Court Opinion

ID: 9530771
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-07 04:03:24.268308+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:14.630167
License: Public Domain

HUNTER, Chief Judge,
specially concurring:
I agree with Judge Hansen’s opinion in its entirety.
We do not hold today that a school board’s authority is limited to that granted in “express words” by the legislature. We do hold that a school board may not exceed the authority granted by the legislature. We specifically hold that a school board’s authority to adopt “an appropriate personnel policy and sick leave guide” does not include the authority to legislate a mandatory retirement age for teachers. We also specifically hold that the school board’s authority to exercise those powers “fairly implied or necessarily incidental to powers expressly granted and those essential (emphasis added) to the declared objects and purposes of the corporation” does not include the authority to legislate a mandatory retirement age which is a power neither necessarily incidental nor essential. This is a matter much better left to the legislature.
Although a mandatory retirement age for teachers would, in my opinion, be constitutional if enacted by the legislature, that is not the issue before this court and therefore, I find Lewis v. Tuscon School District, 23 Ariz.App. 154, 531 P.2d 199 (1975) cert. denied, 423 U.S. 864, 96 S.Ct. 123, 46 L.Ed.2d 92, totally inapplicable.
Finally, I do not believe Article 10, Section 26 of the Oklahoma Constitution has any application here whatsoever.