract to the amount of
    available appropriation. Nichols v. State, 
    32 S.W. 452
     (Tex.Clv.App.,1895:,error ref.); State v. Haldeman,
    
    163 S.W. 1020
    (Tex.Clv.App.1913, error ref.); ForE
    Worth Calvary Club v. 
    Sheppard, supra
    .
    Section 2 of Article 2922*15, Vernon's Civil
    Statutes, as amended by Chapter 198, Acts of the 52nd
    Legislature,Regular Session, 1951, page 325, provides
    that school buses purchased through the State Board of
    Control shall be paid for by the State Board of Control
    out of the School Bus Revolving Fund. Therefore,con-
    tracts for the purchase of school buses through the
    Board of Control create an obligation against the State
    to be paid for out of the School Bus RevolvingFund.
    Fort Worth Calvary Club v. Sheppard;Nichols v. State;
    State v. 
    Haldeman, supra
    . It Is our opinion that a
    contract creating an obligation in excess of the amount
    of money available In the School Bus RevolvingFund at
    the time the contract is made would constitutea debt
    In violation of Section 49 of Article III of the Constl-
    tution of Texas. You are therefore advised that the
    Hon. R. C. Lanning, page ,3 (s-18)
    State Board of Control,doesnot have authority to write
    purchase orders for school buses totaling more than Is
    available In the School BusRevolvIng 'Fundat the time
    the purchase order Is made.
    Concerning your sec'ond~queatlon,you further
    ask if the Board of Control may legally award an annual
    or semiannual contract for bus bodies and bus chassis
    showing an estimated number of units only and guaran-
    teeing no minimum number. Unless there Is a legal
    reason for doing so a contractwill not be held invalid.
    Charles Scrlbner's Sons v. Marrs, 
    114 Tex. 11
    , 
    262 S.W. 722
    (1924) In the case just cited our Supreme Court
    passed on the validity of a contract similar to the con-
    tract involved in your question. The contract In that
    case was made between the Texas State Textbook Commis-
    sion and a publisher. The contract obligated the State
    to purchase all the text books on a particularsubject
    from the publisher as the local school boards should
    requisition them.
    Th,eConstitutionis silent as to the length
    of term for wh.icha contract may be made by the State.
    The only provisions of the Constitutionthat might af-
    fect the term are those which provide that no debt may
    be created by or on behalf of the State, and that no
    appropriationof money may be made for a longer term
    than two yea~rs. However, obligationsthat run current
    with revenues z,renot debts within the contemplation
    of th@ Constitution. Charles Scribner'sSons v. Marrs,
    * McNeal 'v,City of Waco, 
    89 Tex. 83
    , 
    33 S.W. 322
    'I';& D
    Payment for the bus bodies and for the bus
    chassis is to be made out of the School Bus Revolving
    Fund as they are purchased. The obligationof the con-
    tract is not to buy a fixed number or amount of bus
    bodies or bus chassis, but only so many as are requlsl-
    tioned by the schools of the State. Liability is fixed
    only for such amounts as are requisitionedby the
    schools, The number of buses, chassis and bodies pur-
    chased for any period is wholly within the control of
    the local authoritiesand of the Board offControl.
    It is therefore the opinion of this office
    that the Board of Control may legally award an annual
    or semiannual contract for bus bodies and bus chassis
    showing an estimated number of units only and guaran-
    teeing no mirLimumnumber.
    Hon. R. C. Lannlng, page 4 (s-18)
    SUMMARY
    The State Board of Control does not
    have authority to write purchase orders
    for school buses totaling more than Is
    avallable'lnthe School Bus Revolving Fund
    at the time the purchase order Is made.
    The State Board of,Controlmay legally
    award an annual or semiannual contract for
    bus bodies and bus chassis showing an estl-
    mated number of unite only and guaranteeing
    no minimum number.
    Yours very truly,
    APPROVED:                           JOHN BE3 SHEPPERD
    Attorney General
    J. C. Davis, Jr.
    County Affairs Division
    WI1118 E. Greaham                   BY
    Reviewer                               John Reeves
    P---
    Assistant
    Robert S.~Trottl
    First Assistant
    John Ben Shepperd
    Attorney General
    JR:am