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 wCounty Auditor0 

We are in receipt of your~lo~tter of June 29, 1939, in whiah you roquest the opinion of *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 signed and approved byths County 

Doand of Trustees and the Coun$7 Superintendent,+.in order for it tobe 

valid?" 

In 1916 the'Galve8ton Court of Appe+ls held in Rouston Ratdonal 

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~lltgo Itrs pointed 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 office a'sohool lodger 

showing au emurate rooeuut of all,f&s reoeived ,md disbursed by the 

oosmon seheol distriots of his oountyr a pond register showing all 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 aooouut of 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 voucher8 given by the trustees of all co&non sohool districts of 

the county- and shall inquire into the oorreotiess of the same." 

In response to an inquiry by the Co-9 Auditor of 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 county auditor to disapprove vouohers dram on sahool 
Mr. Prank Wright, page 2 (O-1063) 

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

this deparissent rendered a oacference opinion to Mr. H. A. Hodges, 

CcUnty Auditor of UIlliemson County. Ebok 62, page 337, holding that 

*sohool affairs of a county, dmiaistrative and financial, are under the 

supetision of the state and not the oountyr the oowty being merely a 

oonvenient unit through which the State faxncticn8.s The opinion further 

helds 

%aare, therefore, of the opinion that the administration and disbursement of eohool funds is Under the ocntrol of the sohool bodies, 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 auditor Is required to keep a record of 

bonds issued by the coasncn Bohool districts of his county, an interest 

and sinking fund aocount of suoh sob001 bonds, and an account of all 

school Alnds reoeived and diSbur8ed; and to examine and oheck the aorrectnese of vouohers whioh have been given by trustees of oommon school dietriots of the oounty, approved bythe county SUperin+XndeI!t8, and paid by 

the county deposiiuay~ That the oounw auditor is not required or authorized to pass on the legality of aocounts and vouchers for school funds 

nor to apprcve same.* 

Article 2678a'provIdes that &en a resident high sohccl student is 

transferred wader osrtain oiroumstcnoes, hIa tuition shall be paid by warrants dramn w the local board of trustees on the funds of the sending distriot and apprcved'by the Counw Superintendent. ly Article 2686 t&e couutp 

sohool trustiee, aotIng dth the oountg superintendent, shall apportion all 

availeble state end oounty funds to the'rohool distriots as prescribed by 

law. It is provided in Artiole 2687 @at* ?&,oh (oounIy) trustee shall be 

paid $3.00 per 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 

School Fund by warrant drawn on order of the~couuty Superintendent and sI@- 

, 

ed by the President of the County School Trustees, after approval of the 

account properly sworn to by the President of the County Sohool ~rwetees.~ 

Under Article 2687, the Co~niy SuperInimndent Is required tc execute a 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 approve all vouchers legally 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 opinion that it is not neoessary for the County Auditor to 

appxuve a voucher on the County Availaue School Fund, after it has been 

signed aud approved by the County Bard of Trustees, and the County Superintendent, in order for it to be valid. 

APPROVSD JUL 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