Board of Ed. In and For Essex Independent School Dist., Page County v. Board of Ed. In and For Montgomery County

• Decision Date: 02 August 1960
• Docket Number: No. 50028,50028
• Citation: 104 N.W.2d 590,251 Iowa 1085
• Parties: BOARD OF EDUCATION IN AND FOR ESSEX INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, PAGE COUNTY, Iowa, Board of Education in and for Coburg Consolidated School District, Montgomery County, Iowa (Intervenors-Appellees), Plaintiff-Appellants, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION IN AND FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Iowa, et al. (Appellants), Defendant-Appellees, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION IN AND FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Iowa, and Board of Education in and for Page County, Iowa, acting as a single board in accordance with Section 275.16 of the 1958 Code of Iowa, Appellee, v. BOARD OF EDUCATION IN AND FOR PAGE COUNTY, Iowa, Board of Education of Pierce Township School District, Page County, Iowa, et al., County Board and Boards of Education of School Districts affected or portions thereof.
• Court: Iowa Supreme Court

Page 590

104 N.W.2d 590

251 Iowa 1085

BOARD OF EDUCATION IN AND FOR ESSEX INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT, PAGE COUNTY, Iowa, Board of Education in and for Coburg Consolidated School District, Montgomery County, Iowa (Intervenors-Appellees), Plaintiff-Appellants, v.BOARD OF EDUCATION IN AND FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Iowa, et al. (Appellants), Defendant-Appellees, v.BOARD OF EDUCATION IN AND FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, Iowa, and Board of Education in and for Page County, Iowa, acting as a single board in accordance with Section 275.16 of the 1958 Code of Iowa, Appellee, v.BOARD OF EDUCATION IN AND FOR PAGE COUNTY, Iowa, Board of Education of Pierce Township School District, Page County, Iowa, et al., County Board and Boards of Education of School Districts affected or portions thereof.

No. 50028.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

Aug. 2, 1960.

John S. Redd, Sidney, for appellants.

John F. Boeye, County Atty., Red Oak, for Board of Education in and for Montgomery Couty, Iowa.

Richard Davidson, County Atty., Clarinda, for Board of Education in and for Page County, Iowa.

GARRETT, Justice.

On May 12, 1958 there was filed in the office of the Page County Superintendent, pursuant to Section 275.12,Code 1958, I.C.A., a petition for the reorganization of certain districts in Page and Montgomery Counties into the Coburg-Essex Community School District.The petition proposed to unite twenty-one existing districts containing over 120 sections of land with an estimated valuation of $6,600,000 and including 550 pupils.The petition itself did not bear the signatures required by statute but there were 1079 signatures on signature sheets filed with the petition.More than 20% of the eligible voters in each affected district signed such sheets.Of the 1,367 qualified voters in the area seventy-nine percent signed.The required signatures were not attached to the petition but were on papers at the top of which was printed 'Signatures for Proposed Coburg-Essex Community School' and below were four ruled columns headed respectively with the words, Date, Name, Address and District.

On June 21, 1958 on proper notice a hearing was held before the joint boards of Page and Montgomery counties acting as a single board.After hearing the evidence and arguments the joint board ruled upon the objections and by a vote of seven to three approved the proposal as modified and fixed the boundaries.An appeal to the State Department of Public Instruction was taken by the Montgomery County Board, board of Education of the Red Oak Independent School District, Board of Education of the Shenandoah Independent School District, Board of Education of the Clarinda Independent School District and four of the districts involved.The appeal was properly dismissed as to the Red Oak, Shenandoah and Clarinda districts on the ground they were not aggrieved parties.

The record states appellants(on appeal to the State Board) sent notice by mail to the twenty-one school districts affected.Said notice concluding 'You will be notified by the State Superintendent of Public Instruction of the exact time and place of hearing on said appeal.'The State Superintendent set the hearing for August 20, 1958 and caused notice of the appeal and the hearing thereon to be served only upon the appellant boards and the two county boards.It was not served upon the fifteen other districts affected.Following the hearing, the facts being stipulated, the decision of the State Superintendent was filed and approved by the State Board of Public Instruction on August 29, 1958.We quote therefrom: 'Issue: Was the procedure followed legal and was there adequate joint planning?* * * The record indicates that the petition for the proposed district was not attached to the paper for the petitioners to sign.There appears to be some indication they did not know what they signed.* * * There has been inadequate joint planning and insufficient consideration for the welfare of the adjoining districts.It is also our opinion there has been insufficient consideration for the welfare of the children of the district and adjacent districts.'The decision of the joint board of Page and Montgomery counties was ordered vacated.

From this decision due and timely appeal to the district court of Page County was taken by the Board of Education of the Essex Independent School District and the Board of Education of the Coburg Consolidated School District.An interlocutory hearing on points of law resulted in a ruling by the court'that it has jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties that have filed pleadings herein, as provided in Chapt. 275 of the 1958 Code of Iowa, Sections 275.8,275.12and275.16[I.C.A.], as hereinabove mentioned.'

On final hearing, the evidence being stipulated, the trial court held the petition on which the boards of education of Page and Montgomery counties, acting as a joint board, based their action in establishing the Coburg-Essex Community School District'was not signed by eligible voters within the meaning of Sections 275.12' and in its decision stated, 'The court further concludes that at the time of the hearing before the joint boards of education they did not have before them a valid petition, and consequently had no jurisdiction to proceed with the establishment of the district.'The court did not decide the question of jurisdiction of the State Board of Public Instruction to pass upon the issues raised by the failure of the State Superintendent and State Board of Public Instruction to give a ten day notice in writing to all county boards and school districts affected.

From judgment sustaining the action of the State Board vacating the decision of the joint board establishing the Coburg-Essex Community School District and the ruling on their motion for a new trialplaintiffs have appealed.

I.The first question to be considered is whether the State Superintendent and State Board of Public Instruction had jurisdiction of the necessary parties and the subject matter of the proceedings.Upon establishment by the joint board of the Coburg-Essex Community School District of the Board of Education of Montgomery County and four interested districts, feeling assrieved, appealed to the State Board of Public Instruction pursuant to Sections 275.8and275.16.The latter section provides in part: 'In case a controversy arises from such meeting, the county board or boards or any school district aggrieved may bring the controversy to the state department of pubilc instruction, as provided in section 275.8, within twenty days from the publication of this order, and if said controversy is taken to the state department of public instruction, a tenday notice in writing shall be given to all county boards and school districts affected or portions thereof.'Such notice was given the Board of Education of Montgomery County, the Board of Education of Page County and four of the twenty-one districts involved, but it was not given to fifteen of the affected districts and they did not appear.The state board heard and determined the controversy without complying with the quoted provisions of the statute, which must be construed to mean that all affected districts shall be given ten days' notice in writing of the time and place of the hearing by the state department.Without such notice they are not bound unless they have appeared...