Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Hon. C. H. Cavness Opinion No. V-1347 State Auditor Austin, Texas Re: Construction of the .F limitation on appro- priatxons to insti- tutions of higher education prohibiting the expenditure of funds “for courses of instruction required for any degree ‘which was not offered. ‘. . Dear Sir: on October 1, 1950." We quote in part from your recent letter as follows: “In connection with our statutor- ily required audits of the accounts and funds of the State Institutions of Higher Learning, we respectfully re- quest your official interpretation of part of Section 20.0f ‘ArticleV 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 in- stitution on October lst, 1950 . . .I (excepts Lamar State College of Tech- nology, 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. !Irhatconstitutes 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 be- ing given as requirement for an exist- zingdegree, would the above Section have any effect where it may also be re- quired 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.nrthe biennium ending August 31, 1953, makes appropriations for the State institutions of higher learning. Among the General Provisions of firticleV of House Bill 426, at ppa 1468, 1469, it is provided: "The expenditure of the appropria- tions herein made and authorized, whether from the State General Revenue Fund, lo- cal institutional funds, or any other re- ceipts and funds whatsoever, except be- quests 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 instruc- tional funds, or any other receipts and funds whatsoever except bequests and gifts. ghall be exaended for-the continuance-or . establishment of a devartment of instruc- tion which was not in-existence on October 1, 1950popr for courses of Instruction re- wi ed anv degree which s n t beins. ff&ed bv the in itution o?OctIber 7, &'&, . . .I' ,(Em$a.sisadded.) Your first question concerns the meaning of the word "offered" as used in the above-quoted provi- sion. 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 offer- hg of degrees. The facts which constitute the offer- ing at each institution differ, and a decision of the question of when a degree is offered would necessnrily involve a determination of :Ihatare the existing facts r . 4’ 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 institu- tions 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 de- gree there must be some action approving the degree by the administrative and governing board of the in- stitution. This authorization generally precedes the actual offering of the degree by several months. d- ter the degree is authorized, the actual courses re- quired 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 author- ization of the degree, standing alone, Is not suffi- cient to constitute the "offering of a degree." In our opinion, before a degree can be considered as "of- fered" 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 avail- able to students prior to October 1, 1950, will depend upon the particular facts and circumstances at each institution of higher learning. Thus, if you deter- mine 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 ac- tually 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 de- termfning that the degree was actually being offered prior to October 1, 1950. Furthermore, the fact tha.L students with the required background had actually en- rolled and were taking courses leading to a particular degree prior to October 1, 1950, would be strong evi- dence of the fact that the degree was being offered prior to that time. c l -. v Hon. C. II.Cavness, page 4 (V-1347) c 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 mean- ing 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 .coursesprior to the date set out in Section 20, /are important factual determinations to be made in each instance. Your second question concerns courses re- quired 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 re- quired 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 discon- ttnue existing courses but to ma3ntainthe status qu.o_untilsuch.time as a study6f the.facilities for higher education in this State may be completed. We therefore agree~with you that-your second question c be answered in the negative. SUMY What constitutes the offering of a l°reewithin 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 cir- cumstances in each individual case. Courses of instruction required for a de- gree 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