Ingram v. Payton
Decision Date | 08 September 1966 |
Docket Number | No. 23557,23557 |
Citation | 150 S.E.2d 825,222 Ga. 503 |
Parties | John F. INGRAM, Jr., et al. v. Donald E. PAYTON, et al. |
Court | Georgia Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
1. For reasons stated in the opinion, the proviso clause of Section 22(B), Subparagraph (1) of the 'Minimum Foundation Program of Education Act' (Ga.L.1964, pp. 3-49; Code Ann. § 32-622) providing 'that the equalized adjusted school property tax digest of each independent school system located within a county shall be calculated on the basis of 133 1/3 per cent of the county equalized adjusted school property tax digest of all property located within the territory of the independent school system' is not unconstitutional.
2. The said proviso clause of Section 22(B) Subparagraph (1) of the 1964 'Minimum Foundation Program of Education Act' applies to independent school systems whether they lie entirely within a single county or extend across county lines, and such application does not result in discrimination and disparity of fiscal treatment among the independent school systems nor is there any inequality created thereby.
Thomas O. Davis, Decatur, for appellants.
Arthur K. Bolton, Atty. Gen., Alfred L. Evans, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Atlanta, Murphey Candler, Jr., Decatur, for appellees.
A. C. Latimer, J. Lee Perry, Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, James P. Groton, Clay C. Long, Atlanta, for parties at interest, not parties to record.
In 1964 the Georgia General Assembly enacted a law entitled 'Minimum Foundation Program of Education Act' (Ga.L.1964, pp. 3-49). Section 2 of this Act expressed the legislative intent. 'The General Assembly of Georgia, recognizing the importance and extreme necessity of providing improved educational opportunity for all Georgians-children, youth, and adults; of establishing equality of educational opportunity for Georgia's children and youth regardless of where they may live or what their station in life may be; of establishing and maintaining minimum standards for public schools so that every Georgia child and youth can attend an accredited public school; of improving the quality of education through continued development and improvement of balanced programs designed to provide academic and occupational preparation of Georgia's children and youth for adult life in this age; of developing a public school program that will attract, hold and fully utilize competent professional personnel in the public school systems of this State; of establishing and maintaining adequate planning, research and experimentation programs so as to assure continued future improvement of public school education in Georgia; of providing for better efficiency in the operation of public schools, elimination of waste, and better utilization of existing school services and facilities; of the need to finance adequately the improvement of Georgia's public education program and facilities; of the need to assure Georgia's children and youth of receiving an improved minimum level of education; and of the need for providing a method whereby all Georgians shall pay their fair share of the cost of such program, and recognizing fully its responsibility to provide a means whereby the foregoing needs might more readily be met, does hereby establish a State Minimum Foundation Program for the education of Georgia's children and youth.'
Section 6 provides that the several county, independent and area public school systems in Georgia shall be local units of school administration. Section 3 provides that the State Board of Education shall adopt rules and regulations necessary for carrying out the provisions of the law, and Section 4 vests in the State Superintendent of Schools the responsibility of administering the law.
The Act provides two separate methods or procedures to calculate the financial ability of local units of school administration to raise funds in support of the local unit's minimum foundation program for education. One method applies to each independent school system located within a county, and the other method or procedure applies to all other local units of school administration. Section 22(B) of the Act, which provides for these procedures, is as follows: 'The financial ability of each local unit of administration to raise funds in support of the local unit's minimum foundation program of education for the 1965-66 school year, commencing on July 1, 1965, and for each year thereafter shall be calculated as follows:
'(3) The sum of the equalized adjusted school property tax digest of each county in the State, and of each independent school system located within the several counties in the State, and the sum of the equalized adjusted school property tax digest for the State as a whole, shall be furnished to the State Board of Education by the State Auditor on or before February 1 of 1965 and each year thereafter.'
On February 15, 1966, John F. Ingram, Jr. and others, as members of the City of Decatur Board of Education, and Carl G. Renfroe, Superintendent of the City of...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
McDaniel v. Thomas
...the traditional lines of the rational basis test." Thompson v. Engelking, supra 96 Idaho at 803, 537 P.2d 635. See Ingram v. Payton, 222 Ga. 503, 150 S.E.2d 825 (1966). We reach this conclusion for several First, "we stand on familiar ground when we continue to acknowledge that the Justices......
-
Schrenko v. DeKalb County School Dist.
...Board of Pub. Educ. v. State of Georgia, No. CV 490-101, slip op. at 6. 18. See 1964 Ga. Laws at 3-4, 6-7; see also Ingram v. Payton, 222 Ga. 503, 150 S.E.2d 825 (1966) (upholding 1964 Act's differential treatment of independent school systems and county school systems in determining the fi......
-
Battle v. Cherry, Civ. A. No. 15228.
...validity of the challenged provision and its applicability to the Atlanta and Decatur independent school districts. Ingram v. Payton, 222 Ga. 503, 150 S.E. 2d 825 (1966); Rice v. Cook, 222 Ga. 499, 150 S.E.2d 822 (1966). Instead of seeking review in the United States Supreme Court, plaintif......
-
Atlanta Independent School System v. Lane
...here. Compare Board of Public Ed. & Orphanage For Bibb County v. Zimmerman, 231 Ga. 562, 203 S.E.2d 178 (1974); Ingram v. Payton, 222 Ga. 503, 150 S.E.2d 825 (1966). Art. VIII, Sec. VI, Par. I(a) limits the System to ad valorem taxes levied in accordance therewith as its exclusive local tax......