The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1893-07-13
SCHOOL DIRECTORS IN A Stew.
They Are at a Loss to Know Where to
Get Money.
A Special Meeting to Discuss the Mat
ter-A Supreme Court Decision
That Upsets Matters.


quand airy.
The question of the exact legal relations
of the County Superintendent of Schools
to the City Superintendent-of the county
school department to that of city within
the county-has been the subject of much
discussion among the school officials
during the past few days, and the matter
bids fair to create quite muddle before
long. It appears that City Superntend-
ent Hart recently dug up decision otth
Supreme Court, rendered in San Diego
County case, which declares that, as a
school district, the city is not an indie
pendent organization, but is correlated to
the other school districts in the county as
part of the system of public schools
provided for by law. a Board OF Educa-
ton within a city has only the same right
10 make a requisition upon the Board OF
Supervisors OF the county, says the court
in its decision, to levy a tax for school
purposes that the trustees have in any
other school district. Further, that the
rights and obligations OF the school us
trict corporation are to be determined by
the provisions Of the Political Code and
not by those of the city's charter. The
court says that the name Board OF Edu-
cation" is simply another term Tor
''School Trustees"
AS most every citizen knows the local
Board of Education has also considered
itself municipal body, and ia procur-
ing funds has always applied to the City
Trustees. The decision put such an en-
tirely different complexion on affairs,
however, as to cause considerable con-
sternation. The members of the board
got their heads together and resolved to
appeal to State Superintendent Anderson
sNT ~ tifrNf on ha ar16 ha1 r
man Sherburn has received his reply,
which Is as follows:
". II. SbeTbl8n, Esq, President Board
Of Education, 52S h Street. Sacramento
DEAR SIR: Replying to your inquiry as
TO whether the Board OF City Trustees
can levy tax for school purposes, or
whether the levy must be made by the
Board of Supervisors Of the county,
have to say:
l. The city of Sacramento under the
law constitutes a separate school district.
Section 1916 of the Political Code eX-
pressly states that every city or incOr-
porated town, unless subdivided by the
legislative authority thereof, shall con
stltute a separate school district, etc.,
(See Statutes OF 1898, p. 245.)
2. Every school district is a public cor
pOration. (See Estate OF Belmer, 80 Cal.
l3l, and Hughes VS.. Ewing, % Cal. 4l4.)
3. The functions and powers of such
corporation are such, and only such, as
are given to it by the Act under which it
exists. The fact that every incorporated
city is a school district does not give to
the district any of the provisions of the
city charter nor limit the powers and
functions which, as a school district, il
has by virtue of the Political Code. The
authority of the city of Sacramento as a
school district Is derived directly from
the Legislature, through the general law
providing Tor the establishing of schools;
the authority of the city as city lis
found in the charter under which it is
organized; and even though the charter
may purport to define the powers and
duties of It's municipal officers in refer
ence to the public schools in the same
language is has the Legislature, in the
Political Code, yet these powers and
duties are reterable to the legislative au-
thority and not to the charter.
Section 1915 of the Political Code de-
clares that the powers and duties of
Boards of Education in cities are such as
are prescribed in the provisions OF the
laws governing such cities, as otherwise
provided in the general law relating TO
The public schools. According to the de-
clslon OF the Supreme Court i'll the case of
Kennedy VS.. Miller, Boards Of Educa-
ton" is another name Tor boards of
Trustees" to which the control of school
districts is given by section 1917 of the
Political Code; the same powers are con-
ferred upon each, except in certain
enumerated instances. Nowhere in the
law Is the power given to Boards of Edu-
cation or Boards of Trustees of
school districts to leXy taxes, and
nowhere in the law is this
power given TO the Board of City Trus-
tees, but is confined to the Board of
Supervisors. For the purpose of rails
ing money additional to that provided
for from the State school fund,
the law requires the County Super
intendent to furnish to the Board of Su-
perVlSors each year an estimate of the
amount needed for the ensuing year see
Section 1910 and also requires the Super
visors of each county having less than
100000 inhabitants TO levy tax known
as the county school tax. (See Sec
ton ISIS, D. g. For certain special pur-
poses the Supervisors are authorized
TO levy an additional tax within a school
district, if the district has voted there
for. The Board of Education within
city has the same right to
make a requisition upon the Board of Su-
pervisors to levy tax for school pur-
poses upon the taxable property within
city that the Board of Trustees ofany other
school district in the county has in their
district, and the Board of Supervisors
have the power to levy a special tax in
the city for special purposes when the
city has voted therefor.
From thorough investigation of this
whole matter, am fully satisfied that the
Board of City Trustees has not the power
10 levy a tax for school purposes; that
power must be exercised by the Board of
Supervisors of the county, in accordance
with the provisions of the Political Code
(SeCtions 1871 to 1889 inclusive).
Trusting that l have made the matter
plain, am, yours truly,
J. w. ANDERSON,
Superintendent of Public Instruction.
Upon the receipt of Mr.. Anderson's
letter, a special meeting OF the CITY
Board was called for last night. and City
Attorney Post was asked to be present to
advise the board.
The meeting was a lengthy one. Mr..
Post said that so far as ne could see the
only thing the board could do was to
abide by the law as laid down bv the
Supreme Court, and the Political Code.
and hand their estimates in to the Super
Visors this time instead of to the City
Trustees, as has been customary. The
code says that if any school district-and
under the decision a city is a school dis
trict-does not get enough money from
the general county levy to carry it
through, its trustees may call an cleo
ton Tor the purpose of voting on the
proposition TO levy a special tax within
that district. In the case of Sacramento
City this would mean a special city cleo
ton, as the city is a school district.
The matter was discussed pro and con
by the members OF the board, but the
more they talked the more muddled and
eXasperated they became. The worst
part of ii all was that under the present
charter the levy gives them money
enough to last them only until next
June, and under the new charter, which
goes into effect in January no more