.

Hono?a'bl&

J;'WY%dgar ':~Opfnion No. C- 672 Commissioner-of'Education

-- Texas--Education:Agency .Re: Reconsiderationof Austin;:Texas ~Opinlon No. C-60h based upon additional Dear:Mri%dgar: facts submitted. ':'Youhave.requesteda recons.iderationof Opinion No. c-604 (March, 1966) based upon additional facts submitted to this office. In that opinion, the question was whether.

the :res'idence.

p'ropertyowned by the schoolsbut used by the-Superintendent .ofSchools "forhis residence" was exempt'rromtaxation by the State bfT=s, Milam County, City of Cameron,.and~

the Came,ron‘

Independent School District., Under the-facts.submitted,we correctly held that such property, used :hy~:'the~Superintendent .asa .privatedwelling for his residence:dnd-for'twhich 'he.paid..rent,

was not exempt from taxation.PIhe-burden.-to:shoW:clear.:exemptlon from specific facts and to-overcome'the~ presumptionsthat the property is subject ~.... __ to taxation is..on:the .taxpayer.

iLongview vs. Mark$n;McRae Merno~~~a~:~Hos'pl~al,: Ll37Tex: -178,:

152S.W.2d 1112 ( 4 ). ~&dd~tlorial

mat~rSai:fadt$'have now been submitted for further considerationas to the possibility of the tax-exempt status-of-theproperty:

. "?Iti

became~rie~ces~s~ry .and.thedistrict was compelled to obtain and purchase aatla- ~factory~llvlngquarters thereby to enaour:agea:capable person to move to and .aerveas‘scho.ol~superintendentat Cameron. There'sidencewas bought to be occupied ::by'its~

superintendent, only that the school alstrict might be better served.
"Rent houses for better school personnel are :lmposslble in Cameron; indeed, the district '.maybe/forced to purchase additional resldences,'

teeicherages,'

to encourage and secure personnel necessary in the operation of its school system. /Han'.J. W. Edgar, page 2 (c-672)

"The superintendent'sresidence, located three blocks from the school campus, Is 'anintegralpart of its schoolplant and operations. It is district-ownedproperty being paid for with its public funds. It Is cented only to district personnel, the superintendent,as such,who pays $75 monthly rent, the utilities, and keeps up the premises."
It is further caused to appear from the facts supplied us that the trustees of the Independent school district determined and decided that It was necessary to expend funds on hand f.orthe purpose of acquiring the property for living quarters for the superintendentand whi.ch was necessary for conducting the schools in the district and essential under the prevalent conditions In the district to obtain the services of a qualified superintendent. Assuming that the actions and findings of the trustees of the school district as above statedwere duly taken andmade in accordancewith law, and in the absence of some showing of abuse of discretion, we hold that such property, being owned and used for public purposes, is exempt from taxation. We also assume that the propertywas purchased in conformitywith all statutoryprovision?. Section 2 of ArticleVIZ1 of the Constitution of Texas states in part as follows:

. . . the legislature may, by general laws, exempt from taxation public property used for publicpurposes." Article 7150, Vernon's Civil Statutes, exempts "Public schoolhouses" and "All public colleges,public academies

. . .3and all such buildings used exclusivelyand owned by persona for school purposes. In addition, It exempts "All property,whether real or personal,belonging exclusively to this State, or any political subdivisionsthereof

. . . .'I Our courts have held that all public property 'ISto be regarded as ."usedfor public purposes"within ArticleVIII, Section 2 of the Constitution of Texas when It is owned and ~-heldfor public purposes, although it is not owned or held exclusively for such purposes and there has been no abandon- -mentof suchpurposes. City of Abilene vs. State, 113 S.W.2d 631 (Tex.WV. App. 1937‘).
An Independent school district Isheld to be a political subdivisionof the state,being a governmental and state agen,:: and of the same general character as municipal corporations. :51Tex.Jur.2d 323, 345, Schools, Sec. 6, and Sec. 14. Its

-3238-. *

Hon. J. W. Edgar, pBge 3 (C-672)

trusteeshave all of the powers expressly conferred as well as those necessarily implied therefrom. 51 Tex.Jur.2d 444, Schools, Sec. 85. It is also generallyheld that school boards or districts,under their general powers of school management,may cont.ract for the board and lodging of its teachers. 78 C.J.S, 1172, Schools and School Districts, Sec. 230. Independent school districts in Texas possess substantiallythe+ame powers as common school districts. Article 2797, Vernon's Civil Statutes,provides that both Common School Districts and IndependentSchool Districts may issue bonds "in the samemanner as provided by law for the issuance of otherbonds~tobuild and equip schoolhouses and to purchase sites therefor, for the purpose of'purchasing orbuilding a teacher's home and for purchasing land in connection therewith

. . . ." Ithas been held that the above statute does not preelude the school trustees from usinn local funds. crovided statutory conditions exist, Adams ;s. Miles, 41TS;W.2d 21 (comm.App. 1931).~
In Land&n vs. CentennialRural. High School Dist., 146 S.W.2d 799 (T Civ. App. 194rerror di itwas held that yieacherage as provided for'%'Art. Judyfg;or. 1,
sucra,.comeswithin.the meaning of a schoolhouse or school' building. Since the property In question is ownedby the District, the crucial question'iswhether it is being used for a public purpose. Under the holding of Adams vs. Miles, 300 S.W. 211, affirmedby Commission of Appeals, 41 S.W.2d 21 (1931), a school teacherage for living quarters,where necessary to the propermaintenance of the local schools,would be a governmental function and publlo,use; and it is within the statutory power of the school district trustees to expend public funds In the acquisition or construction of teacher's homes. The Court said in part:

"It Is not difficult to conceive of conditions existing In some school districts, especially those in remote communities,which would render such facilities desirable. Those facilities In some cases, depending upon the conditions In particular districts,would undoubtedly enable the trustees to produce better and more experienced teachers,under more advantageous coubracts of employmentwould house the teachers in close proximity to the school rooms, affording

-3239-Ron. J. W. Edgar/page 4 (C-672)

constant oversight and protection of the school properties. It is perhaps a matter worthy of judicial notice that many progressi,veschool communities In the State, and particularly in the southwesternportion of the State, have providedhomes or dormitories for their faculties. The Legislaturehas re-. .cognlzedthe desirability and necessity of this Improvement in Independentand common school districts by authorizing the Issuance of bonds, when voted, for the purpose of buying sites and constructing "teacher'shomes" in connection with schools. Article 2797

. . . ." (300 S.W. 214) The above authority is in accord with,the general rule that suoh are proper public uses. 79 C.J.S.-IO, Schools and School Districts, Sec. 324; Taylor vs. Board of Public Instruction of Lafayette Counte 157 Fl 4 2 2b Y 2d

See also Craig vs. Belf, 211 Sri. 4273 46 s0:E.2?$2,

,wherein the construction and use of's residence' by the school district for the superintendentwas upheld ati a proper schoolpurpose and the Court took notice of the trend in decisions in taking a "liberalview of-the implied -powersof mtlnicipalities or school districts". "Publicuse" is held to be that which will "promote public education" and, as stated in 84 C.J.S. 483-484, Taxation, Sec. 254, "!Phe fact that income is derived from the use of the property does notprevent the use from being a public use or for public purposes . .~. .' It is also generally held in this connection that married student's dormitories are a proper a;d appropriate educational or public use. It isheld that

. they are consideredto be a necessary responsibility of'e&cational institutions in light of the number ofmarried students, particularly at the graduate and professional level." Schuellervs. Board of Adjustment of City of Dubuque (Iowa), 95 N W 2d 731, 733 (19591.
. . SUMMARY

------- 'Underthe submitted facts the real property purchased and held by the Cameron Independent School District for the superintendent'sresidence, where found to be essential to obtain the services of a qualified superintendentand:&on,3. W. Edgar, page 5 (c-672)

necessary for conducting a school in the district,~is exempt from taxation as being public property used for a "public purpose" under Section 2 of ArticleVIII of the Constitut;on of Texas and Article 7150, Vernon's Civil Statutes. Yours very truly, WAGGONER CARR Attorney General 

# By &Tti Assistant

APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE
W. V. Geppert, Chairman Arthur Sandlin Robert Flowers 38ilton

Richardson John Banks APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL By: T. B, Wright

-3241-