Case Information
*1 . I.
Hon. S. M. Pliler Opinion No. O-6333
County Auditor Re: Who is liable
Taylor County fee of the children Abilene, Texas from the Abilene State Hospital Inde-
pendent School District to the City of Abilene Independent School District?
Dear Sir: And a related question.
We have your opinion request which is stated in your letter as follows:
“***An independent school district has, pursu- and to law, been created and is now in existence in the Abilene State Hospital Area. The bounds of the so created are co-extensive with the bounds of the Abilene State Hospital. The Abilene State Hospital is located approximately two miles southeast of the City of Abilene. There are about 200 inmates of this institution who attend this school. All of the inmates attending the school are afflicted to the extent that they are now in the hospi- tal. There are a number of adult employees who live in the hospital area, and also in the independent school area. These adult employees have a number of age. These children children who are of scholastic are normal children, and are not inmates of the institu- tion. The school which is operated and maintained the above mentioned independent school district at the Abilene State Hospital does not have a normal curricu- lum, or course of study, but is mostly handicraft teaching. Therefore, the normal children, cannot at- tend the school so conducted in the Abilene State Hospital independent school district. Therefore, they are being transferred the Abilene Independent School District maintained by the County Superintendent Texas. The Abilene State within the City of Abilene independent schoo i is maintained and operated Hospital by the State money of $25.00 per capita, and no other funds have been given this particular independent The $25.00 per capita apportionment school district.
is, of course, transferred with each student transfer- ring to the Abilene Independent School District in the *2 Hon. S. 14. ililer,
City of Abilene, but this amount is insufficient carry the child, or children, through a nine-months school, but only carries him, or them, for a period of four months. The Abilene city independent school charges a tuition fee as provided by law in the following amount: $5.00 per month per child for transfers such as the above children, in the ele- mentary grades; and $6.50 per month in the junior high school grades; and $7.50 per month in the sen- ior high school.
“Now, the question he desires to have answered is: \!ho is liable tuition fee of the children from ,the Abilene state Hos- pital to the City of Abilene independent school district; and also should this additional tuition, or could the additional tui- tion, be paid from the k,qualization Fund, as provided in House Bill Number 176, Chapter 373, of the Forty- eighth Legislature, and which bill was passed and finally approved on May 2’7, 1943. ***I’ ._,,,~
The additional cannot be paid from the Equali- zation Fund as provided in House Bill Number 176, Chapter~373, 48th Legislature for the reason that the Abilene Independent School District is ineligible to receive State aid, by reason of the fact that it has more than 500 scholastics. Section 1 of Article 1 of that Act provides that only those districts which had not fewer than 20 nor more than 500 original enumer- ated scholastics were eligible for aid, with three certain ex-
none of which are applicable to the Abilene independ- EIP%~“,“~L District. :-Je are sure that the Abilene Independent .~,~ School District has a scholastic population of more than 500.
In Slocomb v. Cameron Independent School District, 1.16 Tex. 288, 288 S.::!. 1064, certain scholastics were duly trans- from other school districts of the county to the Cameron The Board of School Trustees of Independent School District. the Cameron Independent School District entered an order requir- ing these pupils to pay tuition at the rate of ti50.00 per year for high school students and $32.00 for students in grades be- low the high school, less transfer money received. The father of these pupils refused to pay the tuition and instituted an ac- tion to restrain the school board from attempting to collect to be due. The Court held that the Independ- the amounts alleged ent School District could charge tuition to non-resident schol- astics under Article 2760 of the Revised Civil Statutes of 1911, (which Article is almost identical with Article 2696, Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes) and in the course of its opinion said: *3 ‘ion. 3. ‘+I. i,;liler,
“It is our view that the Legislature, enacting this article; did not intend to require any independent district in this state to educate a schol- astic free of charge any longer than the ,funds trans- ferred with such scholastic would pay such pupills proportionate part of the expense of operating the schools of such district. In other words, as long as the state apportionment will operate the schools of the independent district, the transfer pupil, whose state apportionment is also transferred, is not required to pay tuition. But, when the schools of the independ- ent district must continue their term with money raised by local taxes levied upon the property within such district, then the transfer pupil, a non-resident of such district, must pay n reasonable tuition.”
For cases in accord see Huck v. Public Free Schools of the City of ,Austin, 290 S. \:i. 1118; Muse v. McKinney Inde- pendent School District, 35 S. %. (2d) 780. These cases were under Article 2696 of Revised Civil Statutes of 1925. See also the case of Love v. City of Dallas, 40 S.W. (2d) 20, de- cided by the Supreme Court of this State on May 16, 1931, wherein the Court pointed out:
“For more than fifty years statutes have been in effect permitting transfers from one school dis- trict to another, and some consideration must be given to the construction actment of these statutes of the Constitution which the en-
implies. Since the Constitu- tion does not permit the taxation of the people of a school district for the support of that district, ex- cept upon a vote of the people of the district, it is not debatable that the Legislature cannot compel one to use its funds and properties for the edu- cation of scholastics from another district, without just compensation. However, in view of the long oper- ation of the transfer a school district statutes, we believe that where
has facilities and teachers in ex- cess of those necessary for its own scholastics, the state has the power to require it to accept transfers but only upon the payment of from another district, reasonable compensation therefor. ***‘I
It, therefore, is apparent that under the authority of Slocomb v. Cameron Independent jchool District, and Love v. City of Dallas, supra, a receiving
has the right to collect a reasonable from non-resident scholastics sufficient to compensate the receiving district for *4 Hon. S. M. :~liler, page 4
the education of trmsferred scholastics, when the trans- funds received are not sufficient.
The pupils or their parents or guardians are liable for this tuition.
Yours very truly By /s/ C. F. Gibson c* :‘* Gibson, Assistant APPROVES: ivIAY 12, 1945
/s/ Carlos C. Ashley
FIRST ASSISTANT AT'L'ORNEY GENWAL
APPROVED: CPINIi)N CijivIMITTEE
BY: CL@, CHAIRMAN
CFG:EP:wb