# Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion > Texas Attorney General Reports · July 2, 1939 URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4146074 ## Case - **Court:** Texas Attorney General Reports - **Decided:** July 2, 1939 - **Precedential status:** Published - **Opinion:** Opinion - **Judges:** Gerald Mann - **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library ## Citator (automated) - No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases. - Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4146074 ## Opinion text cpinion construing section 7 or HLB. NO. 133, and holding: It is our opinion that Section 7 of H.B. NO. 133 author- izes the State Superintendent to t6ke into consideration the presence of University lands and National forests within (1School District a.8OILC of the factors in de- termining the need of that district, but that such dis- trict must;!beetall the requirements set cut in other sections of the Act bn order to quqlify for state aid. (EFICE OFTHE ATl'(RNE.YCENERAl narch 3, 1939 Honorable H. A. Formen Camty Attorney, Upton calkty Rankin, Texas Honorable Fouler Roberts County Attorney. Reagan County Big Lake, Texas Gentlemen: Opinion No. O-334 Re: Ruling on the interpretation Or Hause Bill NO. 133, Chap- ter 60, Act8 1937, Forty-rirth Legislature, Second Called Ses- sion we have received from each or you a request for a ruling on the interpretation of House Bill No. 133, Chapter 60, Acts, 1937 Fort&-fifth Legislature, Second Called Session, and particularly Section 7, thereof, as it affects the right or a school district containing Unirerstty lands to receive State aid under said Act, regardless or need. Inasmuch as both requests involve the same question, we shall answer them in one opinion. We wish to express cur appreciation for the help given us by the briefs on this question submitted by Mr. Fouler Roberts and Mr. Roy R. Priest. House Bill No. 133, above referred to, Is entitled "Amend- ing Rural Aid and Equalization Fund Law*, and wes passed by the Sec- ond Called Session of the Forty-fifth Legislature ln October, 1937. It constitutes a re-enactment, with 801118 changes and sdditions, ot all except the appropriation section or the Act passed rive months earlier by the same Legislature at its regular session. The earlier Act is Senate Bill No. 183 Chapter 474, Acts Forty-fifth Legisla- ture, Regular Session, entitled *Rural Aid and Equalization Fund Appropriation.w section 7 or Hcuse.Bill NO. 133 reeds 88 r0mm3: -Provided the State Superintendent shell take into consideration, in fixing allowances to school districts, eny loss sustained by said district by reason of the Federel Government buying land icr ~e6ionel forests, end by reeson of the locstion in raid districts of University lends, end the State Superintendent shell be authorized to make alloca- tions to raid distrfcts by rlttue of losses sue- tained by said district by reeson of Federel pur- chase or lends, the amants to be fixed by the Stste Superintendent based upon exfsting facts end circumstances applicable to all other school dls- trlcts, end In ell exceptions provided herein the consent or the State Board or Xducetion shell be first hsd snd bbts1ned.e This lection 1s identical to the one contained in the prior Act with the exception that the later enactment added the lest cleuse, wend In ell exceptfcns provided herein the consent of the Stste Board or Education shall be iirst had end obtained." H.B. Ho. 133 is the most recent enactment of a long series of blennial~sppropriations providing sid to rural schools. The first ot these dates back to 1915. Each succeeding Rural Aid Len hes sought to terry mt the anera purpoees oi its.predeccssor, with certain changes In the provisions iOr the distributlOn.and administratiOn or the fund. Judge Cureton in Mumme vs. Merr8, 40 S.W. (Zd) 31, traces the history or these laws end states that their general purpose is to try to equalizs eduoetional opportunities throughout the state. He eaye et page 37 or ssld opfnion: "That &al aid epproprletlons have e reel relationship to the subject of equalizing educa- tional Opportunities in the state, end tend to make cur system more efficient, there ten be no doubt. It is true that not all rchools will be sided, since many, because or large scholastic population end local wealth against which taxes hare been levied, may not need the aid, end are, therefore, hot within the purposes of the Act.* Judge Curetcn we8 discussing the Rural Aid Act passed in 1929, being Chapter 14, Cenerel Laws or the Third Celled Session of the Forty-First Legirrlature,one or the lineal ancestors of the Act here under consideration. "The cardinal principle of statutory constructions is to ascertain the legislative intent tram the statute.e Couelns vs. Sovereign Camp. W.O.W., Sp+Ciel Supreme Court Or Texes, 1931, 33 S.W. 696. This should be determined by looking to the entire statute, $opy;2;e. Terrell, Tex. S.,Ct. 1918, 202 S.Y?.727, Greenwood, J., "We cannot adopt e constructfon of Section 17, no netter how plainly required by its language standing *lone, which would de- feat the intent Of the Legislature, in the enactment Of this Act." Turning to en analysis of this Act as (Iwhole, wc rind indi- cations that the purpose of the Legislature, as evidenced by a reading or the entire Act, was to equalize educational opportunity throughout the State by supplementing the income of those schools which, because or inadequate iinanciel resources, were unable to maintain the mini- mum educational stenderds prescribed in the Act. Need or iinencial assistance is recited many times a8;‘aprerequisite to eligibility for state aid runas. section 1 of the prior not passed by the Legislatum in May, 1937 (which section was not emended by H.B. No. 133). states that the Act is *For the purpose of prabtlng public school interest and equel- lxing the educational opportunities aiford:d*b{ the state to 811 chil-~ dren of scholsstic age within the State , ,. In Section 1 or H.B. No. 133! it is provided: "*** end no Id shail be given unless it ten be shomlthet e 1 provieions of this Act lava been canplied wi , end that such amount of eid is ec- tually needei ." In Section 15, it is recited: "* * *provided that 12 the school has suificient State end County aveilable funds to msintein the school for an eight (8) months term according to the salary schedule adopted by the State Board of Educetion or with its loon1 maintenance tax, to maintain the desired length of term, not to ex- ceed nine (9) months es provided in Section 2, it shell not be eligible to receive aid; * * * "Provided, else, that ell aid granted out of funds herein provided shell be allotted only on the basis of need, based upon (Iproper budgeting or each district~asking for any rorm or aid." In Section 16, it is provided: "All aid granted out of funds provided shall ba allotted only on the basis or need based upon en approved budget ci each district asking for any form of aid, except es otherwise prcvide~din this Act." Again in Section 22 appears a similar provision: "* * * end all aid shell be granted on tha basis of need after proper budgeting, the same as herein pro- vided." section 23 relates in pert to the qualification or lncor- porated cities, towns and villages for aid, end after setting out certain requirementsi concludes: "* * *end whose sslary budget shows e need thera- for * * *- Finelly, the emergency clause or the Act commences: "The fact that many schools are in need of ad- ditional aid * * *". As further evidence that the underlying principle of the enttra Act is to grant aid only to those sohools in actual need thereof, we find several provisions whioh disqualify (Ischool by raeson of clrcumstences which tend to indicate that State aid 1s not essential. In Section 6. it is provided that: "Any school district which shell e.iterOctober 1, 1937, reduce its existing property essessment end/or existing tax r&es, thereby enewing it to participete under this Act, shell not be eligible to receive aid from any of the funds herein provided* * *". In Section 9, it is stated: -Should any school district eligible to receive aid under the provisions of this Act msintein a Eel- ery schedule in excess of the selery schedule es de- termined by the State Superintendent with the eppro- val of the State Board of Education. the amount of aid received by such school district shell be reduced by the amount of such excess.w And in Section 12 it is provided that: *Should any school which would othemise be eligible to receive aid agree, provide cr contract with teethers to pay e smallermonthly salary dur- ing the remainder of the terms following the grant- ing of aid provided cut of local funds, than is paid out or Stete funds, then such school shell forfeit its rights to receive aid." We have quoted the fOragOing excerpts from the Act at such length because they indicate the expressed end oft-repeated lnten- tlon of the Legislature throughout the entire Act to limit the ex- penditures or the $5,500,000.00 therein appropriated to those school dlstrlcts, which by reeson of insufficient resources era unable to msinteln the minimum educational iecillties prescribed in the Act. H.B. No. 133 1s entitled: wAmanding Rural Aid end Equsllaetion Fund Law.- A camrui study or the law, and the many similar laws preced- ing it v&l1 show thet by wequelizetionv 1s meent equslisetion or educetionel opportunity for the school children throughcut Texas, end not equeliaetion of the tax burden. There is no word either in the ceptlon or the body of H. B. No. 133 to justify the letter in- terpretetion. In the light or the loregoing analysis Or the Act b8 a whole, what is the fair construction or Section 73 . -By Yne% ?3-cGv~l.uI 'h-b?A*"% %zpd**w. 111dzbz%cLw ti- *take Into consideretion, in fixing allowances to school districts, any loss sustained by seid district by reeson of the Faders1 Govern- ment buying lends for Hetionel forests, end by reason of the loce- tlon of said districts or University lends." Other sections of the Act establish certain criteria by which the State Suparlntendent shall be guided in the exercise of his discretion in making ellot- memts or the approprietion. Wa believe this Section provides another such crlterle, i.e. that the location or hatlone forests or Univer- sity lends within a school district mhall be one of the rectors to be taken Into ,considereticnby the State Superintendent in the pro- ration of the'#5,500,000.00 appropriation among the schcol districts ot the State to the end &hat educational opportunity shell be more nearly equalized. Secticn 7 continues: "* * * end the Steta Su erintendent shell be autho- lzed (underscoring cursP to make allocationa ted mricts by virtue of losses sustelned by said dis- trict by reason of Federal purchase or lend * * *". The language is not mandatory, It does not sey that -he shell meke. allocations to said districts in the amount of losses sustained.* It merely authorizes him to take these factors into consideration in making his allocations of moneys. NOr do ae sttsch eny peculiar signliicenca to the iect that the University lands era not again mentioned in the second clause. Section 7 continues with the foll- owing language: a* * *&he amounts to be fixad by the State Super- intendent based upon existing -- 1. iects and>I-*-,^&- ..L__* circum- " This language. we believe, precludes en interpretation that those school districts containing University lends or Netion- al forests should be removed from the application or the other pro- visions or the Act. The concluding clause of Section 7 readr: "And in all exceptions provided herein the consent of the State Board of Educa- tion shell be first hed end obteined.w It is not withcut signlfi- canoe thet this olause did not appear in the prior not passed rive months eerlier, but we8 added ior the first time in House Bill NO. 133. This gect, wc think, lndlcetes en intention on the pert of the Legislature to remove any possible doubt es to the applicetion' to Section 7 of the general intent, expressed repestedly throughmt other sactima of the Act, that the edministration or this &ate aid fund ahall be under the supervisory end discrationery direction or the Stete Board of Educetion. It is so steted, in Section 1 or the prior Act (S.B. No.185, Regulsr Session of the Forty-fifth Lag- lsleture. 19371: e* * *to be allotted en expended by the State Super4ntandent under the direction or thG tata Board or Educet1on.v The authority thereby granted is limited 'only by express provisions or the Aot, end we do not believe that the language of Section 7 can be construed 80 es to remove from the administration or the funds by the State Superintendent end the Board of Education, those school districts which have either National forest8 or University lends within their boundaries. -The Lagielature.elone is to judge whet meens are necess- ary snd eppropriete for a purpDae which the Constitution makes le- gitimate. The legisletlva determination of the methods, restrictions, end regulations is final, except when so arbitrary es to be violative of the constitutional rights of the clt1zen.e Cumton, J., M.nmnevs. Nerrs, S. Ct. or TeXes, 1931, 4G S.W. (26) 31, at page 36~. It 1s cur opinion that Section 7 of H. B.'No. 133 euthori- MS the Stete Superintendent to take into consideration the presence of University lends end Netional forests within e school district es one of the lsotors in determining the need of that district, but that' such district must meet all the requirements set cut in other sections of the Act in order to qualify ior State aid. The feet thet a dis- trict comes within the purview of Section 7 does not grant it immun- ity frcm the remaining provisions of the Act. Subject to the above limitetions,~the'welght to be attached to the presence or University lends or Nation81 forests within s district Is left to the discretion of the State Superintendent under the supervision ot the state Boerd or Equelization. Yours very truly AlT0RNF.Y GEhERAL CF TEXAS BY Welter R.:Koch Assistant BY Glenn R. Lewis Assistant WRE:FG Thie opinion has been oonsidered in conieranca, epproved, end ordered racorded. GERALD C. MANN ATTORNEY GENERAL GF TEXAS --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/4146074. Public record. Not legal advice.