Honorable Arnold Smith
County Attorney
Montgomery County
Conroe, Texas
Dear Sir: Opinion No. Q-3872
Re: Do the trustees of an ind’ependent
school district have the authority
to employ a full tlme’.‘dentist
for
the ensuing school year and pay
him out of local school funds?
We are in receipt of your letter of August 16, 1941,
fn’which you request the opinion of this department upon the
question set out as follows:
“Please advise me whether or not the Trustees
of the Willis Independent School District of Willis,
Montgomery County, Texas, have the authority to em-
ploy a full time dentist for the ensuing school
year at a ‘specifiedsalary to be paid on a month
to month basis, and whether or not school funds can
be expended for such a purpose. O . . .”
In your letter you ask whether or not “school~‘funds”
can be -expendedfor the purpose mentioned e We assume that by
school funds you are referring to local school funds, the ex-
penditure of which are authorized by Article 2827 which reads
in part as follows:
“2 Local stihoolfunds from district taxes,
-tuition fees of pupils not entitled to free tui-
tion and other local sources may be used for the
purposes enumerated for State and county funds
and for purchasing appliances and supplies, for
the payment of insurance premiums, janitors and
other employes, for buying school sites, buying,
building and repairing and renting school houses,
and for other purposes necessary in the conduct
of-‘thepublic schools to be determlned by the
Board of Trustees, the accounts and vouchers for
county districts to be approved by the county
superintendent; provided, that when the State
available school fund in any city or district is
Honorable A.rnoldSmith, page 2 o-3872
sufficient to maintain the schools thereof in
any year for at least eight months, and leave
a surpPJs, such surplus may be expended for the
purposes mentioned herein. . 0 . aU
It is our opinion that your question is answered in
the case City of Dellas vs. Mosely, 286 S.W. 497, by the Dallas
Court of Civil Appeals. Certain of the pertinent facts stated
by the court are as follows:
"After a careful investigation of the work-
ing of health departments in other cities by the
school authorities of the city of Dallas, and be-
lieving that the efficiency of the city's free
schools would thereby be increased, the board of
education, by resolution duly adopted, established
this department, and it was in force for the school
year 1925-26. An appropriation of $30,000, or so
much thereof as necessary, was duly made from the
funds derived from the special taxes levied by the
city of Dallas for maintaining its public schools,
for the establishment and maintenance of said
health department, A competent physician was em-
ployed as superintendent of this department at
a salary of $4,000 per year, and such physician
is required to devote his entire time to this work.
A competent woman physician was employed as assis-
tant superintendent at a salry of $2,500.00 per
war, and she is required to devote her entire
time to the work. Six women nurses were employed
for the school year of nine months, each at a
salary of $125 per month, During a portion of
the year a dentist was employed at a salary of
$2,000; such dentist, however, was not in said
departmen,&at the time of the filing of this suit,
and is not now connected therewith, b-utit is
assumed that a comoeten,tdentist will be employed
in the future,
The court stated as follows:
"Article 2827, 1925 Revised Statutes, places
an express limitation on the power of a school board
in the expenditure of school funds. e . . . I
"It is apparent, therefore, that the correct
solution of the question under inquiry is dependent
largely on whether the said health department, as it
is mair~rtaFned
by the said board of education, has for
Honorable Arnold Smith, page 3 o-3872
its primary pui-poseimproving the efficiency of
the system of public schools for the city of
Dallas. e O D e S
"We are of the opinion that'the school board
was acting under an authorized legal discretion
when It organized and installed the health depart--
meritfor the purposes for which same was organized,
and that it is being conducted for a lawful and
commendable purpose, and has increased the effi-
clency of thenschool system of the city of Dallas.
e ,>D . 0 s D
The case was affirmed by the Commission of Appeals
in 17 S .W. (2d) 36 (I ~The court conclud,edas follows:
"Modern science has conclusively established
the fact, and the record in this case conclusively
shows, that there is an intimate relation between
the mind and the body, and no teacher can intelli-
gently deal with the child's mind who ignores such
child's physical condition. It therefore follows,
as a matter of course, that money wisely and ju-
diciously expended by the school board within pro-
per limitation to ascertain the'child's physical
condition is a wise and legitimate expense of the
teaching p??ocesse It would not only be an injustice
to the child to conduct the teaching process with-
out informatf’onas to its physical condition, but
such a system would be 8,waste of public funds,
“We are of the opinion that the board of edu-
cation has the right an power, under the Constitu-
tion and laws of this state,and the charter of said
city, to exercise sound jugment and discretion to
pe:rfos;mand carry out the duties and powers dele-
gated to them by law, and .thatin exercising such
powers, they have not violated any law of this
st;ste,OP any provision of the charter of said
city, in’instftutlng and maintaining the system
of medical inspection and health work shown by the
re,cordin this ease.”
It is the opinion of this department, therefore, that
the trustees of the independent school district do have the
authority to employ a full time dentist for the ensufng school
year and to’pay him a sal,aryout of the I.ocalschooi funds col-
lected by said school district,
BG:mp:wc
APPROVED AU3 27 1941
s/GPover Sell&
FIRST AS:3ISTAIVT
ATTORNEY %NERAL