Untitled California Attorney General Opinion

California Attorney General Reports·Decided May 18, 1988·No. 88-302·Published

Opinion

TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

State of California

JOHN K. VAN DE KAMP

Attorney General

---------------------------------------------------------------- :

OPINION : No. 88-302

:

of : May 18, 1988

:

JOHN K. VAN DE KAMP :

Attorney General :

:

CLAYTON P. ROCHE :

Deputy Attorney General :

----------------------------------------------------------------

THE STATE ALLOCATION BOARD has requested the opinion of

this office on the following question:

May a school district which sells or leases real property

pursuant to section 39360 of the Education Code transfer interest

earned on the proceeds received therefrom to the school district's

general fund without the approval of the State Allocation Board?

CONCLUSION

A school district which sells or leases real property

pursuant to section 39360 of the Education Code may not transfer

interest earned on the proceeds received therefrom to the school

district's general fund without the approval of the State

Allocation Board.

ANALYSIS

Section 39360 et seq. of the Education Code governs the

sale or lease of surplus real property of school districts.

Section 39360 provides that a "school district may sell any real

property belonging to the school district or may lease . . . [such]

real property . . . which is not or will not be needed by the

district for school classroom buildings at the time of delivery of

title or possession. . . ."

Section 39363 of the Education Code places certain

restrictions on the use of the proceeds received from any such sale

or lease of real property. That section provides generally that

the funds "derived from the sale" and the "proceeds from a lease"

shall be used for certain capital outlay and maintenance costs, or

reserves therefor. The section, however, provides an exception and

permits "the proceeds" from the sale or lease to be deposited in

the district's general fund for any general fund purpose where the

district's governing board and the State Allocation Board find no

anticipated need for capital outlay or major deferred maintenance

projects for a five-year period of time.1

The question presented for resolution herein involves

interest which may be earned on the proceeds of the sale or lease.

It is whether the interest may be transferred to the district's

general fund for any general fund purpose without the concurrence

of the State Allocation Board. Stated otherwise, is the interest

earned on the proceeds of the sale or lease subject to the same

restrictions as are the proceeds of the sale or lease themselves

set forth in section 39363 of the Education Code? We conclude that

it is.

1 Section 39363 provides in full:

"The funds derived from the sale of surplus property

shall be used for capital outlay or for costs of

maintenance of school district property that the

governing board of the school district determines will

not recur within a five-year period. Proceeds from a

lease of school district property with an option to

purchase may be deposited into a restricted fund for the

routine repair of district facilities, as defined by the

State Allocation Board, for up to a five-year period. In

addition, the proceeds may be deposited in the general

fund of the district for any general fund purpose if the

school district governing board and the State Allocation

Board have determined that the district has no

anticipated need for additional sites or building

construction for the five-year period following such sale

or lease, and the district has no major deferred

maintenance requirements.

"The proceeds may also be deposited into a special

reserve fund for capital outlay, for costs of maintenance

of school district property that the governing board

determines will not recur within a five-year period, or

for the future maintenance and renovation of school sites

if the district governing board and the State Allocation

Board have determined that the district has no

anticipated need for school sites or building

construction or major deferred maintenance projects for

a five-year period following the sale or lease. Proceeds

deposited in the special reserve fund shall not be

available for general operating expenses as provided in

Section 42842."

2. 88-302

Initially, we examine the language of section 39363.

(Moyer v. Workmen's Comp. Appeals Board (1973) 10 Cal.3d 222, 230.)

The section first speaks in terms of the "funds derived from the

sale of surplus property." It then speaks of the "proceeds from

a lease of school property." Finally it lumps both of these

together as "the proceeds" for purpose of the restrictions as to

use. Giving the key words "derived" and "proceeds" their usual and

customary meaning, we note that "derived" is defined in Webster's

Third New International Dictionary (1961) as:

"1. formed or developed out of something else:

DERIVATIVE: . . . ." (Id. at p. 608)

and "proceeds" is defined as:

"1a: what is produced by or derived from something

(as a sale, investment, levy, business) by way of total

revenue: the total amount brought in: . . . ." (Id. at

p. 1807.)

These definitions speak of that which is formed,

developed out of or produced by something else which we will call

the source. However, they provide little insight whether the

source must be immediate or includes more remote sources as well.

The definition of "derivative" is helpful on this point. It stated

in part:

". . .2: made up of or marked by elements or

qualities derived from something else (as from an

ultimate source). . . ." (Id. at p. 608.)

Use of the word "ultimate" in this definition indicates

that proceeds are "derived" from more remote as well as immediate

sources. We therefore construe the words "derived" and "proceeds"

in section 39363 to include the interest earned upon the proceeds

of the sale or lease as well as such proceeds themselves.

However, we need not rely solely on the words of the

statute. We can rely upon the common law to support this

interpretation of section 39363 of the Education Code. It is the

settled common law rule that "interest is an accretion or increment

to the principal fund earning it, and unless lawfully separated

therefrom becomes a part thereof." (Pomona City School District v.

Payne (1935) 9 Cal.App.2d 510, 516. See also, e.g., Board of Law

Library Trustees v. Lowery (1945) 67 Cal.App.2d 480, 482; 71

Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. (1988) (Op. No. 87-204, issued 3/9/88); 65

Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 588 (1982); 59 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 43, 45-46

(1976); 49 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 59, 61 (1967); 44 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen.

58, 60 (1964); 38 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 207, 210 (1961).) [T]he common

law of England is, except where modified by Constitution or statute

the rule of decision in this state." (Philpott v. Superior Court

(1934) 1 Cal.2d 512, 515, emphasis added; Civ. Code, § 22.2.) No

3. 88-302

specific legislation has abrogated the common law rule with respect

to section 39363 of the Education Code and the application of

interest. From this it necessarily follows that interest on the

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion, (Cal. 1988).

Untitled California Attorney General Opinion (Untitled California Attorney General Opinion) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Pomona City School District v. Payne
50 P.2d 822 (California Court of Appeal, 1935)
Ostly v. Saper
305 P.2d 946 (California Court of Appeal, 1957)
Metropolitan Water District v. Adams
197 P.2d 543 (California Supreme Court, 1948)
Safer v. Superior Court
540 P.2d 14 (California Supreme Court, 1975)
Moyer v. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board
514 P.2d 1224 (California Supreme Court, 1973)
Krater v. City of Los Angeles
130 Cal. App. 3d 839 (California Court of Appeal, 1982)
Fresno Fire Fighters v. Jernagan
177 Cal. App. 3d 403 (California Court of Appeal, 1986)
Redevelopment Agency v. Goodman
53 Cal. App. 3d 424 (California Court of Appeal, 1975)
Philpott v. Superior Court
36 P.2d 635 (California Supreme Court, 1934)
Board of Law Library Trustees v. Lowery
154 P.2d 719 (California Court of Appeal, 1945)
Kennedy v. Miller
32 P. 558 (California Supreme Court, 1893)