Okanogan County School Dist. of State of Wash. No. 400 v. Andrews, 36038

• Decision Date: 28 June 1961
• Docket Number: No. 36038,36038
• Citation: 58 Wn.2d 371,363 P.2d 129
• Parties: OKANOGAN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON NO. 400, a public corporation, Respondent, v. Lloyd J. ANDREWS, Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Washington, and State Board of Education of the State of Washington, Appellants.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

Page 371

58 Wn.2d 371

363 P.2d 129

OKANOGAN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON NO. 400, a public corporation, Respondent, v. Lloyd J. ANDREWS, Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Washington, and State Board of Education of the State of Washington, Appellants.

No. 36038.

Supreme Court of Washington, Department 2.

June 28, 1961.

John J. O'Connell, Atty. Gen., Robert J. Doran, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellants.

Philip W. Richardson, Olympia, and Joseph P. Delay, Spokane, for respondent.

DONWORTH, Judge.

Okanogan county school district No. 400 seeks (and has sought since 1955) standard accreditation for Molson high school. The state board of education has, since 1955, denied such accreditation. Probationary accreditation was granted for the school year 1955-56, but since that time Molson has operated as a non-accredited high school. In 1960, as in previous years, the school district (respondent) applied to the state board of education (appellant) for accreditation. Accreditation was again denied and respondent school district requested a hearing before appellant board. A hearing was held on June 20, 1960, and the following day respondent school district's application for accreditation was denied.

On July 29, 1960, respondent school district applied for a writ of certiorari to the superior court of Thurston county, seeking review of appellant board's order denying accreditation. The writ was promptly issued by the court. After considering the record of the proceedings before appellant board, along with the briefs and oral arguments of counsel, the court reversed appellant board's order denying accreditation. As a result, on March 13, 1961, the superior court directed appellant board to grant Molson high school

'* * * standard accreditation for the school year 1960-61 and to accord to said District and high school all of their rights attendant upon its being declared and accorded standard accreditation under the laws of the State of Washington as a fully accredited public high school and high school district; * * *.'

Throughout the proceedings, respondent school district contended that its high school complied with the rules promulgated by appellant board concerning accreditation. The rule of appellant board reads as follows:

'Standard Accreditation: A school which meets all minimum standards shall be granted standard accreditation. High schools must have a minimum of 36 students in average daily attendance for accreditation. High schools having less than 36 A.D.A. may receive consideration for accreditation provided (a) that the county committee on school district organization, after study of all factors involved, submits recommendations to the Board, following which the Board shall determine that the high school is geographically remote and necessary; and (b) that the quality of the high school program meets established standards of the State Board of Education.

'Schools with less than 36 A.D.A. must apply annually for accreditation.'

Pertinent portions of appellant state board's findings and recommendations regarding Molson high school are set forth below. 'Molson High School

'Molson School District No. 400, Okanogan County

'Present Accreditation: None

'Enrollment: ..... 29

* * *

* * *

'School Plant:

'* * * Although some effort has been made to improve the physical facilities, there is really very little that could be done to improve the school plant. The building is very old, and there is evidence of sagging in many of the main supports; cracks in walls, slanting door frames and floors. * * * The gymnasium is one of the poorest high school gymnasiums in the state; the dressing room is crowded and difficult to keep clean and sanitary. * * *

'Program and Instruction:

'* * * Science equipment and facilities are inadequate, and need improvement. * * *

'Geographical Location:

'The County Organization Committee in its report in 1956 to the State Board of Education recommended ultimate consolidation with Oroville, and no other action has been taken by this committee since that date. During the present school year, a member of the State School District Organization staff made two visitations to Molson to re-examine the geographical location in regard to the determination of remoteness. One visit was made in January, the other in May. The School District Organization staff does not recommend that Molson High School be regarded as a necessary center. It was noted that an Oroville school bus travels daily over most of the upper and lower canyon roads and only rarely has been unable to make the trip in the past several years. The Molson District is a mountainous area and some of the school bus routes could be difficult in bad weather. However, this situation could be alleviated through employment of several small vehicles to serve the area that is adjacent to the oiled highways. The larger buses could then operate on the better roads.

'Conclusion:

'* * * It has been recognized for several years that the facilities are old and worn out, and very little has been done in recent years to improve these facilities. These conditions continue to affect the program and the hiring and retention of a good staff necessary to carry out an adequate program. The County Committee on School District Organization has not recommended that Molson High School be recognized as geographically remote, and the State School District Organization staff does not consider this district to be a remote and necessary high school center.

'Pecommendation:

'Since the facilities and program are considered inadequate, and since the average daily attendance is less than 36, and the high school is not judged to be remote and necessary, it is recommended that accreditation not be granted to Molson High School for the school year 1960-61.'

Essentially, this case raises two questions: (1) Did the superior court have jurisdiction to review by certiorari the action of appellant board in denying accreditation to Molson high school, and (2) if the court did have jurisdiction, to what extent, if any, may the court substitute its own judgment for that of the board?

The alleged jurisdictional basis for this action is found in RCW 7.16.040, which provides that:

'A writ of review shall be granted by any court, except a police or justice court, when an inferior tribunal, board or officer, exercising judicial functions, has exceeded the jurisdiction of such tribunal, board or officer, or one acting illegally, or to correct any erroneous or void proceeding, or a proceeding not according to the course of the common law,...