r-. /i



## TEKE A~~L ‘ OR.NEY GENERAL

OF TEXAS Gerald C. Atann .Au- 8s. WEXAS

Mrb Frank might CounTy Auditor Eonham,

Texas
Dear Sir: Opinion IToo O-1063 Ret dpprwal of ic~lvouohers or xyarrents

w CountyAuditor0
We are in receipt

of your~lo~tter

of June 29, 1939, in whiah you roquestthe opinionof *is dep~~nt upon the POllowIng question:
"Is it neoehary far the County htiditer

to i;ppro+e

a~vouoher

onthe Count Asailable

**School** F+uud.

after it has been signedand approved byths County Doand of Trustees

and the Coun$7 Superintendent,+.in order for it tobe valid?"
In 1916 the'Galve8ton Court of Appe+lsheld in RoustonRatdonal Exohange

Dmk ve S&o01 Distriot Ro. 2Ss,Rarris

CounQ; 155 S.U. 589, that the oouuty auditor *sS nob authomed or.required to &ppreve

vouchers drasn on fuuds of%b?,oW~~~n sohool**diStriOt8** of the oo~lltgoItrs point**ed Out**  **iXl this**  **O-0 tit**  8OhOOl **‘ fUXld8**  **MO, XrOt~**  fund8 for the We ef belOX%+ ing to the county,

but are state funds, and the counties hold suah funds a8 trustees

for ihe publia free schoolse

w Aots of 1917, the present Artlole 1652 as passed, and Art%010 1653 ma8 mnendod so that said U-tioles now read PS folleust
*Art. 1882. The rod&or hall in&all in his officea'sohoollodger showing

au emurate rooeuutof all,f&s reoeived ,md disbursed by the oosmon seheoldistriots of his oountyra pond registershowingall the soheol bonds issued hy %e ooamou sohoe&di~triots of his county, their **rat0 of**  **ilaterest, date**  **i8SUd Uld**  **aa@Ui~ &+s**  and he Shall keep all intorsst

and sinking

fund aooouutof such sohool bonds.
*Art. 1653. He shll have oontinu~l aooes,s to and sh1Q.1

examine

all the books, aoo:amts,

reports,

vouohers ,yd other'reoords of 'auy officer,

the orders of the commissioners* oourt ,* relating

to finanoes

of the county, and all voucher8givenby the trustees of all co&non sohooldistricts of the county-

and shall inquireinto the oorreotiess of the same."
In response

to an inquiry

by the Co-9 Auditorof 9ri.s County, this deparimont

rendered

a aonferenoe

opkiioti

June 27. 1917; Book 50, page 1, in whioh it was ruled that the statutes a8 amended

did **not** oonfer authoritg

upon the countyauditor to disapprove

vouohers

dram on sahoolMr. Prank Wright,page 2 (O-1063)

funds, and by such disapproval prevent their payment. Again in 1927, this deparissent

rendered

a oacference

opinionto Mr. H. A. Hodges, CcUnty Auditor of UIlliemson County.Ebok 62, page 337, holdingthat *sohool

affairsof a county, dmiaistrative and financial, are under the supetision of the state and not the oountyr the oowty beingmerely a oonvenient

unit through

which the State faxncticn8.s The opinionfurther helds %aare, therefore, of the opinionthat the administration and disbursement of eohool funds is Under the ocntrol of the sohoolbodies,and that this authorI* should notbe limited

by aupervislon

of the oounty auditor and other counts cffloials when euoR supervIsion has not been specifIcally authorlsed. That the oo~iy auditorIs required to keep a record of bonds issued by the coasncn Bohool districts

of his county,

an interest and sinking

fund aocountof suoh sob001 bonds, and an account of all school Alnds reoeived

and diSbur8ed;

and to examineand oheck the aorrectnese of vouohers

whioh have been given by trustees

of oommon schooldietriots of the oounty,approved bythe county SUperin+XndeI!t8, and paid by the countydeposiiuay~ That the oounw auditor is not required or authorized to pass on the legality of aocounts

and vouchersfor schoolfunds nor to apprcvesame.* Article 2678a'provIdes that &en a resident high sohccl studentis transferred

wader osrtain

oiroumstcnoes, hIa tuitionshall be paid by warrantsdramn w the localboard of trustees on the funds of the sendingdistriot and apprcved'by the Counw Superintendent. ly Article 2686 t&e couutp sohool trustiee,

aotIngdth the oountg superintendent, shall apportion

all availeble

state end oounty funds to the'rohool distriots

as prescribed

by law. It is providedin Artiole 2687 @at* ?&,oh (oounIy) trusteeshallbe paid $3.00per day, but not to sroeed #3S&O bn as~r one year, for tie +Ims spent in attending

suoh meetings,

out of fhe state and Couaty &n&Ala SchoolFund by warrantdrawn on order of the~couuty Superintendent

and sI@-

, ed by the President of the CountySchoolTrustees, after approval

of the account

properlysworn to by the President of the County Sohool ~rwetees.~ Under Article 2687, the Co~niySuperInimndent Is required

tc executea bond in the sltm

of ~l,OOO.OO,

conditioned

upon the faithful

perfcnuenos

of hi8 duties. Artiole 2690 glvee ti%Coun~ Superintendent general supervision of allmatters'pertabing to public eduaaU6zfId his county. Article 2893 prowIdes

that: "The County Superintendent shall approveall voucherslegally draun against the school fund of his ootaniy~" Ue.also call attention to Articles 2731, 2762, 282?a, 2829, 2830, R.GS.a.1925.
It is OUT opinionthat it is not neoessary for the County

Auditor to appxuve

a voucheron the County Availaue School Fund, after it has been signedaud approved by the County Bard of Trustees, and the County Superintendent,

in order for it to be valid.
APPROVSDJUL 13, 1939 /s/W.F. hbere FIRST ASSIST&NT AYl’ORm GENWIL CCC:Jd!RERlegw YOU-8 V'3Z-ytI-U~
ATTORHEY GENERK, OF TEXAS By/s/ Cecil C. Canmack

Assistant