Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1988 )


Menu:
  •                       _ December 29, 1988
    Honorable Bruce Gibson                    Opinion No.   JM-1000
    Chairman
    Committee on Financial Institutions       Re:   Whether a school
    Texas House of Representatives            district may rent a
    P. 0. Box 2910                            school building   owned
    Austin, Texas ,78769                      by a nonprofit founda-
    tion   under    certain
    circumstances       and
    related questions
    (RQ-1476)
    Dear Representative   Gibson:
    you request an opinion about certain powers of an
    independent  school   district.   YOU   report that  rapid
    fluctuations in the population    of the district make  it
    difficult to plan for adequate classroom facilities.   YOU
    describe the following proposal which the district      is
    considering to deal with this problem.
    To save money and provide higher quality
    facilities, the district    is interested   in
    using removable classroom facilities acquired
    through a non-profit corporation that will be
    created by citizens of the school district to
    provide adjunct services to the school dis-
    trict as a tax-qualified public    foundation.
    The district will not be officially   involved
    in the creation,   organization, or operation
    of the foundation.
    YOU note that two alternative plans are under consideration
    using such a foundation to provide for the contemplated
    classroom facilities.
    The foundation will issue bonds or notes
    to acquire a site and construct or install
    removable modular classroom buildings.    The
    bonds or notes will be secured by a deed of
    trust lien on the premises and will be pay-
    able solely from rentals paid by the district
    or a successor tenant or from proceeds of a
    P. 5131
    Honorable Bruce Gibson - Page 2   (JM-1000)
    sale of the property.  The district will rent
    the facilities for a one-year term with the
    option to extend the tenancy annually for 25
    year.s; the district's   obligation  will be
    subject to the budgeting of the necessary
    amounts. The district will pay rent monthly
    or semiannually in fixed amounts that equal
    the amount due in a fiscal year on the found-
    ation's bonds plus any insurance and similar
    costs. On the date the district ceases to
    pay rent or the expiration     of 25 years,
    whichever  comes first, possession    of the
    property will return to the foundation.   The
    district believes interest on these bonds  is
    subject to federal income taxes.
    The second plan is the same as the first
    except that, before the bonds are issued, the
    foundation and district will agree that on
    full payment    of the    bonds the     rental
    agreement will terminate  and the foundation
    will convey title to the property     to the
    district, which will have agreed in advance
    to accept the donation of the property.    The
    board of the school district will adopt a
    resolution approving the foundation's     pur-
    poses and activities and consenting to the
    issuance of the foundation%    bonds for the
    described purposes.   Under this plan, the
    district believes the bonds can be issued on
    a tax-exempt basis under federal law.
    We provide you with our opinion on each of the
    questions  you   ask in    relation to  the plans    under
    consideration by the district. We have grouped  questions
    one and two together,   along with our answers.   Question
    three is addressed separately.
    (1) May the district,    under the law of
    this state      (including Section    20.48(c),
    Education Code), rent a school building owned
    by a     nonprofit    foundation   created    by
    interested citizens under these circumstanc-
    es, assuming:     (i) the    district  is    not
    obligated to pay rent or occupy the premises
    beyond the current fiscal year and does not
    create a debt:    (ii) funds are budgeted    for
    the year in which the rent is due: and     (iii)
    the nonprofit foundation retains title to the
    facilities?
    P- 5132
    Honorable Bruce Gibson - Page 3 (JM-1000)
    (2) May the district, under the law of
    this state (including Section 23.26, Educa-
    tion Code), accept a donation of the property
    from the foundation after the bonds are paid
    in full?
    The trustees   of an independent school district have
    exclusive power   "to manage and govern the public        free
    schools of the district."    Educ. Code 5 23.26; Trustees   of
    the Index. School    Dist.  of  Cleburne  v.  Johnson   County
    Democratic  Executive   Comm., 
    52 S.W.2d 71
    (Tex. 1932);
    Attorney General Opinion JM-531 (1986); see also Attorney
    General Opinion M-1047     (1972).   The discretion    of the
    trustees is limited only to the extent that they may not
    enter into agreements outside of the governmental     purposes
    of the district.    In other words, every transaction    which
    they approve must relate to the operation of the public
    schools entrusted to their care. See River Rd. Neighborhood
    Ass'n. v. South Texas Svorts, 
    720 S.W.2d 551
    (Tex. App. -
    San Antonio 1986, writ dism'd; Rovse Indev. School Dist. v.
    Reinhardt, 
    159 S.W. 1010
    (Tex. Civ. App. - Dallas 1913, writ
    ref'd); Attorney General Opinion M-1047 (1972).
    Additionally, the specifically enumerated powers of the
    trustees include the power to spend local tax funds for
    "renting school houses," Educ. Code § 20.48(c),      and to
    accept donations.    Educ.   Code 5 23.26(a).    Thus,   the
    trustees of the school district may arrange to rent portable
    classroom buildings and to accept a donation of the build-
    ings from a private  foundation, subject to the limitations
    discussed below.
    As a matter of law, an independent school district  may
    not expend money except according to a budget item adopted
    in due course as prescribed by law. Educ. Code 5 23.47(a);
    see also 0 4.03(c). Of course, the question of whether   the
    trustees have properly exercised these powers in relation to
    a particular transaction concerning the lease of classroom
    space ("school houses") also is in part a question of fact.
    See River Road; Rovse Citv, suvra. Thus, whether or not a
    lease transaction  results in fair value for the school
    district is a question of fact which this office cannot
    resolve. See, e.g., Attorney General Opinion JM-486 (1986).
    You also ask:
    Under Section 272.001(b)(5), Local Govern-
    ment Code, may the district, without competi-
    tive bidding,  sell a site for the school
    facilities to the foundation for development
    in accordance with the rental agreement    if
    the foundation's bond issue includes, and the
    P. 5133
    Honorable Bruce Gibson - Page 4   (JM-1000)
    foundation pays to the district, an amount
    equal to the fair market value of         the
    property that will be paid to the district?
    An independent school district may sell its land only
    if the proceeds of the transfer are used for "the purchase
    of more convenient   and more desirable   school property"   or
    for "the construction or repairing of school buildings"      or
    for deposit "to the credit of the local maintenance fund of
    the district."     Educ.   Code 5 23.30    (emphasis   added).
    Additionally, the    property must no longer be needed      for
    school purposes.   Attorney General Opinion O-1570 (1939).
    Because, under the facts you have provided, the land in
    question will be conveyed to a private party which will
    erect structures   on it which will be leased back to the
    school district   and used as classrooms,    the district   can
    hardly claim that the land is "no longer needed for school
    purposes."    In fact, under such a plan, the land is
    precisely needed   for school purposes.    The district    thus
    lacks the authority      to convey the land to a private
    foundation for such purposes. We, therefore, need not reach
    questions concerning the application    of section 272.001   of
    the Local Government Code.
    Additionally,    several  aspects   of   the   proposed
    transactions   contained   in the   second proposal    raise
    questions about the authority   of the school district    to
    proceed with its participation in such a plan. YOU relate
    that, under that arrangement, the district, before bonds are
    issued by a private foundation, must agree that:
    (1) on full payment    of the bonds the
    rental agreement will terminate     and  the
    foundation will convey title to the property
    to the district, which will have agreed   in
    advance to accept     the donation   of  the
    property:
    (2) The board of the school district will
    adopt a resolution approving the-foundation's
    purposes and activities and consenting to the
    issuance of the foundation's   bonds for the
    described purposes.
    You cite no authority for the district to enter into
    these arrangements, and we can find none. cf. Educ. Code
    5 20.48; see also Attorney General Opinion MW-522 (1982).
    The transaction which you have described to us requires
    the trustees to take action that is beyond the powers bf an
    independent school district.  The trustees of an independent
    school district have the powers expressly conferred on them
    P. 5134
    Honorable Bruce Gibson - Page 5    (JM-1000)
    by law or necessarily implied from express powers. Harlinaen
    Indev. School Dist. v. C. H. Paae & Bros., 
    48 S.W.2d 983
    (Tex.   Comm'n   App.   1932,    judgment   adopted).     More
    specifically, the board of trustees of the district has no
    power to approve the organization, purposes, and activities
    of a private foundation and "[to
    Sf co sent
    the foundation's    bonds for     the described    vurvoses. 'I
    (Emphasis added.) Thus, we need not consider whether       the
    district's "consent" to the issuance of bonds by a private
    entity may violate article III, section 52(a) of the Texas
    Constitution, which forbids independent     school districts
    from lending public credit to private individuals,    associa-
    tions, or corporations.  We also note that the arrangements
    in the proposed second alternative may violate the doctrine
    which prevents a political subdivision    from entering   into
    arrangements that would potentially control or embarrass    it
    in the exercise of its governmental powers. See Clear Lake
    Citv Water Auth. v. Clear Lake Utilities Co., 
    549 S.W.2d 385
    (Tex. 1977).
    SUMMARY
    The board of trustees of an independent
    school district may rent classroom space for
    fair value in a transaction with a private
    foundation.  Educ. Code 5 20.48. The board
    may accept the donation of portable classroom
    buildings from such a foundation. Educ. Code
    § 23.26. An independent school district may
    sell its land only if the proceeds of the
    transfer are used for "the purchase of more
    convenient   and   more   desirable     school
    property" or for "the construction or repair-
    ing of school buildings"  or for deposit   "to
    the credit of the local maintenance fund of
    the district."    Educ. Code § 23.30.      The
    trustees of an independent school district
    have no power to l'consent" to the issuance of
    bonds by a private foundation.
    Very-truly yo~fs~
    MATTOX
    Attorney General of Texas
    WARY KELLER
    First Assistant Attorney General
    LOU MCCREARY
    Executive Assistant Attorney General
    P. 5135
    Honorable Bruce Gibson - Page 6    (~~-1000)
    JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY
    Special Assistant Attorney General
    RICK GILPIN
    Chairman, Opinion Committee
    Prepared by D. R. Bustion, II
    Assistant Attorney General
    P. 5136