Attorney General Headshot

Attorney General Marty Jackley

Attorney General Seal

OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 71-06, Minor boundary change-adjustment of assets and liabilities discretionary with the County Board of Education.

STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA
OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

February 15, 1971

Keith A. Tidball

States Attorney, Hughes County
Pierre, South Dakota 57501

OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 71-6

Minor boundary change-adjustment of assets and liabilities discretionary with the County Board of Education.

Dear Mr. Tidball:

You have requested an official opinion on the following factual situation:

X school district transferred to Y school district by minor boundary change a certain area of land, such transfer occurred after taxes had been spread for the year of transfer.

You have asked the following specific question:

Is Y school district entitled to a remuneration from X for taxes spread, levied and collected on the above mentioned area of land?

SDCL 13-6-85 reads as follows:

A minor boundary change, affecting not more than two per cent of the assessed valuation of the school district from which the area is to be taken, may be made upon an application for a boundary change made to the county board of education in the form of a petitition signed by over fifty per cent of the e1ectcJts residing in the area to be transferred by such boundary change.

SDCL 13-6-86 provides for a major boundary change which is a boundary change with an assessed valuation greater than that set forth in SDCL 13-6-85.

SDCL 13-6-88 reads as follows:

When a boundary change is made under the provisions of Section 13-6-86, the county board of education shall make an adjustment of assets and liabilities as may be required by law.

You will note that SDCL 13-6-88 only requires an adjustment of assets and liabilities when there is a boundary change made under the provisions of SDCL 13-6-86, therefore, it is my opinion that it is not necessary to make an adjustment of assets and liabilities when a minor boundary change is made under the provisions of SDCL 13-6-85.

My predecessor held in 1967-68 AGR 162 and 1967-68 AGR 244 that it would be discretionary with the county board of education on the question of whether or not they wished to make an adjustment of assets and liabilities for a minor boundary change. I concur in these opinions, and it is my opinion that it may still be discretionary with the county board of education when a minor boundary change is made under SDCL 13-6-85.

In answer to your specific question, it is my opinion that it is discretionary with the county board of education as to whether or not they wish to make an adjustment of the assets and liabilities of the land areas involved in a minor boundary change and the taxes could then be a part of this adjustment.

Respectfully submitted,

Gordon Mydland
Attorney General