*1 OFFICE OFTHE ATTORNEYGENERALOF TEXAS

AUSTIN

','.nrch 17, 1353 ar. Joe Zunachik

Commissioner of Labor

Austin, Texas

Dear sir: , -.. ..\ ',, ',

Gpinion No. Q-416-~... z:o : ::ketker Independent. So‘hool 3istrlcts come within.theqro- vlstons of Article 5159+' .~ Your mqueet for ad apint& as to whether an independent eohool disbrict as sach,&ould coae within the provisions of :,rtlcla 5159,a'hsabeen received by this o$fice. ,--.

*Rot ices thin the general prevail-

&&e bS per dim wages for nork~of a siraiL~.oharacter,.~in the looality in --\ \. wkicb thework is perfomed . . . . . . . . . . ‘)ehsll be paid to all laborera, work- '-\ ,,.' men or &eohanics employed by or on

alr oi;‘~.'....any.......dfetrlct, ng&ed in the construction a? public $"B &rks, . . . ..." -. ‘,, \, ?Jie/ S,egislature did not place any llmlta-

. ‘;\ tlon bpoti~the/;type of district eubjeot to the pro- vislons'~~.pf She low. Xn Independent aohool district would coW%tkln tbe purview of the word distrlot r as wed.

Tublic xorks" is defined by Artiole 5159a, Section 4 33 follows:

".\ny construotion....done unum aon- tract, and poid for in whole or in part out OP public fuuds,....wketker or not done under publio auparvislon or dlrec- ticn, cr paid for wholly or In part out of publio funds, akall be held to be 'public works'-....*

The construotlon of a school building by an independent school distriut neeessarlly involve3 tha expenditure , ot least in part% of.poblia fund3 for the reeson.tket the cost3 of oonitruotion are paid in --hole or in part by funds ralaed or bond3 paid for by

taxation.

It la, therefore, our opinion that the con- 3trila.\,lcm of a sohool building by an independent sahool distriot is suok a3 would be governed by Artiole 5159a, 2evfW:d Civil Statutes 1925.

Very -truly your3 Richard R. Cooke Assietant 2HC:bbb