Hon. C. H. Cavness Opinion No. V-1347 

State Auditor 

Austin, Texas 

.F 

Dear Sir: 

Re: Construction of the 

limitation on appropriatxons to institutions of higher 

education prohibiting 

the expenditure of 

funds “for courses of 

instruction required 

for any degree ‘which 

was not offered. ‘. . 

on October 1, 1950." 

We quote in part from your recent 

as follows: 

letter 

“In connection with our statutorily required audits of the accounts 

and funds of the State Institutions of 

Higher Learning, we respectfully request your official interpretation of 

part of Section 20.0f ‘Article V in 

House Bill 426, Acts 52nd Legislature, 

1951, ch. 499. 

“This Section prohibits the ex-. 

pending of State funds ‘for courses of 

instruction required for any degree 

which was not being offered by the institution on October lst, 1950 . . .I 

(excepts Lamar State College of Technology, Reserve Officers Training Corps 

instruction, etc. 1 In order for us to 

have the guide lines on the part of our 

audits that will be concerned with this 

Section . . ., we need your answers to 

the following questions: 

“1. !Irhat constitutes the offering 

of a degree within the meaning of the 

above quoted portion of the Section in 

question? . . . 
. I 

Hon. C. H. Cavness, page 2 (V-1347) 

"2. Where a course is already being given as requirement for an existzing degree, would the above Section 

have any effect where it may also be required for a new degree not previously 

offered? We believe that the above 

quoted part should have stated 'for m 

courses1 and that the answer to this 

question would be *NoI .I1 

Article V of House Bill 426, Acts 52nd Leg., 

R.S. 1951; ch. 499, pa 1446, the general appropriation 

bill f.nr the biennium ending August 31, 1953, makes 

appropriations for the State institutions of higher 

learning. Among the General Provisions of firticle V 

of House Bill 426, at ppa 1468, 1469, it is provided: 

"The expenditure of the appropriations herein made and authorized, whether 

from the State General Revenue Fund, local institutional funds, or any other receipts and funds whatsoever, except bequests and gifts, shall be subject to the 

following provisions: . . . 

"Sec. 20. Limitations on Courses of 

Study. pane of the aooroJriatlons herein 

made and authorized, whether from the 

State General Revenue Fund, local instructional funds, or any other receipts and 

funds whatsoever except bequests and gifts. 

ghall be exaended for-the continuance-or . 

establishment of a devartment of instruction which was not in- existence on October 

1, 1950popr for courses of Instruction rewi ed anv degree which 

ff&ed bv the in 

s n t beins. 

itu 

&'&, . . .I' ,(Em$a.sis added.) 

tion o?OctIber 7, 

Your first question concerns the meaning of 

the word "offered" as used in the above-quoted provision. A determination of the answer to this question 

involves a study of the procedure followed at each of 

the many institutions of hiSher learning in the offerhg of degrees. The facts which constitute the offering at each institution differ, and a decision of the 

question of when a degree is offered would necessnrily 

involve a determination of :Ihat are the existing facts 
. 4’ r 

Hon. C. Ii. Cavness, page 3 (V-1347) 

at each institution as well as whether those facts 

constitute an offering of a degree. This office is 

precluded from deciding fact issues and hence we 

cannot answer your first question categorically. 

Att'y Gen. Op. O-3382 (1941). 

Accompanying your request are a number of 

letters from the administrative heads of institutions of higher learning containing expressions with 

regard to their interpretation of when a degree is 

actually "offered" at their respective,institutions. 

From these we gather it is the ordinary practice 

that prior to, or as a part of, the offering of a degree there must be some action approving the degree 

by the administrative and governing board of the institution. This authorization generally precedes the 

actual offering of the degree by several months. dter the degree is authorized, the actual courses required by the degree program are made available to 

students who wish to take the courses for the purpose 

of receiving the degree. 

Thus it seems apparent that the mere authorization of the degree, standing alone, Is not sufficient to constitute the "offering of a degree." In 

our opinion, before a degree can be considered as "offered" the courses required by the degree program 

mustbe made available to students who wish to take 

the courses for the purpose of receiving the degree. 

As to whether such courses were actually made available to students prior to October 1, 1950, will depend 

upon the particular facts and circumstances at each 

institution of higher learning. Thus, if you determine in connection with your audit of the accounts and 

funds of a particular institution that there had been 

authorization for a degree by the governing board and 

that courses required by.the degree program were actually made available to students who desired to take 

the courses for the particular degree prior to October 

1, 1950, then we believe you would be justified in determfning that the degree was actually being offered 

prior to October 1, 1950. Furthermore, the fact tha.L 

students with the required background had actually enrolled and were taking courses leading to a particular 

degree prior to October 1, 1950, would be strong evidence of the fact that the degree was being offered 

prior to that time. 

c 
Hon. C. II. Cavness, page 4 (V-1347) 

The above are just some of the criteria 

to be considered in determining the fact issue of 

whether a degree was being offered within the meaning of Section 20. There may be others just as 

persuasive, but in our opinion the actual offering 

I/of thecourses and enrollment of students in the 

.courses prior to the date set out in Section 20, 

/are important factual determinations to be made in 

each instance. 

Your second question concerns courses required for degrees offered prior to October 1, 1950, 

and also for degrees offered subsequent to that 

date-~ The wording of Section 20 does not prohibit 

the continuation of a course of study already required for an existing degree when that same course 

becomes a requirement for a new degree, offered for 

the first time after October 1, 1950. The purpose 

of Section 20, as therein expressed, is to prohibit 

; the establishment of new courses of instruction for 

new degrees. The obvious intent is not to disconttnue existing courses but to ma3ntainthe status 

qu.o_until such.time as a study6f the.facilities for 

higher education in this State may be completed. We 

therefore agree~with you that-your second question 

be answered in the negative. 

SUMY 

What constitutes the offering of a 

l°ree within the terms of Sec. 20 of 

Art. V of H.B. 426 Acts 52nd Leg., R.S. 

1951, ch. 4999 pe i446, is a fact issue 

to be determined from the facts and circumstances in each individual case. 

Courses of instruction required for a degree being offered prior to October 1, 

l.950, may oe continued even though such 

courses are also required for a degree 

offered subsequent to that date. 

APPROVED: Yours very truly, 

C. K. Richards PRICE DANIEL 

Trial & Appellate Division Attorney General 

Everett Hutchinson 

Executive Assistant 

Charles D. Mathews 

First Assistant 

EJ:wb 

l -. v 

c 

c