='D?EBcATIY)RNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS
HonorableT. M. Trimble First Assistant State Superintendentof public Instruction Austin, Texas
Dear Sir: Opinion No. O-2838 Re: Group Insurancefor teachers in independentschooldistricts and paymentof premiums out of school funds.
In your letter of Ootober 17, 1940, you request our opinion in response to the followingquestions: : "May the Board of Trustees of the Fort Worth IndependentSchool Districtuse localmaintenance funds to pay the employer'spart on a group life insurancepremiun for the Fort Torth teachers?
"Couldthe Board of Trusteesof an independent school districtmake provisionfor the payment of the employer'spart of the premium of group life insurance of its teachers,if provisionis made in the teachers* contractswherebythis premiws payment is a prt of the teachers'annual salaries?"
Y& are unableto find any statutewhich would authorizethe trustws of the Fort Worth IndependentSchool District to contractfor or expend local maintenancefunds to pay the employer'spart of a group life insurancepremium for the district'steachers. In the sbsence of such a statute,such funds may not be so expended.
This questionis in all material respectsthe ssme as that consideredby t'nisdepartmentin our Opinion No. O-2469, copy of rhich is attachedhereto, and it was them held that public school funds could not lx used to pay for group insurance.
Your second questionis answeredin the negativefor soveral reasons.
(1) Section 1 of Article 47G4a provides: Bon. T. Y. Trhble, Page 2 (O-2838)
"GroupLife Incurancoic horobydeciarodto bc that fona of life inouranceocvoringnot loss thnn twenty-fiveemployeeswritton under a.policy issued to the employer,the premiws for which ictc bo paid by the employeror by the employerand employeejoint- ly and insuringall of his employees,or all of any class or classesthereof determinedby conditions pertainingto the employment,for smcuntsof insurance based upon scme plan whioh will precludeindividual selection,andfor the benefitof personsother than the employer;. . ."
It will be observedthat group insuranaecannotunder this statute bs had unless the schooldistrictpays its art of the premium.
If your second questionis predicatedupon the idea of paying the teachersa salary,and then requiringthem to pay the school districtsI portionof the premiurm for the insurance,such procedurenould not bring the insuranceunder the above definitionof group insurancefor the reason that the teacherswould, in faot, bs paying all of the premium;while the above statuterequiresthe school districtto pay a part of the same.
(2) If you intend by your second questionto provide in the teachers'contractsto pay them so much money for salaries,provided a certain amountof same should be used to pay the school district'spart of ths premium on group insurance,the plan would amount to nothing more than an evasionof cur ruling to the first question suhaittedrfor the reason that you would still be doing indirectlywhat you cannotdo directly. This principleis sustainedby the'courtof Civil Appealsat San Antonio in the case of Godson vs. Jones, 190 S.VL 2.53:
"Appellantwas the principalof school Xo. 1, districtNo. 2, sndwas being paid the sum of $75 cut of the free schoolmoney of the state. About the same time of his employmentas principal,he was also employedbythe trusteesas janitorwith a sal- ary of $50 a month. Voucherswere issued to appellant for his servicesas janitor,and the county,superin-