Opinion ID: 2461858
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 14

Heading: funding for textbooks

Text: The General Assembly, also through the budget bill, permitted local school districts to rent textbooks and further imposed a minimum six year period on the use of textbooks selected by the Textbook Commission. Budget, Part I, General Fund, D. Education and Humanities, Item 29(c), (b). It is argued that this section of the budget conflicted with KRS 156.400 and KRS 156.435(4). The trial court disagreed. We agree with the trial court. In this section of the budget bill  as in all the questioned sections  the General Assembly was basing its action on the financial condition of the state and its various entities. It was acting on the authority granted in SB 294. In this instance, local boards of education can now  at their option  rent textbooks to students. All books shall now be used for six years. Both of these objects are economy moves. They allow local school boards to make appropriate individual decisions as to whether textbooks shall be loaned or rented to students. Whether one agrees with this infringement on the traditional use of free textbooks, one cannot challenge the General Assembly's right to make such a policy decision. The same logic applies to extending the use of books for a period of six years. [13] We believe therefore that not only is the action of the General Assembly in the budget bill valid as a suspension or modification of existing statutes, we also believe that, there is, in effect, no real conflict.