Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1941 )


Menu:
  • HonorableB. V. Rayford
    Co-ntyAuditor
    Rusk CourQ
    Senderson,Texas
    Dear Sir:                           opinionx&Y.e=mx
    Be: (1) Whether school districtmay
    issuewarraats payableover a
    term of severalyears.
    (2) Vihethertaxes for fiscalyear
    leginningSeptembsr1,194l,but
    collectedin August, 194l, are
    for scholasticyear 1940-1941.
    Ws have receivedyour letter of recentdate which we ~quoteia _oart
    as follows:
    "I desire an opirionfrom you as to imo quea-
    tions pertainingto the public schools,with chic!
    we are confrontedin t'~iS county. A large perceht-
    age of the scholasticsof Rusk Countyars transy::-
    ed to schoolsby buses which are owed & the so!ools.
    Several of the school dfstriots,lackingthe funi3 to
    pay for buses in cash, have boughtthem on credit,
    paying part of the ~chase price in cash and execut-
    ing warrants of the school district,payable over a
    tens of severalyears, for the balance. The first
    questionto rbich I desire an answeris this; Do
    such notes or contractsfor schoolbuses cons%tute
    .validobligations,enforceableagainstthe school
    districtsinourringsubh obligations?"
    HonorableR. V. Ileyford,
    Rage 2 (O-4001)
    I . . . Thin limitationupon the power of the
    trustseain Wing the ccntmct ndth teachen net-
    sr~arily1bit.a the payment of tha debts that might         '
    be contractedto the amount of the hurd nhich belong-
    ed to the diatrJ.ct
    for that year, and rrsgdebt aoa-
    tractedgreaterthan that wculdb a Violationof the
    lar, md constituteac 018&e againatthe diatrict.e
    The twae principlehaa been extendedmd appliednot cnly to
    tee&em1  contractabut alaa to other obligrticna,such asthe puraluas
    of equipnent,and penaanentimprocments to the sohcclprcperty.
    Ycu oited in ycur letter the case of TsmplauwiCcrnncnSohcol
    Districtv. Bcyd B. Read Canparry, 101 S.H. (2d) 352. In this care two
    rarrentrwere issued in payment of septictoilets. These wem renewal
    nfMts,    and were dated February 22, 1933,due February22, 19'54,and
    April 1, 1934. Them was no showingthat the districthad any available
    funds on hand for the year for nhioh the purahaaewas made, and the
    court in holdingthat reccreryoculd not be bd CQ raid warrants had the
    folloringtc anyc
    .%d.le the languageused 5x1said statuterefera
    apcifically b a deficiencycreatedinthe employment
    of teachers,it hea been held th8t it applis~with
    equal foros tc debts ircurredin the purchaseof equip-
    ment. Inthi8 oonwotion, the Wu-t of CivilAppeals
    in StephensonV. l&&on SeatingCo., 26 Tex. Cit. App.
    16, 62 S.H. 128, 129, in referringto the holdingof
    the Supreme Court in %rlier V. Peacock,supre,said:
    "1 It ir held that a~warrantfor a teaoher'rsal-
    ary in.exoesrof the sun apportionedto the dirtrict
    for the yeer'camot be made a chargeupon the fund of
    4 mbaequeiit psar. Article 3959 (new Article 2749) was
    ocnatruedas @ limitationupon the power of the trustees
    to contract ap debt which would cause a deficiencyin
    the ~ohocl fund   of the dirtPi&.   Uhile the artiole q-
    plies alcne to oontractsfor teachers'klaries, w
    think the constructionplaoed upon it~by the supreme
    court applieswith equal force 5, the artioleaoontml-
    ling the purchse of sohocl.furriture.l
    -',
    ..      3
    "The Supreme Court refuseda writ of error in that
    case. This seems to be the logicalsonstrudion to be
    placedon the statute; for its purpose,at least in part,
    is to avoid a dissipationin advanceofthe funds to be
    appropriatedfor the suppo&-t  of t:-.e
    sc?~olduring subse-
    quent years ezd thus render more cerzainthe maintenance
    of a pxzblicfree sc:loolin each ,+strictfor at least
    Hon. R. V. Reyford,Page 3 (O-4001)
    six months in each year, es called for is article7,
    3 3, of the Constitution;and, if in keepingwith
    that purpose6 defioienay  debt oannot be creetedin
    the employmentof e teacher,the one ixIispenaab.le
    essential of a school,it reasoneblyfollowsthet
    such e deficiencycannot lawfullybe createdin the
    puroheao of equipsent. See in this oonnedion 37
    Tax. Jur. 972; ??ermn V. Sager IndependentSchool
    Dirt., 
    116 Tex. 163
    , 
    266 S.W. 159
    .'
    The s-e doctrinehas been applied to independentEcho01 dis-
    triutr. First  Bet. Bank of Athena V. Murchison IndependentSchool Dist.,
    114 S.W. (2d) 382; 'Busteesof Crosby IndependentSchoolDist. V. Uest
    DisinfectingCo., 121 S.iV.(2d) 661. In the l4urchison  cese, the suit
    ma* upon warrantsmaturingone, tm     and three -yearsafter date, bearing
    six per cent interest,payableout of the localmairrtenance   fund for
    furnitureor noney advancedto purchasefuraitum. The followingas
    stated bythe court:
    sEor ware there, for partiaularyears over and
    above the msountanecessary to conductthe schoolany
    availablefinds out of which these debts couldbs paid."
    'Ws quota from the opinion of the hunission of Appealsin the
    case of HarlingenIndependentSchool Dist. V. C. R. Page deBra., 48 S.U.
    (2d) 983:
    Vrcm the ebow it is evidentthat the powers of
    the school board to *spend the funds of ths district
    ere et all times li,itedto en availablePond,and to
    ;,heparticularthing prescribedby the statute. The
    board never has any authorityto expend funds that ere
    not loaileble.'
    Rs see no reasonto differentiatethe announceddoctrinees to
    the Durchaseof school buses,end m, think that the languageemployedin
    the oited cases is amply broad to co'rersuch purcheses. It follma,
    therefore,that the larrantagiven in payment of the buses are invalid.
    We quote hrther from your letter:
    "The fiscalyear for.schools r-8 from the first
    of Septemberof me year to the first of the same
    month of the next"y6s.r.Several cf the largerschool
    districtsin Rusk County are in ths oil field. In or-
    der to get the tm~ ?er cent. discous: cffexd by the
    taxing authoritiesfor payment:ofadvalor taxss for
    the year 1941, many taxlxysrshave paii +eir taxes in
    full in &+tlst,my infomstLon being i?.stapprodimately
    _,- .
    .
    Hon. B.V. Rayford,Page 4 (o-4001)
    ninety perxmt, of the 1941 taxes ware psid in
    that month. The secondquestion I suhuit to you
    is this:   Ib such taxes which are oolleatedin
    August,  1941, becme a part of the sohool funds
    for the scholastioyear 1940-1941,making the
    same availablefor the payment of school obliga-
    tions incurredduring that year, or do such taxes
    constitutea fund forthe operatim of the schoola
    for the scholastioyear 1941-19421
    'If your ansnerto the last questionis&at
    auohtaxes xay be appliedto paymentof obligations
    - inaurredfor the year 1940-1941,then please answer
    this further question: Could such taxes so oollrct-
    ed in August, 1941, be lawfullyappliedto the pey-
    ment of a warrant issuedduring 1940 for part of the
    purchaseprice of a.hts purchasedat the tjme which
    such warrant uas issued?"
    He assume that the allow&se of a discountnas made under
    the pr&isioa of Wicle 7255b,Verncsa's       AuaotatedCivil Statutes,
    rhi&  authorizes     a discounton ad valoremtaxss under the terms sst
    out in the statilte.
    Regardlessof the fad that the taxes nere collectedbefore
    kpmaber 1, 1941, which markedthe ~beginirgof the aer fiscal year
    .X341-1942, they mere assessedfor that fiscal year, and, therefore,
    Lwastitutea fmd for the operationof the schoolsduriag that year,
    It  follons,invie* af our sasmr to your first questior?,that such
    ;u moneys zay not js used for the paymentof obligationsincurred
    during the fiscal gear 1940-1941.
    Cur answer to your secondquestionrendersunnecessarysn
    anmer to your third question.
    Verptrulyyours
    ATTOEEY        GEERR   OP lZX4.3
    W”         -.
    s/   Glenn R. Lewis
    Glenn R. bris
    Assietmt
    APPRO7EDOCT 2, 1941                             BY
    s/George l?.Sparks
    s/  Gromr  Sellers                                      Georgs K. Sparks
    FIRST ASSISTANi”
    ATTORSY           GE:XXL.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: O-4001

Judges: Gerald Mann

Filed Date: 7/2/1941

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017