April 8, 1975
Senator Jerry Mayer
1615 South Fifth
Sioux Falls, South Dakota 57105
OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 75-64
Crippled children
Dear Senator Mayer:
You have requested an opinion from this office based on the following factual situation:
Exceptional children, who have physical handicaps, are assigned for educational purposes to the Crippled Children's Hospital and School as provided in SDCL 13-37-14.1 and are provided board and room by the Crippled Children's Hospital and School.
Based on this factual situation, you raise the following questions:
(1) May the school district request that the parents or guardian of the assigned children sign a claim voucher or verified bill for the board and room provided and may the school district pay all these claim vouchers or verified bills by one warrant-check to the Crippled Children's Hospital and School or other agency which may be providing similar board and room services?
(2) May the Division of Elementary and Secondary Education pay to the district the amount of school transportation support as provided in SDCL 13-31-22 (2) if the answer to Question #1 is affirmative?
(3) May the Division of Elementary and Secondary Education pay to the district the amount of school transportation support as provided in SDCL 13-31-22 (2) if the agency providing board and room bills the district directly?
The questions raised will be discussed in the order of their presentation.
A school district may request parents or guardians of assigned exceptional children to sign a claim voucher for the board and room provided for such children. SDCL 13-37-8.8 provides:
The costs of maintenance, including both board and room shall be provided by the district wherein the exceptional child has school residence and shall not exceed five dollars per day per child and shall be paid from that district's special education fund.
SDCL 13-37-8.9 provides:
Where appropriate transportation is not provided by the school district, any exceptional child, when legally assigned, shall be eligible for necessary transportation at the rate per mile set forth in §13-30-3, provided, however, that the maximum shall be twice the dollar limitation set forth in §13-30-3. The district wherein an exceptional child has school residence shall pay the transportation expenses from the district's special education fund.
SDCL 13-37-20 provides:
Private, nonprofit institutions providing a service directly to exceptional children under the provisions of this chapter shall recover authorized costs from the county special education fund for so long as it is obligated for the payment of claims under the provisions of this chapter, and thereafter from the school district special education fund monthly.
The above statutes indicate that the financial obligation of the local school district for maintenance costs of an exceptional child assigned to private institutions such as the Crippled Children's Hospital and School, shall be paid monthly from the district's special education fund. Since the institution is usually the ultimate payee of a warrant-check drawn for this purpose, it would appear that vouchers for such reimbursements would be presented by the institution not the parents of the exceptional child. An exception to this general statement would be claims for reimbursement for transportation costs provided by the parents under SDCL 13-37-8.9
It is my opinion that a local school district can request parents of an assigned exceptional child to co-sign a claim voucher for reimbursement for services given to their exceptional child. However, I do not believe that such parents could be required to sign a claim voucher of this type before funds would be obligated under SDCL 13-37-20. Nothing in SDCL 13-37 or SDCL 13-18 would provide for such a requirement.
With respect to the question of whether the district can pay all these claim vouchers by one warrant-check, it is my opinion that they can do so, so long as they keep adequate records of individual accounts being paid. It appears to me however that little is gained by this one check approach and perhaps auditing problems would result from its use.
The second question you ask poses more difficult matters for consideration. SDCL 13-31-2.2 provides:
The amount of school transportation supports to which each school district shall be entitled shall be:
(1) Fifty per cent of its net cost for providing bus service, but not to exceed twenty-five cents per mile for those miles actually and necessarily traveled by school transportation vehicles, and
(2) Fifty per cent of its actual cost for payments to parents for mileage and board and room for public school pupils as provided by law for the previous school fiscal year.
It is clear, that if the local school district pays parents of school children for school transportation costs of such children, the costs are included in the provisons of SDCL 13-31-2.2. The problem arises when payment is made by the local school district to an institution providing transportation for special education students, not to the parents providing such transportation. If the payment is made to the institution, not to a parent, the question arises whether or not SDCL 13-31-2.2 (2) still allows the local school district to include these costs in its "actual cost for payment to parents." The question you ask focuses on the issue of whether or not parents must actually provide special education transportation under SDCL 13-37-8.9 before the local school district can be reimbursed under SDCL 13-31-2.2 (2). Also, you ask whether or not parents can delegate, assign, or waive their rights to reimbursement so that the institution providing such transportation can bill the school district directly, and if this is done, whether the costs of this sort of program are covered by the provisions of SDCL 13-31-2.2 (2).
On the face of the above statutes, it appears to me that if an exceptional child was transported in to the Crippled Children's Hospital and School by the parents the local school district would clearly be entitled to reimbursement according to SDCL 13-31-2.2. If however, the special education institution provided the transportation and the local school district paid the institution for such transportation, it seems to me that SDCL 13-37-2.2 does not literally apply. I am not altogether certain that this is really the result intended by the Legislature in passing these statutes, however, SDCL 13-31-2.2 (2) clearly provides only for reimbursement for “payments to parents.”
Until such time as the Legislature further clarifies the area, it is my opinion that if a parent of an exceptional child co-signs a claim voucher along with the institution claiming reimbursement from the local school district for transportation costs of an exceptional child, the costs of such transportation are included in the provisions of SDCL 13-31-2.2 relating to state financial aid to local schools.
With respect to your third question it is my opinion that direct billing of the local school district by the institution for special education transportation costs is not valid under SDCL 13-31-2.2 apart from a parent or guardian co signing a voucher for such transportation costs. The Division of Elementary and Secondary Education can under SDCL 13-31-2.2 (2) pay transportation costs to parents or to a special education institution made pursuant to vouchers co-signed by parents or guardians and the institution or agency actually providing such transportation.
Respectfully submitted,
WILLIAM J. JANKLOW
ATTORNEY GENERAL
WJJ:DOC:dh
