Board of Educ. of County of Kanawha v. West Virginia Bd. of Educ.
| Citation | 399 S.E.2d 31,184 W.Va. 1 |
| Decision Date | 11 October 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 19736,19736 |
| Court | Supreme Court of West Virginia |
| Parties | , 64 Ed. Law Rep. 932 The BOARD OF EDUCATION OF COUNTY OF KANAWHA v. The WEST VIRGINIA BOARD OF EDUCATION. STATE of West Virginia ex rel. Thornton COOPER v. Henry R. MAROCKIE; the West Virginia State Board of Education; and the Board of Education of the County of Kanawha and Douglas Skaff, Individually, and on Behalf of Concerned Citizens and Parents of the South Charleston Junior High School Attendance Area. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. County boards of education do not have unlimited power to make the final decisions with respect to school closings and consolidations. The plain language of W.Va.Code, 18-5-13 (1990) and W.Va.Code, 18-5-13a reflects that such decisions may be rejected where they fail to comply with statutory provisions or West Virginia Board of Education regulations.
2. Syllabus Point 2, in part, West Virginia Bd. of Educ. v. Hechler, 451 W.Va. 180, 376 S.E.2d 839 (1988).
3. "The determination of the educational policies of the public schools of the State is vested in The West Virginia Board of Education, and, unless unreasonable or arbitrary, its actions relating to such policies will not be controlled by the courts." Syllabus Point 1, Detch v. Board of Educ., 145 W.Va. 722, 117 S.E.2d 138 (1960).
4. Where the West Virginia Board of Education rejects, in whole or in part, a county board of education's school closure or consolidation plan, it is required to state its reasons for doing so. The State Board need not make detailed findings of fact or conclusions of law, but must give some reason for its action so as to enable a reviewing court to determine if it has abused its discretion.
Basil R. Legg, Jr., Director of Legal Services, Charleston, for The WV Bd. of Educ. Henry R. Marockie.
Deborah L. McHenry, J. Michael Ranson, Ranson, Ranson & McHenry, Charleston, for Douglas Skaff and Concerned Citizens.
Greg Bailey, William Courtney, Charleston, for Bd. of Educ. of County of Kanawha.
Thornton Cooper, South Charleston, for Thornton Cooper.
This is an appeal from a final order in two cases that were consolidated for hearing in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County. The central issue is whether the West Virginia Board of Education (State Board) is empowered to approve or disapprove a school consolidation and school closure plan adopted by a county board of education under W.Va.Code, 18-5-13a. We conclude that the State Board has such authority, and we reverse the judgment of the circuit court and remand the case for further proceedings. 1
The underlying facts need not be discussed in great detail. On May 2, 1990, the Board of Education of Kanawha County (County Board) approved that portion of a school consolidation plan which proposed closing South Charleston Junior High School (SCJHS). On May 24, 1990, the State Board considered and rejected a motion to approve the proposed closure.
On June 27, 1990, appellee Thornton Cooper, a taxpayer and resident of the City of South Charleston, instituted a proceeding in prohibition and mandamus in the Circuit Court of Kanawha County against the County Board, the State Board, and Henry R. Marockie, the State Superintendent of Schools. On June 28, 1990, the County Board filed an action for declaratory and injunctive relief against the State Board. Both suits challenged the State Board's authority to approve or disapprove a county board's school closure plan. The two cases were consolidated and heard on July 23, 1990. On August 2, 1990, a motion to intervene was granted to appellant Douglas Skaff, individually and on behalf of Concerned Citizens and Parents of the South Charleston Junior High School Attendance Area.
By order dated August 6, 1990, the circuit court concluded that under W.Va.Code, 18-5-13a, the exclusive authority to close and to consolidate schools was vested in county boards of education and that the State Board had no constitutional or legislative authority to disapprove or overrule such decisions. As a subsidiary point, the circuit court concluded that the State Board's decision not to approve the closure of SCJHS was arbitrary and capricious. The circuit court permanently enjoined the State Board from taking any action to obstruct or otherwise impede the County Board from closing SCJHS. The State Board appealed this order.
We find that the circuit court erred in its legal analysis. We have recognized that under W.Va.Code, 18-5-13, 2 "the county boards of education have the authority to close or consolidate county schools, and a decision in that regard is a matter within the sound discretion of the [county] board of education." State ex rel. Jones v. Board of Educ., 178 W.Va. 378, 380, 359 S.E.2d 606, 608 (1987). See Haynes v. Board of Educ., 181 W.Va. 435, 383 S.E.2d 67 (1989). W.Va.Code, 18-5-13, also states, however, that the county board's authority is "subject to the provisions of this chapter and the rules and regulations of the state board." (Emphasis added). In addition, W.Va.Code, 18-5-13a, which requires county boards to fulfill certain procedural steps prior to a final decision on school closings or consolidations, 3 provides: "Any such proposal to close or consolidate any school by any county board of education shall be further subject to any current rules and regulations of the state board of education relating to school closing or consolidation...." 4
Clearly, the county boards of education do not have unlimited power to make the final decisions with respect to school closings and consolidations. The plain language of W.Va.Code, 18-5-13 and W.Va.Code, 18-5-13a reflects that such decisions may be rejected where they fail to comply with statutory provisions or State Board regulations.
The State Board need not rely entirely on statutory authority, however. Article XII, Section 2 of the West Virginia Constitution provides, in pertinent part: "The general supervision of the free schools of the State shall be vested in the West Virginia board of education which shall perform such duties as may be prescribed by law." Article XII, Section 1 of the Constitution provides: "The legislature shall provide, by general law, for a thorough and efficient system of free schools."
In Bailey v. Truby, 174 W.Va. 8, 321 S.E.2d 302 (1984), a county board of education challenged the validity of State Board rules setting the eligibility requirements for student participation in nonacademic extracurricular activities. The county board asserted that W.Va.Code, 18-2-25 which granted county boards "the control, supervision and regulation" of such activities, 5 delegated the power to promulgate such rules exclusively to the county boards. We concluded that the above-cited constitutional provisions charged the State Board with "a duty to ensure that the constitutionally mandated educational goals of quality and equality are achieved." 174 W.Va. at 16, 321 S.E.2d at 310. We also concluded that the State Board's authority to act in furtherance of this constitutional obligation overrode any legislative grant of authority to the county boards:
174 W.Va. at 18, 321 S.E.2d at 312.
In Pauley v. Bailey, 174 W.Va. 167, 324 S.E.2d 128 (1984), we addressed certain issues arising from the Master Plan for Public Education developed as a result of this Court's decision in Pauley v. Kelly, 162 W.Va. 672, 255 S.E.2d 859 (1979). 6 In Pauley v. Bailey, supra, we noted that in addition to its general supervisory powers under the Constitution, the State Board has broad rule-making powers under W.Va.Code, 18-2-5 (1983). 7 In Syllabus Point 1, in part, we stated:
Most recently, in West Virginia Board of Education v. Hechler, 180 W.Va. 451, 376 S.E.2d 839 (1988), the State Board challenged a legislative limitation on its rule-making authority in the form of a statute requiring the State Board to submit its rules and regulations to a legislative oversight commission for approval. We recognized that by virtue of its constitutional grant of general supervisory powers, the State Board enjoys a special standing in relation to other administrative agencies. We held, in Syllabus Point 2, in part:
Clearly, then, the State Board is empowered to take whatever steps are necessary to fulfill its obligation to achieve "the constitutionally mandated educational goals of quality and equality...." Bailey v. Truby, 174 W.Va. at 16, 321 S.E.2d at 310. The closing or consolidation...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State ex rel. West Virginia Bd. of Educ. v. Perry
...with the power of the WVBE to approve, alter, or reject a local school board's plan is Board of Education of Kanawha County v. West Virginia Board of Education, 184 W.Va. 1, 399 S.E.2d 31 (1990). In that case, the Kanawha County Board of Education (KCBE) decided to close a junior high schoo......
-
W. Va. Bd. of Educ. v. Bd. of Educ. of the Cnty. of Nicholas, 17-0767
...its obligation to achieve ‘the constitutionally mandated educational goals of quality and equality[.]’ " Kanawha County Board, 184 W.Va. at 5, 399 S.E.2d at 35 (1990) (quoting Bailey, 174 W.Va. at 16, 321 S.E.2d at 310 ) (emphasis added).2. Statutory Authority of WVBOE Relative to Consolida......
-
McComas v. Board of Educ. of Fayette County
...mandamus is appropriate when a board oversteps, or fails to meet, its clear legal duties. See generally Board of Educ. v. West Virginia Bd. of Educ., 184 W.Va. 1, 399 S.E.2d 31 (1990). As we stated in Syllabus Point 1 of Pell v. Board of Education of Monroe County, 188 W.Va. 718, 426 S.E.2d......
-
W. Va. Bd. of Educ. & Steven L. Paine v. Bd. of Educ. of the Cnty. of Nicholas, 17-0767
...its obligation to achieve 'the constitutionally mandated educational goals of quality and equality[.]'" Kanawha County Board, 184 W.Va. at 5, 399 S.E.2d at 35 (1990) (quoting Bailey, 174 W.Va. at 16, 321 S.E.2d at 310) (emphasis added). 2. Statutory Authority of WVBOE Relative to Consolidat......