Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

EA NE GENERAL December 6, 1965 Honorable Robert S. Calvert Opinion No. C-559 Comptroller of Public Accounts Austin, Texas,,78711 Re: Whether a 1965 Model Twin Cessna Aircraft 310-J may'be paid for out of funds appropri- ated to the Texas sparksand Wildlife Commission under House Bill No, 12 ~ Acts 59th Legislaiure, Dear Mr. Calvert: 1965. Your request for an opinion asks the following question: Hay a 1965 Model Twin Cessna Aircraft 310-J be paid for out of funds appropriated to the Texas sparksand Wildlife Commission under House Bill No. 12, Acts 59th Legislature, lg65? Article V Section 21a of House Bill No. 12, Acts of the 59th Leglslagure, provides as follows: "Sec. 21. PASSENGER VEHICLES. a. None of the moneys appropriated in this Act may be expended for the purchase of a passenger car or of airplanes designed for passenger trans- portation unless authority to do so Is stated by the language of this Act. Moreover, none of the moneys appropriated in this Act may be expended for the maintenance or operation of any State-owned passenger car or airplane de- signed for passenger transportation unless the authority to do so is stated by the language of this Act." Section.20 of Article V of House Bill No. 12 is also pertinent to the purchase of an airplane. It provides: -2700- Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 2 (c-559) "Sec. 20. AIRPLANES. None o,f the moneys appropriated by this Act may be expended'for the purchase of'an airplane, or for the repair,of an airplane costlng~in excess of Pive Thousand Dollars ($5jooo), without the prior written ~approvalof the Governor after obtaining the a~dviceof the Legislative Budget Board. "None of the funds appropriated in this,Adt may be expended by a state agency for operation or maintenance of a state-owned airplane unlbss the agency files.a reportwith the Legislative Budget Board showing the names of places-to which flights were made, the name of the'pllot, and the name or names Of any passengers on each such flight, and the offlcia-lbusiness purposes of each such flight. Such report shall be certified as to accuracy by the executive head of the agency and shall be filed by no later than October 1 for the preceding fiscal year." In accordance with Section 20 of Article V, the prior written approval for the purchase of a Cessna 310 class air- craft for the Parke and Wildlife Department was ~secured from Qovernor John Connally with the express notation: $9 .I am today:approving; upon the advice of the'ldglslative Budget Board the purchase of a twin-engine plane equal to'or In the Cessna 310 class through the State Board of Control from current funds . . ." .that the plane will be used to further the Parks and Wildlife Programs of the Department and the plane will,not be used as a passenger plane except on official state business as approved by the Commission or the Executive Director as to its assignment and location." Although, Section 20 above quoted is couched in negative language' it necessarfly implies thit the moneys appropriated by this Act may be expended for the purchase of an airplane and for the repair of an airplane costing in excess of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) with the prior written approval of the Governor after obtaining the advzce of the Legislative Budget Board. -2701- Hon. Robert S. Calvert, pag e 3 (C-559) The question arises, whether Section 21 of Article V Is applicable. In order to -determlne'this the phrase "airplanes designed for passenger transporation" must be analyzed. In a prior opinionof this office the above phrase was construed'as meaning, ". . .reasonably adapted, structurally, for carrying passengers. . . .', Letter Opinion No. MS-107 l;l.z3). This office specifically overrules this prior construc- "Designed" Is defined by Webster's New World Dictionary of the American Language as follows: "designed,'adj. gp. of deslg_nT,formed or done according to design; planned; purposed; intended." "Designed" ,ls de'flnedin the fourth edition of Black's Law Dictionary as follows: .taken to be employed for a particular r2ruiis suppl;i;;nded, adapted or designated." It is the opinion of this office that the word "designed" as used in Section 21 of Article V, House Bill No. 12, Acts of the 59th Legislature, is synonymous with the words "purposed" and "intended." -'Therefore the phrase may be interpreted to.read 'I.. . .airplanes 'Intended' for passenger transportation. . .'I. It is the intent or purpose of the Department pur,- chasing an airplane which determines whether or not Section 21 of Article V is applicable. not the structural design of the airplane. This construction is supported by Williams v. State, 264 S.W.2d 711 cTex.Crlm. 1954) which- while construina the phrase ". ',poiicy book- ,- 'designed or adaptable f& use in connection with a policy game",' defined "designed" as follows: I! .The terms 'designed' and 'adaptable,' are not defined in the statute. As there used, the term 'designed' means other thipgs, 'intended', 26 C.J.S. p. i2;Tng . . "It is apparent therefore, that by the use- of the term 'designed' an Intent on the part of the possessor of the p&cy book and policy slip is written into the offense. -2702- . Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 4 (C-559) "It is, therefore, immaterial that the book here involved was, upon its face, nothing more or less than a common notebook and the slip merely a blank piece of paper. If the notebook and slip of paper were,possessed by appellant with,the intent to use them in playing the game of policy, the unlawful act condemned by the statute has been shown." Other jurisdictions have reached a slmiliar result: Bruce v. Slbeck 78 P.2d 741 Cal. Dlst. Ct. of Appeals 1938 hearing denied 6y Supreme Ct.f; City of'Akron v. Stouffis 121 N.E.2d 307; 96 OA 105, Ohio Ct. of ~A‘1. pea a; Darriagtonj 221 Mlch. 571, 191 N.W. f; 31 (1923). Furthermore, it would be,an impractical and uneconom- ical limitation on the various departments to require them to purchase automobiles and airplanes which have been specially constructed not to transport passengers. Consequently it Is the opinion of this office that since the aircraft is intended to be used by the Parks and Wildlife Commission in connection with its statutory duties and responsibilities as they relate to the enfordement of the'game and fish laws and carrying out the operations of Its park servlces, the aircraft is not designed for passenger transporatlon'within the meaning of Section 21 of Article V, House Bill No. 12, Acts 59th Legislature, 1965. Paragraph 12, Article 111-108, House Bill No. 12, Acts 59th Legisl,ature,1965, appropriates funds for the enumerated purposes: "12 Consumable supplies and materials current and recurring operating expense (exciud- ing travel), malnten&k and operation of passenger cars and aircraft, capital outlay including passenger cars." (Emphasis addend) The Parks and Wildlife Commission may purchase an airplane as part of its capital outlay and may then maintain and operate it under the above provision. -2703- . . Hon. Robert S. Calvert, page 5 (C-559) SUMMARY Section 21 of Article V, House Bill No. 12, Acts 59th Legislature 1965 does not prohibit the purchase of a 1963 Model Twin Cessna Aircraft 310-J where It is the intent of the Parks and Wildlife Commission to use it In the performance of Its duties and for official State business and not as a-passenger plane. Funds may be expended from paragraph 12, Article 111-108, House Bill No. 12, Acts 59th Legislature 1965, for the pur- chase, maintenance and operation of the airplane. Very truly yours, WAGGONER CARR Attorney General BY Wade Anderson Assistant WA:ml APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman W. 0. Shultz Bob Flowers James Broadhurst APPROVEU FOR THE ATTORNEX GENERAL By: T. B. Wright -2704-