Honorable9. T. Kalters
CountyAuditor
Smith County
Tyler,Texas
bar Sir: OpinionNo. O-3660
Re: &at authorityis vested in
the CountyAuditor'ofSmith
Countyto install,audsuper-
vise the books and reoordsof
the ccmmonschoolsof the
OOunty?
This will a&nonledge receiptof your requestfor our opinion
on the hereinaboveoaptionedquestioo. v* quotefrm your letterasp
follows:
"Pleaseadvisewhat authorityis vested in the Auditor
of Smith Countyto installand supervisethe books and
recordsof the oosmsm schoo1.s of the county. Art. 1652-
1663, RCS, do not give enough informationfor me to know
the dutiesand corresponding authoritiesof ~thisoffice in
the fiscalaffairsof the common sohools.
"The recordsof the CountySuperintendent's officeare
not sufficientfor any auditorto ascertainthe aorreotness
of the vouchersgiven by the trustees of the oommon school'
districts,except for paymentof teacherssalaries. In most
case no invoiceor other evidenceof debt is furnishedby
the distriatwhen requestingthe CountySuperintendent to
issue vouohsrin payment3f a local bill. Xany of these
requisitionsare signedby the superintendant of school,or
by one trJ~steefor the entire board. A large number of bills
are paid that run into hundredsof dollarsthat simply shorn
on the requisitionas "supplies." 'Ibisprevehtsa breakdown
of expendituresi:lto'JanitorSupplies,' 'ClassRoom.Supplies'
eta.
"Mo;t of the Xstriots ore perfectIywillingto comply
with any reasonablerequest. Sme do not uant to sutmit
any furthereviderosto the CountySuperintendent when
requestingpayzentof local bills, or bills from the looal
funds.
Her. 3. T. ifalters,
page 2 O-3660
"If it is the duty of the CountyAuditorto aur?i
the CommonSchooldistriots,or the reoordsof the
..ountySuperintendent, pleaseadvise i.?,in your ~$.;nr,
5w oorreotness of the vouohcrsmay be determinedfr:>n
the enclosedpapersyhioh,,.as stated!:b$ve,coApri:.e
~11 the evidenoato be found in the Superintendent's
office. if not then what steps shouldbe taken to onr-
root the situation?"
;irticles1662 and 1653, Fernon'sAnnotatedXvi1 'tatutesof
Texas,read as followsr
:'.bt.1652. SchoolLedger -- The aiiiiitor shall
ins.te.11
in his offioea sohool ledger showingsn
arourateacoountof all funds receivedand disbursedby
the oa-corschool distriotsof his'oounty;a bond
registershe-::ti;g
all the sohool bonds issuedby the
ocemon.so;hooldistriotsof his oounty,their rate of
interest,tlateissuedand areturity dates and he shall also
keep an interestand sinkingfun? aooountof ouoh school
bonds.
'At. 1633. To examineaoobunts;'--Iisshall have
continualaocessto and shall e%%nineall the'books,ao- :
oounts,re'g,"rts,vouohersand other reoordsof any offioer,
the orders of the ~S6iOnOr~,O~Urf,~rolat~ng to fimmoes -
of tho o~~cnty,end all vouohersgiven b the trusteeof all
comaorsohaoldistrictsof the oouztyand shall :'.nquireinto
the oorrbotness of 8atpp.a.,,
in .ourlpinionNos. O-2734‘andO-2734+;heretofore
renderedby the presentadministration of this depal-tment,
codes I? which are enclosedheretith,it was held that it
is na:+eto~that.the oountyauditorkeep the sohonlledger
mentior~din Artiale1652, supra~.
-A said Opinionho. o-27346, this dep&ent held that
she o.:wrty auditorwas entitledto examineall boolcsand.
-covuntsi;cving to do with reoeiptsand disbursements in"
oo~~ao;~ schooldistricts,and to examineall vouohersgiven
by sue): trustees. :twas there furtherheld that the
detailsfor suoh eltcr;ination shouldbe worked out beizreen
the auditorand the respeotiveschool3oards,sinoo the
s’;atute is silenton the subject. If any other construction
was givenirticle1653 it vmuld be impossibiefor the auditor
to :ietarmine the oorrectness.of the voucher-which the
statuterequireshim to examinefor that pur~se.
'ironour examinationof the papersenclosedin your
letter,whioh appearto be the "vouchers"gi7m by the
,.. .-. -
Hon. B. T. Walters,page 3 0-36&l
.
trusteesof the oosmonschooldistriot,into the cor-
reotnessof which Article1653 makes it your duty to
inquire,we are inalinedto agree with your opinion
that you can&t determinetheir oorreotnessfrcm the
meager informationcontainedthereon.
As oountyauditor,.you are, of course,not authorized
to pa88 on the legalityof the voucher8given by the
: trustees,ofthe oosm~nschooldistrict;nor:to disapprove
them and therebypreventtheir:payment.Those duties
are givento the oountysuperintendeat,by Artiole 2693,
Vernon'sAnnotatedCivil Statuteswhich provides,in
part, as follows:
"The countysuperintendentshall approve
all.vouoherslegallydrawnagainstthe
sohoolfund of his'aounty.* * *"
The quotedportionof said statutewas construedby
Conmi8sion:ofAppeal8of Texas,SeotionB,'in Palmer
PublishingCornpans vs:Zhaith,109 S.R. (2d).l66. In
thatoase the.plaintiff PublishingCompanywas the holder
of numeroussohoolwarrantsissuedby various oomaon
8ohoold$striotsof Titus County,.and allegedto have
beensigned by a majority.of the trustees:ofthe issuing -.
diatriot. The oountysuperintendent of.publiosohoole~
.rsfusedto approvethese warrants,whereupona msndamus
suitwas filed agabst.hJm to oompeltheir approval. ~The
courtheld that mandamusdid not lie since the plaintiff
failedto 8how that it had first appealedfrom the super-
intendent'sdeoisionto the countyboard of sohooltrustees
a8 providedby Article2686,Vernon'sAnnotatedCivil
statutes. Mquote from the court'sopiniona8 follontrr
"The olause 'legallydrama againstthe school
fund of his county,'as used in article2693,
supra,undoubtedlyoonfersupon hti authorityto
decideas to~thelegalityof the fornof suoh
vouchers. If we considerthis languagein oon-
nectionwith the 'educational set-up'of each
oounty, we have no doubt it goes furtherthan
this and authorieesan inquiryby him into the
legalityof the indebtedness representedby;suah
voucher. lyeneed inquiryno furtherthan whether
or not he.oe.npasshis jud@ent on any one Or more
of the elementswhioh go into the making of a
'legallydravm'vouoher,and froa'suoh'decide'its
legality. Yiethink his relationto.the school,
fund in a limitedsense is somewhatanalogousto
that of a countyauditorwith respectto:oountyfunds.
.%;,
Hon. B. T. Qklters,.page4 O-3660
.
"The oonclusionthat his said act of disapproval
was not a void one followsnecessarilyProm the above.?
You stats in your letterthat "some districtsdo not
want to submitany furtherevidenceto the oountysuper-
intendent(than the sieager,statementas shown on the
vouchersenclosedby you) when requestingpaymentof
local bills,or bills from the local funds."
Under the authoritieshereinbeforementionedthe.county
superintendent certainlyhas the authority--bandwe thnk
it is his duty under the facts Suhnittedby you -L to refuse
to approvesuch vouchers(as;submitted by you in your letter)
on theground that they do not disclosesufficiently detailed
information for him to determinetheir legality.
Any authoritygiven to boardsand offioersto'dramon
schoolfunds is governedand limitedby the provisionsof
the generalstatutes. Vouchersand warrantsalso shouldbe
approvedas orovidedby law. The manner in whioh those
powers shall be exercised,are presoribedbystatute; and the
coursepresciibedby law mU8t be'followed.to the 'exolusion
of all othermethods. 37 Tex. Jur. 968, Section97.
Like other publicoffioers,sohooloffioers'are:,
responsiblefor any wrongfilor illegaldisbursementor
misspplioationof sohoolfunds. A oounty superintendent
and his bondsmenhave been held liablewhere the superin-
tendent'knowingly and wrongfullyapprovedvouchersdrawn
on a fund which could only.beappropriatedto another
purpose. 37 Tex. Jur. 971, Section99; Powellv. Mathews
(Civ..App.)260 3. !"I.903.
If the oountysuparintendentwouldrequirethe trustees
of the comaon schooldistriotto give such detailedinforma-
tion in such vouchersas would appearto be necessary5x1
order for him to properlydeterminetheir legality,as he is
authorizedto do to avoid possibleliabilityon his bond,
the countyauditorwould have no diffioulGyin determining
thsir correctnessas requiredof him in Article 1653.
:.eare of the opinionthat the Legislature,in charging
the county superintendentand countyauditorwith their
respectiveduties%n aannootion*th vouchersgiven by the
trustnesof c-on schooldistricts,intendedthat the
suparintondent and mditor cooperatein their respective
dutiesto the end that the schoolaccountswill receivethe
highestdegree of scrutinypossible.
?FJstsssof a conaaonschool~district are else "public
offiaers"and must subscribeto the o%th prescribedin the
Hon. B. T. -iihlters,
page_?. '0-3660~
Constitution.37 Tex. Jur. 335, Section68. Consequently,
it is our opinionthat such trusteesare duty bound,under
oaths of office,to oobperate with the ccuntysuperintendent
and the countyauditor,and to give to such officersany in-
formationconcerning-suchvouchersthat may be reasonably
necessaryfor them to dischargetheir statutoryduties.
The Constitution(Article5, Section24) and statutes
(Articles5~70-5YR7,V. A. C. S.) ,giveto a districtjudge _"
power to removecountyoffioerafor certainspeoifib causes.
Trusteesof independentand comaonschooldistricts,other
than those in citiesthat have assumedcontrolof their schools,
are comty officerswithin thenmeaningof the statutesproviding
for the removalof countyofficers..37 Tax. Jur; 936, Section
68; i:imbrcughvs. Burnett,~93,
Tex. 301, 66,S.W.120.
?'fe
are of the opinionthat a county superintendent,
like;
wise, is a county officerwithin the meaningof the statutes,
supra,providingfor the,removalof county officers.
In ConferenceOpin&'Nc. 1824, reoorded'iri
Bock 60, pages
1-7, renderedby this departmenton June:27,,1917~,
to the
Honorable9. L. Washburn,CountyAuditor,Houston',Texas,~it
was held~,at page 6, as follows:
"His (the countyaud~itor's)authorityto examine
into the correctnessof.such~vouchersto our minds :
was conferredmerely~forthe purp&s'of.givinghim
the right to audit au&vouchers and if in his
judgmentthe 881118~uere.unlawfully
drawn to reporb
the same to the properauthoritiesof the county,
for such actionas might be indicatedthereby."
In snswerto your questionasto what '.
steps'should'be taken
by you to correctthe situationas stated in the letter.from
you, it is the opinionof this departmentthat, under the
authoritieshereinabovediscussed,the followingcoursemight
aid you in your commendabledesireto carry,out your official
duties.
(1) You should suggestto the county superintendent that
you and he, together,work .cuta form of voucherthat will
containa!? of the informationthat is needed by each of you
for your respectiveduties.
(2) After a suitableform has been agreed'uponthe
trusteesshouldbe advisedthereofand their cooperation
requestedby the countysuperintendent.
As statedhereinabove,the manner in which such details
Bon. 9. T. Xalters,page 6 :O-3660
are to be worked out is withinthe discretionof the auditor
and cannotbe pass&upon by this department. :';e are re-
turningto you herewiththe voucherssutrnitted with your
letter.
Trustingthat wc have fullyansweredyour inquiry,we are
Very truly yours
By 's/Edgar
Pfeii
Edgar Pfeil
Assistant
APPROVEDJULY 22, 1941
s/GroverSellers
FIRST ASSISTA?JT
ATTORNEYGXIJFXAL
ApprovedOpinionCommitteeBy-.
BWB Chairmu