Choal v. Lyman Independent Sch. Dist. No. 12 Bd. of Ed.

214 N.W.2d 3, 87 S.D. 682, 1974 S.D. LEXIS 165

• Court: South Dakota Supreme Court
• Decided: January 10, 1974
• Docket: 11242-rev-JMD
• Status: Published

Opinions

DOYLE, Justice.

This appeal involves the question of whether the action taken by the Board of Education for the Lyman Independent School District No. 12, by assigning the seventh and eighth grade students of Reliance to the Kennebec Junior High School, amounts to a closing of the Reliance Elementary School.

The present Lyman Independent School District No. 12 is the result of the reorganization of four former independent school districts, Vivian, Presho, Kennebec and Reliance. The district operates one high school at Presho, a junior high at Kennebec and four elementary schools, one at each of the above-mentioned towns. The sixth, seventh and eighth grade students from Kennebec and Presho and the seventh and eighth grade students from Vivian are assigned to the junior high school in Kennebec.

The controversy arose in June 1972, when the appellant at a regular school board meeting, upon motion, assigned the seventh and eighth grade students of Reliance to the Kennebec Junior High School.¹ This assignment was against the wishes and without the approval of the parents and resident voters, the respondents herein. The respondents brought action and the circuit court ruled that the appellant was required by SDCL 13-6-9 to operate grades one through eight at Reliance until such time the resident voters voted to terminate the operation of the elementary school.

The respondents contend the action taken by the appellant constituted a closing of the elementary school without the requisite approval of the voters pursuant to SDCL 13-6-9. SDCL 13-6-9 in relevant part provides:

“The school board of an independent school district shall continue to operate any elementary school in operation as of December 5, 1968 until such time as only the resident voters of the former common district area which operated said elementary school shall vote to cease operating said school or schools.”²

The respondents argue that the legislature intended the term “elementary school” to mean the first eight grades. Therefore, the appellant has in effect closed the Reliance Elementary School by its failure to maintain all eight grades there.

Although we find no explicit definition regarding the number of grades necessary to constitute an elementary school, we cannot accept the respondents’ view that eight grades are necessary. It is our opinion that the appellant had the power to make the assignment under SDCL 13-28-15. SDCL 13-28-15 provides:

“Every school board shall have the power and duty to make assignment and distribution, of all elementary students with school residence within the district. The board shall take into consideration in assigning and distributing students its duty to provide equal educational facilities, the wishes of the patrons, and the best interests of the students in the district.”

The record is clear that the Reliance school is presently open and operating with grades one through six. This being the case, we cannot agree with the trial court’s conclusion that the school had been closed by the action taken by the appellant.

Reversed.

RIEGELMEIER, C. J., and WOLLMAN and DUNN, JJ., concur. WINANS, J., dissents.

1 . According to the record seven students are involved in the assignment.

2 . Ch. 85, § 8, S.L.1973 amended the statute and substituted: “former common school district area” for “area” in the first sentence, and made other changes not pertinent herein.