STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA
OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

August 11, 1975

Rep. George S. Mickelson
P.O. Drawer 248
Brookings, S.D. 57006

OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 75-138

Expenditure limits for Alumni Center at SDSU

Dear Representative Mickelson:

You have asked for an official opinion as to whether section 1 of Senate Bill 121, as passed by the 1975 Legislature, limits the amount which many be expended for the Alumni Center at SDSU to $190,000. Section 1 of Senate Bill 121 reads as follows:

The board of regents is hereby authorized to expend from gifts, donations, and other non-state sources the necessary funds for the construction and equipping of a building to be used as an alumni center at South Dakota state university, Brookings, South Dakota, at an estimated cost of one hundred ninety thousand dollars ($190,000).

First, it is important to note that the Legislature has not appropriated any public funds for construction or equipping of the Alumni Center. The obvious purpose of the legislation was to comply with the statutory requirements found in SDCL 13-51 and 13-52 regarding authorization to the Board of Regents to accept gifts and erect buildings. Therefore, the constitutional and statutory directions for appropriating funds are not applicable to your question.

The ultimate question which must be decided is what the Legislature intended by the term "estimated cost of one-hundred ninety thousand dollars." Terms are to be construed in the ordinary sense (see SDCL 2-14-1). "Estimate" is defined in Webster's Collegiate Dictionary, Seventh Edition, as "to judge tentatively or approximately the value, worth or significance of, or to produce a statement of the approximate cost of." In the case of Dennison and Partridge Co. v. Mingus, 179 N. W. 2d 748 (Iowa, 1970), "estimated cost" was held to mean the equivalent of "more or less" and not based on absolute calculations. The words essentially preclude accuracy since the calculation is based on imperfect data.

I am of the opinion that the sum of one hundred ninety thousand dollars is not to be considered as a maximum limitation. Rather, it is my opinion that the one hundred ninety thousand dollar limitation should be seen as a guideline when bids for construction and equipping the Alumni Center are opened and considered. Acceptance of a bid in an amount reasonably related to the estimated figure in Senate Bill 121 would not violate the intent of the law. Therefore, the answer to your question is "NO." If the Legislature had intended the maximum authorization limit to be one hundred ninety thousand dollars, they could have easily done so. The fact that they chose to use the terms "estimated cost" in my view indicates their intent to not make the one hundred ninety thousand dollar figure the fixed maximum allowable.

Respectfully submitted,

William Janklow
Attorney General

WJJ:DOC:LLV:mhb