Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1960 )

..
EA'ITORNEY GENERAL
OF’ %-EXAS
AUSTIN ``.‘lkxas
WILL WILSON
A-ORNEY GBNE-I. July 22, 1960
Honorable J. W. Edgar Opinion NO. W-892
Commissioner of Education
Austin, Texas Re: May a junior college
district legally expend
local maintenance funds
when available for estab-
lishment and operation of
a television station facil-
ity (to be located within
or without the dlstrlct) as
a cooperative educational
project with other public
Dear Dr. Edgar: educational entities.
We are in receipt of your letter requesting our
opinion on certain questions concerning the legality
of an educational television station.
Your questions read as follows:
I'Maya junior college district legally
expend local maintenanc,efunds when available:
"1. For establishment and operation of
a television station facility (to be located
within or without the district) as a coopera-
tive educational project with other public
educational entities?
"2 . For the costs of providing or ser-
vicing the district with educational tele-
vision broadcasts from a television channel
or station?
“3. And/or for the costs of procurement
from and televising by a certain television
station of educational programs or services
designated by the District for augmentation
of Its educational program?"
.. -
Honorable J. W. Edgar, Page 2 (W-892)
The authorized expenditures for which local main-
tenance funds may be used are set out in Article 2827,
Vernon's Civil Statutes, which reads in part as follows:
"The public free school funds shall
not be expended except for the following
purposes:
"2. Local school funds from district
taxes, tuition fees of pupils not entitled
to free tuition and other local sources may
be used for the purposes enumerated for
State and county funds and for purchasing
appliances and supplies, for the payment of
insurance premiums, janitors and other em-
ployees, for buying school sites, buying,
building and repairing and renting school
houses, and for other purposes necessary in
the conduct of the public schools to be
determined by the board of trustees . . ."
Article 2827 quoted above is applicable to Junior
College Districts by virtue of Article 2815h, Section 5,
Vernon's Civil Statutes, which reads as follows:
"The Board of Trustees of Junior Col-
lege Districts shall be governed in the
establishment, management and control of
the Junior College by the General Law
governing the establishment, management
and control of Independent School Districts
insofar as the General Law is applicable."
Section 20 of Article 2815h, Vernon!s Civil Statutes,
reads in part as follows:
Said Board of Trustees shall
. . . &l is such they shall constitute
a body corporate by the name of the Junior
College District , State of Texas,
and in that name may acquire and hold real
and personal property, sue and be sued, and
may receive bequests and donations, or other
moneys or funds coming legally into their
hands, and may perform other acts for the
promotion of education in said district."
- -
Honorabie J. W. Edgar, Page 3 (w-892)
It is our opinion that the language of this Sec-
tion quoted above does not expand or enlarge the pur-
poses for which junior college funds may be expended
but rather it pertains only to the authority of the
trustees to perform acts as a corporate body in the
name of the junior college, the authorization for the
particular acts being elsewhere in the statutes.
We believe that the answer to your first question
is controlled by Attorney Gneral's Opinion O-4573
(1942), a copy of which is attached hereto, and the
authorities cited therein, which hold that a junior
college district may legally expend local maintenance
funds for erection of a school building provided that
the funds used are surplus funds and that a deficiency
debt is not thereby created against the district. This
raises the question of whether or not a television
station facility Is a school building.
In Adams v. Miles, 300 S.W. 211 (1927), the Court
of Civil Appeals in an opinion affirmed by the Commis-
sion of Appeals in 41 S.W.2d 21 said the following:
"We are of the opinion tha~tunder
the powers granted common school district
trustees by the statutes above referred
to Sec. 1, Art. VII, Tex. Coast., Arts.
274.A9 2749, 2827, R.C.S.j, those trustees
have the authority,to be reasonably exer-
cised within their discretio:n,to
appropriate the surplus funds in their
hands to the constructi:X!of a 'school-
house', such as that proposed here, to be
used by them In providing "living quarters
for the teachers of sala school, and fo?
such other purposes as to the trustees of
said district may seem prop:r or necessary
In conducting said school',
In Mosely v. City of Dallas, 17 S.W.2d 36 (Corn.
App,), the Court recogn:zedthat the board of trustees
may exercise considerable discretion as to the purposes
for which the public free school funds may be expended
due to the language of Article 2827.
The case of Youn Linwood School District No. 17,
97 saw. 2d 627, iiiYo* the_:
que&ion of whether or not a
gymnasium building with rooms for home economics and
Honorable J. W. Edgar, Page 4 (W-892)
vocational agriculture was a school building under a
statute authorizing the issuance bonds for building
and equipping school buildings. The Supreme Court of
Arkansas held that It was a school building and the
following language Is from their opinion:
we think the words ‘school bulld-
lngs’, ‘ai ised therein, mean any such school
dlatrict bulldlng as may be needful, necessary,
or proper for the conduct of a school in said
district. ”
Article 2815r-1 specifically authorizes the several
governing boards of the Junior Colleges to enter into
contracts with munlclpalltles and school districts for
the joint construction of buildings and other structures,
In vlew of the foregoing authorltlea It ia our
opinion that a junior aollege dietriot may legally expend
local maintenanoe funds when avallable for eetabllshment
and operation of a tslevlaion station faallity as a
oooperative educational project with other public eduoa-
tional entltise where the trusteee determine suoh a pro-
jeot to bo neoeaaary in the oonduot of the sohool.
- -
Honorable J. W. Edgar, Page 5 (w-892)
I!
.. . and the Legislature may au.thorlse
an additional ad valorem tax to be levied and
collected within all school districts hereto-
fore formed or hereafter formed, for the fur-
ther maintenance of public free schools, and
for the erection and e ulpment of school build-
ings therein; . . .' 4Emphasis added)
From the authorities cited above we conclude that
the question of whether or not a junior college district
may expend local maintenance funds when available for
either the cost of providing or servicing the district
with educational television or for the costs of educa-
tional programs or services for the augmentation of its
educational program is a questlon that rests within the
sound discretion of the trustees of said district.
Questions 2 and 3 are, therefore, answered in the affirm-
ative, provided that the trustees in the exercise of
their discretion determine that such activities are
necessary in the conduct of the school.
SUMMARY
A junior college district may legally
expend local maintenance funds when
available for establishment and opera-
ticn of a television station facility
(located within the district) as a
cooperative educational project with
other public educational entitles, pro-
vided the trustees of the district in the
exercise of their discretion determine
such a project to be necessary In the con-
duct of the school, and provided further
that only surplus funds are used and a
deficiency debt is not thereby created
against the district. Such funds may
also be legally expended for the costs of
providing the district with educational
television broadcasts or for the procure-
ment and televising of programs to augment
Honorable J. W. Edgar, Page 6 (w-892)
the district's program where the
trustees in the exercise of their
discretion determine these activi-
ties to be necessary in the con-
duct of the school.
Yours very truly,
WILL WILSON
Attorney General of Texas
By k%J&ftLdJ
Robert A. Rowland
Assistant
RAR:mm
APPROVED:
OPINION COMMITTEE
W. V. Geppert, Chairman
Martin DeStefano
Riley Eugene Fletcher
Howard Mays
John C. Phillips
REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: Leonard Passmore