Hon. W. A. Haaaan Opinion No. O-7198
County Attorney Re: Whether Trustees of Independent
Pecos county Sohool District may lawfully permit
Fort Stockton, Texas the use of public school bufldings
for religious worship where such
use does not interfere or oonflict
with the use of such bulldings as
Dear Sir: school property
Your request for opinion upon the following stated
question:
“Have the Trustees of an Independent School
District the power to permit any rellglous denomi-
nation, Protestant or Catholic to use the public
school builalng or buildings for religious worship.”
has been received and carefully considered by this department,
Section 88 Vol. 37, Texas Jurisprudence, pages 958
ana 959, read as follow*:
“Use for Other Than School Purposes -
BIPublic school property Is held in trust to
be used for the beneftt of the chqldren of the com-
munity or district in which the’ property exists.
It Is so plainly and clearly Impressed with a trust
in favor of the’ schools that It Is within the pro-
teotlve claims of both the State and Federal Con-
stitutions, and the Legislature is without power to
devote such property to any other purpose or to the
use of any other beneficiary. The laws of Texas
by implication at least require that the exclus i ve
ownership end control o ! school builalngs of a ais-
trict shall be In the trustees thereof. ,And a con-
tract entered Into between the trustees and a pri-
vate individual or organization is .void when it
contemplates that the d,lstrict shall surrender ex-
clusive oontrol of a school building or that a
building shall be erected for the jokt use and joint
control of the district and another.
Hon. w. A, Haaaen, page 2
“But the trustees may, authorize the use of
school property for private purposes whfch do
not conflict with Its use as a schoole Although
they may net own or control the buildfng jointly
with private interests, they may lease a portion
of it In so far as the uses to which the prop-
erty !s put wCI. not interfere or conflict with
its USQ as school property. Thus the Supreme
Court has held that the trustees may permit the
use of buildings by ‘clubs and fraternal societies,
musical organizat&ons Sunday-schools, etc.,
where such uses do no e interfere with their use
for school purposes, Nor is there any abuse of
discretion in the leasing, during vaaatfon of
an unused school campus for a baseball per&
such use being so restricted as not to perm%t of
injury to or waste of the school property or in-
terference with the conduct of the school.
“In the absence of any provision of law to
the contrary, it fs also discretfonary wfth the
trustees to refuse the use of school property for
other than school purposes, as for the purpose of
holding primary eleetlons, Likewise, even though
the statute provides that general elections shall
be held fn schoolhouses ‘where ft is practfcable
so to do, t the trustees in the exerc%se of their
discretion may decline to allow school buflafngs
to be used therefor and th.e courts, in the absence
of any showing of a&e? will not disturb thefr
act ion.”
The case of Martin ve South San Antonlo Independent
School District 27.5 SOW. 265 (Tex.Ci.v.App.) 277 S,W. 78 (Tex.
Sup.Ct.) ho1d.s ?hat school trustees may permit the use of
school buildings by clubs and fraternal societies, musfcal or-
genizatgons Sundav s ho In, eta0 where such uses do not %nter-
fere with thefr use-fzr zchzol purposes.
Under the ~above Cfted authorities it is our opinion
that school trustees, in their sound dfscreeion, may lawfully
permit the use of public school buflafngs for religfous worship
where such usa ~$11 not interfere with or conflict with the use
of such buflafngs for schoo~l purposes,
APPROVED APR 23, 1946 Very truly yours
/s/ Cellos C. Ashley ,PlPTORNEY GENERALOF TEXAS
FIRST ASSISTANTATTORNEY Buy./‘s/ Wm. Jc Fanning
GENERAL Wm. J* FannUg, Assistant
APPROVED:OPINIONCOMMITTEE
BY: BWB, CHAIRMAN
WJF:BT:wb