Opinion
June 26, 1951.
Appeal from the Circuit Court, Hamilton County, Hal W. Adams, J.
R.C. Horne, Madison, and F.B. Harrell, Jasper, for appellants.
E.A. McCall, Jasper, for appellees.
As we understand the record on this appeal, the case involves the validity of the reappointment of one Pinkston as principal of Jennings School. The statutory procedure for the appointment of a principal in a district school is set out in sections 230.23(7) (c), 230.33(7) (c), and 230.43(1), Florida Statutes 1949, F.S.A. Section 230.33(7) (c) provides that the County Superintendent of Public Instruction shall submit to the trustees of each school district his recommendation of a person to fill the position of principal of each district school. Section 230.43(1) prescribes that the trustees shall consider these recommendations and submit their nominations to the County Board of Public Instruction at least eight weeks before the close of the school year. Section 230.23(7) (c) requires the County Board to act on the nominations submitted not later then six weeks before the close of school.
According to the record, the school year closed at Jennings School on May 26, 1950. The County Superintendent of Hamilton County not having made an affirmative recommendation to the trustees for the appointment of a principal for the next ensuing year, the trustees, on April 15, 1950 nominated Pinkston for the position and gave notice of their action to the County Board. Subsequently, on July 3, 1950 the County Superintendent recommended to the trustees that one Foshee be appointed as principal. So far as the record shows, the trustees never took any affirmative action in respect to the recommendation of Foshee. On July 10, 1950 the County Board approved the nomination of Pinkston and directed the Chairman of the Board and the County Superintendent to prepare and tender to Pinkston a written employment contract. The Chairman and the County Superintendent refused to carry out the directions of the Board, and, instead, instituted this suit to procure a decree declaring their rights in the premises.
At final hearing on the merits the chancellor entered the decree appealed from. In this decree the chancellor found that under the applicable law the trustees "were powerless to recommend any person for principal * * * until such person had first been recommended to them" by the County Superintendent; that notwithstanding this fact "the Trustees upon their own motion, and without any recommendation being first made to them, as required by law, by the County Superintendent, did recommend * * * E.B. Pinkston for reappointment * * * and the County Board attempted to act thereon and approve the said recommendation * * * but both the trustees and the Board acted without authority of law * * *" The chancellor found, further, that though the action of the Board in appointing Pinkston upon the recommendation of the trustees was wholly without authority of law, inasmuch as the trustees had not submitted a nomination at least six weeks before the close of the school year, the Board "can now proceed, and should do so, without delay to name and appoint some person as principal of the Jennings School * * * And when the said Board so acts, it is the lawful duty of the * * * Superintendent of Public Instruction and the * * * Chairman of said Board, to consummate, without delay, the appointment of the person so selected by said Board for said position, by entering into the usual contract with such person as such Principal * * *"
We are unable to find any error in the decree of which the appellants can complain. Concededly, the normal procedure to be pursued in selecting a principal of a district school is for the County Superintendent to recommend a person for the position to the trustees. If they act favorably upon the recommendation the trustees are required to advise the County Board of their action; and the Board is under the duty of employing the person nominated, unless the person is rejected by the Board for good cause. But this procedure is subject to the qualification that unless the trustees make the nomination within the time limits required by law, "the county board may upon its own motion, appoint" such principal. Section 230.23(7) (c), Florida Statutes 1949, F.S.A.
In the instant case neither the County Superintendent nor the trustees acted within the time required by law. Under such circumstances it would have been perfectly permissible for the County Board to have acted upon its own motion in the selection of a principal. In recognition of the authority vested in the County Board under such a situation, the chancellor has ordered the Board to convene and select a principal. Moreover, he has decreed that when the principal has been selected, it will become the duty of the County Superintendent and the Chairman of the Board to execute and tender a contract to the person selected.
The appellants have failed to show that as to them the chancellor committed reversible error, and hence the decree appealed from should be affirmed.
It is so ordered.
TERRELL, THOMAS, ADAMS, HOBSON and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
CHAPMAN, J., concurs specially.
Involved on this appeal is a dispute as to the reappointment of E.B. Pinkston as principal of the High School at Jennings, Hamilton County, Florida, for the 1950-1951 school term. The school term ended there on May 26, 1950. Mr. Pinkston previously served as principal for this High School during the 1949-1950 term. The record discloses that Mr. Pinkston was educationally qualified at the time of the entry of the decree appealed from (September 28, 1950) to act as principal of the Jennings High School, although it was necessary for him to obtain certain scholastic credits by his attendance during the Summer School period of 1950. This Mr. Pinkston did and it is now conceded that the necessary credits were acquired by him during the month of August, 1950. Thus all objections to the educational qualification of Mr. Pinkston to serve as principal of the Jennings High School were removed when he obtained the scholastic credits in August, 1950.
On August 11, 1950, the Honorable W.W. Bradshaw, County Superintendent of Public Instruction, and Honorable J.A. Mitchell, as Chairman of the Board of Public Instruction of Hamilton County, Florida, filed in the Circuit Court of said County their bill of complaint under the provisions of Chapter 87, F.S.A., against R.D. Vickery, J.L. Butler and E.B. Jordan, as Trustees of School District No. 1 of Hamilton County, Florida, and E.B. Pinkston. It alleged that E.B. Pinkston was attempting to act as principal of the Jennings High School while not having a contract so to do executed by the plaintiffs. That he is now engaged in performing all the duties of principal of said school and is attempting to collect and take into his possession moneys belonging to the Jennings High School. The plaintiffs, severally, refused to sign or tender to E.B. Pinkston a contract to teach the Jennings High School or to execute the same in behalf of the local Trustees of the school, although three members of the Board of Public Instruction voted in favor of so doing, and two members thereof voted against so doing. The Trustees nominated Pinkston for the position by a vote of two to one.
Pertinent allegations of paragraph 3 of the bill of complaint substantially recite the Minutes of the School Board covering the period of time the reappointment of Pinkston was being considered. The answer of the defendants admit as true paragraph 3 of the bill of complaint, with one or two exceptions. An amendment to the bill of complaint filed on September 30, 1950, alleged that the Superintendent, under date of July 3, 1950, in writing, recommended to the Trustees as principal of the Jennings High School Mr. Linton M. Foshee.
The conceded facts — with the single exception, set out in paragraph 3 are viz.:
"3. That the school term for the 1949-1950 school year of the Jennings High School ended or closed on the 26th day of May, 1950, and at that time the defendant, E.B. Pinkston, had only been principal of said school for two school years, and had not been principal thereof for three years, and was, therefore, subject to renomination as provided by statute (Section 230.43 (1) Florida Statutes Annotated); that prior to March 31, 1950, the plaintiff, W.W. Bradshaw, as Superintendent of Public Instruction, did not recommend to the trustees of said School District No. 1 of Hamilton County, Florida, the nomination of said E.B. Pinkston to serve as principal of said school for the school year 1950-1951, and has not at any time since recommended him for employment as such. That on March 18, 1950, the said trustees met, with the plaintiff, W.W. Bradshaw, present, and heard protests against the nomination of said E.B. Pinkston as principal of said school, and said trustees were notified at that time by the said Bradshaw that he would not as such Superintendent of Public Instruction make such recommendation; and no action was taken at said time by the trustees concerning the employment or nomination of said E.B. Pinkston. That subsequently, and after March 31, 1950, to-wit, on April 1, 1950, the said trustees again met, with the said W.W. Bradshaw being present, and upon the recommendation of the said Bradshaw, by a vote of 2 to 1 refused the nomination of the said Pinkston as said principal, and on April 3, 1950, such action of the Trustees was confirmed by the Board of Public Instruction of Hamilton County, Florida, and the said Pinkston was so notified. That on April 15, 1950, and subsequent to eight weeks prior to the 31st day of May, 1950, the said trustees again met, with the said Bradshaw present, and without any recommendation from the said Bradshaw as Superintendent of Public Instruction, by a vote of 2 to 1 nominated the said Pinkston for said principalship. That at a meeting of the Board of Public Instruction of Hamilton County, Florida, regularly held on the 6th day of June, 1950, the action of said trustees at their meeting on April 15, 1950, was submitted to the Board, and upon motion by a member thereof that the said Pinkston be tendered a contract of employment as principal of said school, the plaintiff, J.A. Mitchell, as Chairman of said Board, ruled that said motion was out of order and same was not put to an official vote. That thereafter the said Pinkston instituted certain litigation seeking to complete the tender and execution of a contract of employment as said principal, which litigation has now become dormant or inactive because of the failure of said Pinkston to move further in said matter, as he was permitted by order of the Court to do. That on the 10th day of July, 1950, at a meeting of the Board of Public Instruction of Hamilton County, Florida, a member thereof again moved that the said Pinkston be tendered a contract of employment as principal of said school, and the plaintiff Mitchell as Chairman of said Board again ruled said motion out of order because the employment of said Pinkston would not be in compliance with the statutes and laws governing such employment. From this ruling of the Chairman an appeal was taken, and the Chairman was overruled by a vote of 3 to 2. Thereupon the motion that the said Pinkston be tendered a contract of employment recurred for adoption, and upon a vote being taken the motion carried by a vote of 3 to 2. That since the last aforesaid action of the Board of Public Instruction the plaintiffs have jointly and severally refused to tender to the said E.B. Pinkston a contract of employment as principal of said Jennings High School, or to execute a contract on behalf of said trustees or said Board of Public Instruction with the said Pinkston, and will continue to so refuse until their duty under the controlling statutes is interpreted and outlined by a Court of competent jurisdiction."
The plaintiffs-appellants on appeal here contend that the learned Chancellor below erred in construing or interpreting the applicable statutes. Five questions are posed here for adjudication as follows:
"Question No. 1: Does the Statute involving and controlling the reappointment, appointment, recommendation, nomination or employment of High School principals give to Board of Public Instruction the right, privilege or authority to employ a High School principal of its own motion?
"Question No. 2: Is there any limitation of time imposed by Statute as to the right, privilege and authority of the Superintendent of Public Instruction to recommend High School principals for employment?
"Question No. 3: Is a recommendation made by the Superintendent of Public Instruction about forty days after eight weeks prior to the closing of a High School binding upon and subject to the consideration of the Board of Trustees and Board of Public Instruction, before the Board of Public Instruction of its own motion and without consideration or acting upon such recommendation proceeds to employ a High School principal?
"Question No. 4: Can the Board of Trustees and/or the Board of Public Instruction act upon the employment of a High School principal without having first received a recommendation from the Superintendent of Public Instruction?
"Question No. 5: Does the statute provide for or require the Superintendent of Public Instruction to at any time make any recommendation for the appointment of a High School principal, and if such recommendation is made is it binding upon the Board of Public Instruction and subject to its consideration?"
Section 10 of Article 12 of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., is viz.: "The Legislature may provide for the division of any county or counties into convenient school districts; and for the election biennially of three school trustees, who shall hold their office for two years, and who shall have the supervision of all the schools within the district; and for the levying and collection of a district school tax, for the exclusive use of public free schools within the district, whenever a majority of the qualified electors thereof that pay a tax on real or personal property shall vote in favor of such levy; Provided, that any tax authorized by this section shall not exceed ten mills on the dollar in any one year on the taxable property of the district." (Emphasis supplied.)
Our adjudications in construing the foregoing provisions commit us to the principle or ruling that the supervision of the schools situated in the special taxing district, inclusive of the power to nominate the teachers for said schools, is vested in the Board of Trustees. Likewise Section 230.36, F.S.A., provides: "Whenever a school district is created and trustees are elected, they shall have the general supervision of all public schools in the district for the support of which school district funds are used. The powers of the trustees shall not be those of control but of general supervision only, as hereinafter provided." (Emphasis supplied.)
Pursuant to its constitutional authority the Board of Trustees of the Jennings High School, under date of April 15, 1950, several weeks prior to the end of the school term, by a two to one vote, recommended the appointment of E.B. Pinkston as principal of the Jennings High School. For some reason not clearly shown by the record the recommendations so made were disregarded, and under date of July 3, 1950, the first and only recommendation was made by the Honorable W.W. Bradshaw to the Board of Trustees. He recommended the appointment of Mr. Linton T. Foshee. Mr. R.D. Vickery, one of the trustees, approved the Superintendent's recommendation of Mr. Foshee. On July 10, 1950, the Board of Public Instruction approved by a three to two vote the recommendation of the Board of Trustees of Mr. Pinkston as principal of the Jennings High School. Plaintiffs-appellants declined or refused to execute the necessary contract with Mr. Pinkston after the Board had requested it to be done by a three to two vote. See Section 230.18, F.S.A.
Subsection (7) (c) of Section 230.23, F.S.A., directs that the Board of Trustees of each school district shall file nominations of district supervising principals with the County Board of Public Instruction not later than four weeks prior to the closing date of the term of school. It provides further that the County School Board, for good cause, may reject the nomination as made by the Board of Trustees. If the nomination as made by the Board of Trustees is rejected for good cause, then the Board of Trustees shall make a second nomination to the County Board. If the second nomination is rejected, then the County Board "shall then proceed on its own motion to fill such position." It appears by the record in this cause that the nomination of Pinkston was approved by a three to two vote by the School Board of Hamilton County, Florida.
Subsection (1) of Section 230.43, F.S.A., requires the Board of Trustees of any school district to consider the recommendation of the County Superintendent regarding all persons to be nominated for district supervising principal or principals and to make nominations for such position to the County School Board. Nominations for reappointment * * * shall be submitted to the County Board at least eight weeks prior to the closing of the school term. Section 231.35, F.S.A., provides (1) for the appointment of employees; (2) filling of vacancies; and (3) reappointments. The above provisions simply regulate the manner and means of making nominations, filling vacancies and reappointments of former employees. See Armistead v. State ex rel. Smyth, 41 So.2d 879. The above statutes do not conflict with Section 10 of Article 12 of the Constitution, but when read in pari materia a separate field of operation may be found for the several pertinent provisions. It is fundamental that supervisory powers of schools and the nomination of teachers granted to the trustees of a taxing school district by Section 10 of Article 12 of our Constitution cannot be withdrawn by statutory enactment.
TERRELL and ADAMS, JJ., concur.