Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

EIBE AT-Jr0
OF TEXAS
The Honorable J. W. Edgar Opinion No. H- 144
Commissioner of Education
Texas Education Agency Re: Whether an institutional inde-
20.1 E. Eleventh Street pendent school district and its
Austin, Texas 78701 average daily attendance must
be considered in determining
eligibility for incentive aid
Dear Commissioner Edgar: under the Education Code
You have requested the opinion of this office on the following question:
Should an institutional independent school
district, such as Boys Ranch, and its average daily
attendance (hereinafter, ADA) be considered in cal-
culating what constitutes “a majority of the children
in average daily attendance in the county containing
the majority of the land area involved in the reorgani-
zation, ” in determining a newly consolidated district’s
eligibility for incentive aid payments under Sections
23.991 through 23.999 of the Education Code?
Subchapter 23(G) of the Education Code, dealing with incentive aid
payments to independent school districts, was added to the Code in 1971
(Acts 1971, 62nd Leg., p. 3013, ch. 994). Generally it provides for finan-
cial aid to new districts created through consolidation of older ones in
retiring existing bonded indebtedness of the older districts or to be used
for constructing new buildings.
Section 23.993 provides:
“The new district created through consolidation
shall contain not fewer than 750 children in average
daily attendance or a majority of the children in aver-
p. 680
The Honorable J. W. Edgar, page 2 (H-144)
age daily attendance in the county containing the
majority of the land area involved in the reorgan-
ization. ” (Emphasis added)
The facts which you have submitted to us are that the Vega Independent
School District and the Wildorado Independent School District, both located
within Oldham Comty, contemplate a consolidation of their districts. Three
other school districts have territory ,located in Otdham County. You advise
that these five districts and their ADA figures are:
1. Vega 453
2. Wildorado 60
3. Adrian 150
4. Charming 0
5. Boy’s Ranch 392
Charming Independent School District is a county-line district under the
jurisdiction of Hartley County (See § 19.101, Education Code), and probably has
no students from Oldham County. The Boy’s ,Ranch District is ,a so-called
“institutional” independent school district created in 1942 pursuant to Article
2666, V.T.C.S., which has since been repealed. But see $2.10, Education
Code, V. T. C. S.
Assuming that the ADA of the childrenin all of the districts is counted,
the total would be 1055, and a majority of the children in ADA would be 528.
However, if Boys Ranch School District is not included, the total ADA, would
be 663 of which a majority of children in ADA would be 332. The total ADA
of Vega Independent School District and Wildorado Independent School District
is 513. Therefore, if the Boys Ranch School District is included in the ADA,
and based on the figures you hatie’ furnished, the netiljr consolidated district,
having fewer than 750 children in ADA, will miss’having the required “majority
of the children in average daily atten,dan,ce in the county” by 15 at this time.
p. 681
The Honorable J. W. Edgar, page 3 (H-144)
There is no exclusion of those children in the ADA who are in
“institutional” independent school districts from the calculations required
by $ 23.993. We construe “children” to include all of those in ADA in
the county. Therefore, under the facts you have submit,ted to us, it is
our opinion that the proposed consolidated school district does not at this
time have sufficient children in ADA to be eligible to receive incentive
aid payments under the provisions of the Education Code.
SUMMARY
The average daily attendance of children in a
so-called institutional independent school district
located within a county must be considered in cal-
culating what constitutes “a majority of the children
in average daily attendance in the county” in order
to determine if a consolidated district is to receive
incentive aid payments under the provisions of
$ 23. 993 of the Texas Education Code, V. T. C. S.
Very truly yours,
Attorney G- al of Texas
APPROVED;
n
DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman
Opinion Committee
p. 682