806 S.E.2d 136
W. Va.2017Background
- June 2016 floods severely damaged Richwood Middle, Richwood High, and Summersville Middle schools; Nicholas County sought FEMA "428" funds to build a consolidated campus and avoid rebuilding in the floodplain.
- Nicholas County Board prepared a consolidation/closure plan and amended its Comprehensive Educational Facilities Plan (CEFP) after holding required public hearings and complying with W. Va. Code § 18-5-13a and State Board Policy 6204.
- At the State Board of Education (WVBOE) meeting, the WVBOE voted to reject the CEFP amendment (7–1, then 6–1 on reconsideration), citing concerns about alternatives, community outreach, impacts on impoverished students, extracurriculars, discipline, and academic performance.
- Nicholas County Board petitioned the circuit court for a writ of mandamus; the circuit court ordered the WVBOE to approve the CEFP amendment, finding the WVBOE lacked authority to reject a procedurally compliant plan and that its reasons were arbitrary and capricious.
- The West Virginia Supreme Court reversed, holding the WVBOE has constitutional, statutory, and regulatory authority to approve or reject CEFP amendments and that the WVBOE's stated reasons were not arbitrary or capricious.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1) Does the WVBOE have authority to approve/reject a CEFP amendment? | Nicholas Cty: WVBOE's role is supervisory/compliance-only; statute/regulations require approval if county follows procedures. | WVBOE: Constitutional general supervisory power, plus authority under statute/regulations to approve or reject. | Held: WVBOE has constitutional and statutory authority to exercise discretion to approve or reject CEFP amendments. |
| 2) Do compliance with §18-5-13a and Policy 6204 entitle county to automatic approval? | Nicholas Cty: Meeting statutory/regulatory procedural requirements obligates WVBOE to approve. | WVBOE: Those are procedural supporting-data requirements; WVBOE must assess merits and may reject on substantive grounds. | Held: Compliance with procedural requirements does not guarantee approval; supporting data are for WVBOE's substantive review. |
| 3) Were the WVBOE's reasons for rejection arbitrary or capricious? | Nicholas Cty: WVBOE considered factors beyond Policy 6204's listed categories, so rejection was arbitrary. | WVBOE: Reasons related to educational-policy concerns and implicitly tied to Policy 6204 areas; rejection was reasoned. | Held: WVBOE's reasons (community outreach, alternatives, impacts on impoverished students, extracurriculars, discipline, etc.) were thoughtful, germane, and not arbitrary or capricious. |
| 4) Was the circuit court’s mandamus remedy appropriate? | Nicholas Cty: Mandamus appropriate to compel approval given procedural compliance. | WVBOE: Mandamus cannot control board discretion absent caprice, passion, partiality, fraud, or misapprehension of law. | Held: Mandamus improper because WVBOE did not act arbitrarily; circuit court erred in granting writ. |
Key Cases Cited
- Pauley v. Bailey, 174 W.Va. 167 (1984) (State Board has broad constitutional general supervisory powers over education)
- Hechler v. West Virginia Bd. of Educ., 180 W.Va. 451 (1988) ("general supervision" includes rulemaking and cannot be nullified by statute)
- Bd. of Educ. of Cnty. of Kanawha v. W. Va. Bd. of Educ., 184 W.Va. 1 (1990) (State Board has authority to review and approve/disapprove county consolidation plans)
- State ex rel. Perry v. Bd. of Educ., 189 W.Va. 662 (1993) (mandamus is proper vehicle for review of school closure/consolidation disputes)
- State ex rel. Jones v. Bd. of Educ. of Ritchie Cty., 178 W.Va. 378 (1987) (courts should not substitute their judgment for educated boards on consolidation merits)
- Pauley v. Kelly, 162 W.Va. 672 (1979) (education is a fundamental constitutional right; boards must thoroughly consider closures/consolidations)