Case Information

*1 E ATTOKNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUWTlN 11. TWAS

PRICE DANIEL ATTORNEY GENERAL September 14, 1948 Hon. Norton Fox Opinion No. V-681, County Attorney Re: Right of

Limestone County Groesbeck, Texas of public records

school districts.

Dear Sir:

Your request for opinion rse.ds in part as fol- lows:

“Does a person, who is s citizen, pa- rent s.nd tax payer in the Groesbeck Indepen- dent School District, ‘i’exa.s, ha.ve the right to Inspect the financial Including accounts, vouchers, of dis- ledgers, bursements, etci, kept by the school of said school.

School districts are quasi public corporations which derive their powers by delegation from the State. 37 Tex. Jur. p. 864. Independent school districts, like the Groesbeck dlstrlct, are so denominated because they are managed and controlled by s board of trustees inde- pendent of the county government. They are local public corporations created for school purposes alone. 3’7 Tex. Jur. 873. A school dlstrlat’s board of trustees Is a creature of statute and has only such powers as are con- ferred upon it and such implied powers as are necessary Royce Independent School to execute such express powers. District v. Relnhardt, 159 S.W. 1010. Thus, A school trustee is a public officer and every essential element of an office Is embraced In the powers conferred on him. Klmbrough v. Barnett, 93 Tex. 301, 55 S.W. 120; 37 TOX. Jur. 935. 2779, V. C. S., provides that a major-

ity of the independent school district board shall con- stitute a quorum to do business, and they shall choose assessor end collector of taxeg * secreterg, n treasurer, It follows end other necessary officers and committees. that minutes of the orders, resolutions, rules, and oth- er official actions of the board need be recorded and *2 Hon. Norton FOX, page 2 (V-681 1

kept by the board, by its designated secretary or other officers to reflect that the public school district’s business was executed by the board, a quorum being pre- sent. These records of the official actions of the board constitute public concerning the lndepen- dent school district, its officers and its official busi- ness.

Sections 17 a.nd 18 of Artic1.e 68gs, require the preparntion of ? school. budget by boards of trustees independent and common school districts covering all pro- posed expenditures of the current fiscal year, end when adopted by the boa.rd, further require that R copy there- of shall be filed in the office of the County Clerk of the county or counties in which such district is situat- ed.

Article 2833, V. C. S,, provides that each treasurer receiving or hs,ving control of a.ny school fund of an independent School d$st ‘ict shall keep a full and separote ,itemlzed account wit i ench of the different, classes of school fundscoming into his hsnds, a.nd shs,ll on OP before the first da,y of October of esch yea.r file with the board of trustees of each independent school district and with the State Superintendent an itemized report of the receipts and disbursements of the school funds the preceding school year ending August 31, which report shsll. be on a form prescribed and furnish- edy by the Depsrtment of EdUCatiQn. The board of trustees must notify the State Superintendent of their approval of said report within thirty da.ys efter receipt of same, should same be approved. It further requires that all vouchers showing items of the report shall be filed with the board of trustees, and the State Superintendent may demand same vhen passing on said report or for the pur- pose of investigating same.

Clea,rly the budget prepared by the board under 6899, and the reports and vouchers required to be filed under Article 2833, also constitute public flnan- clal of bos.rds of trustees of a school district. 1 of Article 2833a, V, C. S., provides

Section that all financial reports made by or for school dls- trlcts, either independent or common, or by their offl- cers, agents or employees to the State Superintendent or to the Department of Education shall be made on forms prescribed or approved by the State Auditor.

Hon. Norton FOX, page 3 (v-681)

In Articles 1653 and 1652, V. C. S., the COU- ty auditor is authorized to have continual acaess to, and it Is made his duty to inquire Into the correctness of all the financial ledgers of all the common school districts of the county and all the vouchers given by the trustees thereof. Attorney General’s Opinions Nos. O-2734, O-3660 2684, V. C. S., requires the secretary of the board of county school trustees to keep a true and correct record of all the proceedings of seid coun- ty school In a well-bfund book, “which shall be kept open to public inspection .

Under Article 2912 teachers in Texas free pub- lic schools shnll ,keep daily records, in which the a.t- tendance, name, ages and studies of all pupils shall be rocordod, and such other matters as may be prescribed by the State Superintendent. “Said registers shall be open to public inspection of all parents, schogl officers, and all other persons who may be interested.

Although inspection of certain records, fina,n- cial ledgers, registers, vouchers, and other reports of school districts have been provided in the statutes above enumerated, there is no statute giving citizens, or tsxpayers the genera,1 right of inspection parents, all books, and papers of a school district, in- dependent or common.

We quote from 36 Tex. Jur. Sec. 103, at page

593: - Since there is no stat-

“In General, ute or constitutional provision giving citi- zens or tnxpayerr the ycnrrql. right to in- rscord:] Ilnd paper:: of county spect all. book:, officers, the cxiztence of the right must be determined by the common law. Nor is this comcnon l..?w ri.glit restricted by a statute glv- lng to the public an absolute tonInspect certain of such books and records. . .

The rule of law and principles propounded in Palacios v. Corbett, 172 S.W. 7;‘7 (writ refused), with reference to the right of of records of coun- ty officers by citizens and taxpayers of the county, are equally applicable to the right of parents, taxpayers, and citizens of a school district to inspect the

Hon. Norton Fox, pege 4 (v-681)

kept by his school district board. In that case the San Ant0ni.o Court of CXvil. Anpes1.s concl.ucieil. that the opinion of the :-u:,:~rc ,c Curt of ‘J.‘cnne:::::cc 2.n Zt?tc, ex rel Wel- ford v. Wil.l,i~>~.::z, ‘ifj 3.W. glii3, constituted the best state- ment of the rule of 1.8,~ which should be eppl.ied to this character of c” se. It quotes from said case as follows:

‘.In theory the right of examination is absolute, but In practice it is nt lest only a matter of discretion, because such application is l.ikely at any time to be re- fused on the part of the custodian of the books and papers sought to be exa.mined, and then the right !nust be forced by mande.mus, and this wri.t is not of absolute right, but l?ierely of discretion, to be awarded only in R proper cnse; the facts cleimed as authoriz- ing its issunnce to be judged of In every c4se by the court, and the writ to be sward- ed or withheld upon a consideration of all the circumstances presented. So, while the is, in theory, absolute, yet it Is in practice so limited by the remedy necessa,ry for its enforcement 9s that it can be denom- insted only A ‘qualified right I. The right to an examination for Q special. purpose, a,s, for example, to obtain specific informa.tion to use In a litigation between the applicant snd third parties, or between the applicant snd the corporation, and the like cases, while not, in principle, standing upon high- yet is the more easily grsnta- er grounds, ble, because it does not involve so much time, and so much inconvenience to the cus- todian of the books and papers, and so much interruption of business, as in case of a general examination. Yet it cannot be doubted, under a sts.te of facts showing it to be important to the public inter- est that the general examination of the books of a municipality should be had, that the court should allow such examination at the suit of one who is a citizen and tax- payer of the corporation. The right rests, not only on the ground that the books are public books, but also on the same principle that authorizes a taxpayer to enjoin the en- forcement illegal contracts entered into by the municipality, county, or state, *5 Hon. Norton i”ox, pq[;c 5 (v-m. 3

the protection of the applicant and all other taxpayers from illegal burdens. And it is obvious thet, in meking nnd enforcing such application, the taxpayer acts, in a very real sense, not only for himself, but for all other taxpayers, and ects, therefore, in the cspacity, 8.5 it were, of e trustee for all. It must be qdmltted,. also, thrrt the exercise of such power, if prud.ently snd cn,refully gusrded, cnnnot be otherwise than ss.lutsry, beceuse the knowledge tha.t it can be exer- cised by e citizen and taxpayer, a.nd mey be exercised when the public good shs1.1. seem, on sound reasons, to demsnd it, cannot re- sult otherwise than in producing e.n added sense of responsibility In those who admin- ister the affsirs of municipnl corporations, and in inducing a greater carefulness in the discharge of the trusts imposed upon them by their fell.ow citizens under the sanc- tions of 1a.w.”

In the absence of statutes giving the right to perents, citizens, and taxpayers to inspect the records kept by school district and its officers, end in the light of the rules of low epplied In the Corbett case to en analagous character of cases, it is our opin- ion that a parent, citizen and taxpayer of a school dls- trlct has the right to inspect the records, financial or otherwise, kept by the school trustees, public officials of his school district. The Palaclos-Corbett case held that a citizen and taxpayer of a county who had good cause to believe there has been misapplication of county funds, and Is Interested in the inspe~ction because it may result In e decrease of his assessment, is entitled to a writ of mandamus to compel county officers to allow in- spection of their books to discover the misapplicetion.

SUMMARY Certain school a.re made avail- able for public by statute, and, if there Is no such statute, the public gen- eral~ly hos the common law right to inspect such public records. The courts, however, exercise discretion in the granting of a *6 Hon. Norton Fox, page 6 (V-681 )

mandamus to compel such inspection. The of inapeotlon is therefore a “qua.ll- fled right. Palacios v. Corbett, 172 S.W. 777, writ refused.

Yours very truly, ATTORNEY QERERAL OF TEXAS CEO : mv Chester E. Ollison

Assiatnnt ,