STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA
OFFICE OF
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

June 19, 1969

Thomas M. Issenhuth
State's Attorney, Lake County
Madison, South Dakota 57042

OFFICIAL OPINION NO. 69-53

Distribution of surplus high school tuition fund

Dear Mr. Issenhuth:

I have your request for an official opinion on the factual situation set out by you as follows:

"Pursuant to SDC 1960 Supp. 15.3306 Lake County had a separate high school tuition fund. The last common school district in said county was dissolved as of July 1, 1968. This fund presently contains a sizeable non-obligated balance in which there will be no further claims. Lake County is now obligated to disburse said funds among the four remaining school districts contained within said county. Also, to be taken into consideration is the fact that in 1963 the county advanced approximately $12,000.00 to one of the school districts from said fund."

You ask the following questions:

"1. Should these non-obligated funds be distributed according to the assessed valuation of each common school district as of June 30, 1962, or should said funds be disbursed according to the 1968 school census?

"2. Should the advance made to one of the school districts in 1963 be taken into consideration in the disbursement of the remaining funds?"

It is our opinion that these non-obligated funds should be distributed according to the assessed valuation of each common school district as of June 30, 1962.

Senate Bill No. 21 enacted by the 1969 Legislature, which contained an emergency clause, went into effect on February 18, 1969 and amended Chapter 52 of the Session Laws of 1968, reads as follows as to pertinent parts:

"On or before September 1, 1968, the county superintendent of schools, or other authorized county official shall notify the county auditor and county treasurer to make a distribution of such surplus to all school districts having land area as of July 1, 1968 which still is or was land area of a common school district as of June 30, 1962 on the ratio of such land areas assessed valuation is to the surplus. The initial distribution of such surplus shall be made by all counties in accordance with the provisions of this paragraph. (Emphasis added.)

"Whenever no common school districts exist in a county or whenever all remaining common school districts are within a superimposed high school district after the initial distribution is made as provided above, the county superintendent of schools, or authorized county official shall determine when there will be no further claims against the county high school tuition fund and the balance thereof shall then be transferred to the county general school fund and distributed to the public school corporations of the county in accordance with the provisions of SDC 15.16 and subsection 11 of SDC 1960 Supp. 15.1008. The distribution shall be accomplished within one year after there are no common school districts existing in a county or all common school districts are within a superimposed high school district." (Emphasis added,)

This is an initial distribution of the surplus funds, as no such distribution has been heretofore made and the intent of the Legislature, in a situation of this type as clearly stated in Senate Bill No. 21, is to make the initial distribution of the surplus according to the assessed valuation of each school district as of June 30, 1962.

In an opinion issued by this office on September 23, 1968 to Senator Norval Gullickson, South Dakota State Legislator, Flandreau, South Dakota, my predecessor stated that the county officials of Lake County could delay the distribution of the surplus until the 1969 Session of the Legislature when that body's intent could be clarified with respect to the initial distribution. The Legislature, by Senate Bill No. 21, did clarify the distribution of these funds and made it very clear that the initial distribution should be on the basis of assessed valuation rather than on the basis of the school census. DISTRIBUTION MUST BE BEFORE JULY 1, 1969.

The advance made to one of the school districts in 1963 must be taken into consideration in the disbursement of the remaining funds. In an Attorney General's opinion to Mr. John C. Penne, State Comptroller, State Department of Audits and Accounts, Pierre, South Dakota, dated August 9, 1965, AGR 1965-66 p. 159, the Attorney General expressed the opinion that money raised for a specific purpose may not be diverted to another purpose until the object for which the funds were raised and collected have been accomplished, and the only object the special county high school tuition fund can be used for is the payment of high school tuition. See 1959-60 AGR 234.

It is my opinion that the undistributed high school tuition fund in Lake County has a claim against the school district, you refer to, in the amount of $12,000.

Respectfully submitted,

Gordon Mydland
Attorney General