Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1942 )


Menu:
  • Honorable Compton White
    County Auditor
    Freestone County
    Fairfield, Texas
    Dear Sir:           Opinion No. O-4294
    Re: Can the school board of a common
    school district legally Snvest any
    part of the local matitenance
    SWP~US  fund in United States
    Government Defense Bonds or any
    other kind of securities?
    Your letter requesting the optiion of this department on
    the above stated question reads as follows8
    "The St. Elmo conssonSohool District No. 46 In
    Freestone County has 'a surplus fund of approximately
    ($5,000.00) Five Thousand.Dollars in a local
    maintenanoe fund that will not be needed to.operate
    their 1941-1942 sOho    term for nine months: This
    sohool has no bonds outstanding nor has any debt'
    outstanding of,any nature. This District has a looal
    maintenanoe fund for sohool purposes of fifty aents
    on the,One Hundred ($100.00) Dollar valuation., Th$s
    surplus of Five Thousand ($5,000.00) Dollars is a
    surplus built up.from this fifty oentlevy.    The
    dls,trlothas no levy for any purposs except ~for local
    maintenanoe school purposes.
    "Please answer the following question: Can the sahool
    board of this district legally Invest any part of'thls
    looal.maintenanoe surplus fund ln United States
    Government Defense Bonds,or any other kLnd of
    seourltles?. An earlyreply from you answering this
    inquiry wiL1 be appreciated;"
    Public sohool funds from every souroe, including those
    derived from local taxation, oountg s,ahool.funds and
    apportionment from the state available sohool fund, are
    held in trust by the ol,ty,distrfot,.county, or other stat- ',
    utory agenay, to be ,used for the benefit of the oommunity or
    Honorable Compton White, page 2, O-4294
    district. 'The funds are ao olearly impressed with a trust
    in favor of-the sohool that they are within the protection
    of both the State and Federal Constitutions, and the
    Legislature may not devote them to any other purpose or to
    the u88 Of any other benefioiary. (bJ8   v. City Of Dallas,
    40 S.W. (2d) 20; Texas Jurisprudenoe, Vol. 37, p. 967.)
    Powers of boards and offioers over funds belonging to school
    districts, and the manner in whiah those powers Shall be
    exercised, are prescribed by statutes, and the oourse
    pr8scribed by law must be followed to~'th88xclusion of all
    othermethods.   (Thompson v. Elm0 Independent School District,
    
    269 S.W. 860
    ; Dodson v. Jones, 190 S. U. 253; Texas
    Jurisprudence, Vol. 37, p. 960.)
    Article 2827, Vernonra Annotated Civil Statutes, reads in
    part as f0110WS:
    "The public free school funds shall not be expended'
    except for the following purposes:
    "1. 'Ph8Stat8 and County available funds shall be
    used 8xclusiv8ly for the paym8nt of teaahersr and
    superintend8ntsr
    ~. . ~.~. census,salaries,
    _. . fees for taking the
    acno1astilc        ana interest on money forrowed on
    short time to pay salaries of teachers and superin-
    tendents, when these salaries become due befOr the
    school funds for the current year become available;
    provided that no loans for the purpose of payment of
    teachers shall be 'paidout of funds other than those for
    the then current year.
    "2. Local school funds from district taxes, tuition
    fees of pupils not entitled tvfree tuition and other
    looal sources may be used for the purposes enumerated
    for Stateand county funds and for purchasing
    appliances and supplies, for the payment of insruance
    premiums, janitors and Other employes, for buying
    school sites, buying, building and repairing and rent-
    ing school tlOUS88,  and for other purposes neaessary
    in the conduct of the public schools to be determined
    by the B~oardof TrUSt88S,   the accounts and vouchers for
    county districts to be approved by the oountg superin-
    tendent; provided, that when the State available school
    fund in any city or district is sufficient to maintain
    the schools thereof in any year   for at l8aSt eight
    months, and leave a surplus, such surplus may be
    expended for the purposes mentioned herein."
    It will be noted that the above mentioned statute in effect,
    aUthoriZ8S the trustees of common sohool distriots to
    expend funds derived from looal sources, and the surplus
    r.
    _   .^   -
    ?I
    Honorable Compton White, Page 3     O-4294
    from the State and oounty available school funds, for any
    and all the purposes enumerated by law, and for such other
    purposes, as in the disor8tiOn of the board, may be reason-
    ably necessary in the maintenance of the schools. Like other
    public officers, sohool officers are responsible for any
    wrongful and illegal disbursement or misapplioatlon of sahool
    funds. (Borger Independent School District v. Dickson, 52
    S. W. (2d) 505; Powell v. Mathews, 
    280 S.W. 903
    .)
    We fall to find any authority authorizing the board of
    trustees to invest any part of the local maintenance fund in
    Unit8d States GoverrutmntDefense Boards or any other kind of
    securltles. Such funds must be expended as authorized by
    Article 
    2827, supra
    . Therefore, W8 r8Sp8CtfUlly answer the
    above atated question in the negative.
    Yours very truly
    ATTORNE!t
    ., GRKRRAL OF TRXAS
    s/ Ardell Willi&
    BY             Ardell WlllGiixi9
    Assistant
    AW: GO/q
    APPROVED JAN. 16, 1942
    s/ Grover Sellers
    FIRST ASSISTANT
    ATTORNEY GWRRAL
    APPROVED OPINION COMMITTEE
    By BWS, Chairman
    

Document Info

Docket Number: O-4294

Judges: Gerald Mann

Filed Date: 7/2/1942

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017