Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: 1967: Establishment of New Iberia Educational Center Nixed

  1. Louisiana Campus 1967: Establishment of New Iberia Educational Center Nixed

    250 La. 337, *; 195 So. 2d 289, **;
    1967 La. LEXIS 2824, ***

    Howard Charles MELANCON et al. v. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION et al.

    No. 48182

    Supreme Court of Louisiana

    250 La. 337; 195 So. 2d 289; 1967 La. LEXIS 2824

    February 20, 1967

    CASE SUMMARY

    PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Defendant board of education adopted a resolution establishing an education center. On the petition of plaintiffs, 11 interested taxpayers, the district court (Louisiana) held that the resolution violated La. Const. art. IV, § 14 and permanently enjoined the board from establishing the center. The board appealed. The taxpayers moved to dismiss the appeal, contending that the court lacked appellate jurisdiction. The court maintained the appeal.

    OVERVIEW: At issue was whether the board could have established an education center without special legislative authorization. The district court held that the center was an educational institution and struck down the resolution. The court agreed. La. Const. art. IV, § 14 barred the institution's establishment without sound legislative approval. The section was designed to prevent discordant drain upon the public fisc by the proliferation of these institutions outside the Legislature. An educational institution was a permanent, state-controlled establishment located on state property and sustained by state appropriations to provide education. The Education Center was a permanent educational establishment located on State Board of Education land, operated with state facilities, and sustained by state appropriations. It was state controlled and administered. The establishment lacked perfect autonomy, for the State University president was interposed between it and the board. However, this factor alone had not destroyed the institutional design.The center, in the court's opinion, was an institution under § 14, requiring legislative authorization. Hence, the board's resolution was abortive.

    OUTCOME: The judgment of the district court was affirmed.

    Authority
    HN1 La. Const. art. IV, § 14 provides that no educational or charitable institution, other than the State institutions now existing, or expressly provided for in this Constitution, shall be established by the State, except upon a vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the Legislature. More Like This Headnote

    Authority
    HN2 La. Const. art. IV, § 14 bars the establishment of a state educational institution without sound legislative approval. The section is designed to prevent a discordant drain upon the public fisc by the proliferation of these institutions outside the Legislature, which appropriates the money for their operation. More Like This Headnote

    Authority
    HN3 Formal designation of the establishment as an education center or extension of the existing university is not controlling for purposes of La. Const. art. IV, § 14. The establishment's true status must be determined by appraising its salient features. More Like This Headnote

    COUNSEL: [***1]

    Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen., Harry Fuller, Second Asst. Atty. Gen., Willie D. Maynor, Special Counsel to the Atty. Gen., for defendants-appellants.

    Domengeaux, Wright & Bienvenu, James Domengeaux, Lafayette, for plaintiffs-respondents.

    JUDGES: Sanders, Justice.

    OPINIONBY: SANDERS

    OPINION: [*339] [**290] The question posed by this appeal is whether the Louisiana State Board of Education can establish an "education center" of the University of Southwestern Louisiana in Iberia Parish, without special legislative authorization.

    In 1965, the State Board of Education adopted a resolution establishing the Education Center of the University of Southwestern [*340] Louisiana near New Iberia in Iberia Parish. On the petition of eleven interested taxpayers of Lafayette Parish, where the University is located, the district court held the resolution violated Article IV, Section 14, of the Louisiana Constitution and permanently enjoined the Board from establishing the Center. The State Board of Education appealed to this Court. Plaintiffs moved to dismiss the appeal, contending this Court lacked appellate jurisdiction. We maintained the appeal. See Melancon v. State Board of Education, [***2] 249 La. 604, 188 So.2d 419.

    Act No. 162 of 1898 created Southwestern Industrial Institute and provided for its location as follows:

    "Said Institute shall be known as the 'Southwestern Louisiana Industrial Institute,' and shall be located in that parish of the 13th Senatorial District which will offer the best inducement therefor to the Board of Trustees, said location to be made by the Board to be appointed under this act, provided that the parish selected for the location of said Institution shall donate not less than twenty-five acres of land and Five Thousand Dollars to said Institution * * *"

    Pursuant to the Act, the Board of Trustees considered locations at Lafayette in Lafayette Parish and at New Iberia in Iberia Parish. During a meeting of the Board of Trustees on January 3 and 4, [*341] 1900, the Board located the Institute at Lafayette.

    Article XII, Section 9 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1921 placed the Institute under supervision of the State Board of Education and changed its name to Southwestern Louisiana Institute of Liberal and Technical learning. Later, Act No. 123 of 1960 changed the name to the University of Southwestern Louisiana.

    At its meeting on [***3] October 14, 15, and 16, 1965, the State Board of Education considered a proposal to establish an education center or branch of the University of Southwestern Louisiana in Iberia Parish. The original proposal read in part:

    "The administration of the University of Southwestern Louisiana recommends that a lower division, or College of General Studies, be established at the former Naval Auxiliary Air Station near New Iberia. The College of General Studies should be a junior division which offers the first year's work of baccalaureate programs and one- and two-year technical curricula, the latter leading to certificates or to Associate in Arts and Associate in Science degrees.

    "The College of General Studies will be headed by a vice-president, who will answer directly to the president of the University. This branch of the University will consist of three divisions, the Division of Academic Studies, the Division of Technical Studies, and the Division [*342] of Student Services. Each division will be administered by a dean. Further, while each division will be independent of the several colleges and departments of the University, each will coordinate activities with University [***4] Counterparts and related units."

    The State Board of Education adopted the proposal by resolution in the following language:

    "* * * [T]he Board approved the plan as outlined in the first 100 pages of the proposal of the University of [**291] Southwestern Louisiana concerning the New Iberia property, with the use of present facilities only, with the proviso that in any place in the proposal where the words 'Branch' or 'Lower Division' or 'College' appear that the words 'Education Center' be substituted, and wherever the word 'Dean' appears, the word 'Director' is to be substituted, and wherever the word 'Division' appears, the word 'Department' is to be substituted; this proposal subject to the approval and advice of the Board's attorney, the Attorney General of the State of Louisiana, relative to all legal technicalities."

    Plaintiffs assert the resolution established an educational institution without special legislative authorization in violation of HN1Article IV, Section 14 of the Louisiana Constitution, which provides:

    "No educational or charitable institution, other than the State institutions now [*343] existing, or expressly provided for in this Constitution, shall [***5] be established by the State, except upon a vote of two-thirds of the members elected to each house of the Legislature."

    The State Board of Education, on the other hand, contends the resolution established no new institution but merely expanded the University across the parish line by adding to it an education center, to be operated as an integral part of the existing institution. Hence, the State Board reasons, the constitutional provision is inapplicable.

    In a well-reasoned opinion, the district court held the Center was an educational institution within the meaning of the Constitution and struck down the resolution. We agree with the holding.

    HN2Article IV, Section 14 of the Louisiana Constitution bars the establishment of a state educational institution without sound legislative approval. The section is designed to prevent a discordant drain upon the public fisc by the proliferation of these institutions outside the Legislature, which appropriates the money for their operation.

    The prohibition was introduced into the organic law by Article 60 of the Louisiana Constitution of 1898. Succeeding constitutions have retained the prohibition.

    An educational institution within the [***6] meaning of this section is a permanent, [*344] state-controlled establishment located on state property and sustained by state appropriations to provide education through a staff of professionally trained educators.

    In Jones v. State Board of Education, 219 La. 630, 53 So.2d 792 (1951), this Court stated:

    "Generally speaking a State educational institution is one, title to whose property is vested in the State, whose physical plant and facilities are controlled and managed by the State through one of its State-wide boards and whose funds for its operation are derived from appropriations made by the State Legislature."

    The record discloses that the site of the Education Center is a 1400-acre tract of land acquired in the name of the State Board of Education, after the tract had been abandoned as a naval air station. On the tract are several permanent buildings, which are to be used for educational purposes. In addition to these, however, the plan entails the construction of new buildings, including student dormitories and dining facilities. The new buildings are to be financed by state funds and proceeds of revenue bonds. The operating expenses are to be paid from state [***7] funds in recurring items of the state budget.

    The head of the Education Center, a vice-president, will supervise both administrative and educational personnel at the [*345] Center. He will act under authority delegated by the President of the University. The President, however, is responsible to the State Board of Education, a constitutional [**292] state board supervising educational institutions.

    The Education Center will be composed of three departments or divisions: the Department of Academic Studies, the Department of Student Services, and the Department of Technical Studies. Each department will be administered by a director. Although coordination of departmental activities with University counterparts is required, each department will be "independent of the several colleges and departments of the University."

    The Academic Studies and Student Services Departments will duplicate courses and services offered at the University of Southwestern Louisiana campus. The Department of Technical Studies, however, will provide new two-year vocational curricula leading to associate degrees from the University in such areas as agricultural engineering, air conditioning and [***8] refrigeration, construction, and restaurant management. These are terminal courses, requiring no attendance elsewhere before graduation.

    University officials estimated the initial enrollment at The Education Center at 1400 students and projected the enrollment to 3500 students in 1970.

    [*346] As aptly stated by the trial judge, HN3formal designation of the establishment as an education center or extension of the existing university is not controlling. See Jones v. State Board of Education, supra. The establishment's true status must be determined by appraising its salient features.

    As we view it, The Education Center is a permanent educational establishment located on State Board of Education land, operated with state facilities, and sustained by state appropriations. It is state controlled and administered. The Center offers broad-ranged curricula, leading in some instances to terminal degrees. Moreover, it is located in a parish other than that designated for the location of the University of Southwestern Louisiana.

    It is true, as contended by the State Board, that the establishment lacks perfect autonomy, for the President of the University is interposed between it and [***9] the State Board of Education. But this factor alone does not destroy the institutional design. A similar administrative intervention existed as to the John McNeese Junior College and Northeast Center Junior College branches of Louisiana State University considered in Jones v. State Board of Education. Yet, the Court classified them as institutions under the constitutional provision.

    The Education Center, in our opinion, is an educational institution under Article IV, [*347] Section 14 of the Louisiana Constitution, requiring legislative authorization. Hence, the resolution of the State Board of Education is abortive.

    For the reasons assigned, the judgment of the district court is affirmed.


  2. Default

    249 La. 604, *; 188 So. 2d 419, **;
    1966 La. LEXIS 2289, ***

    Howard Charles MELANCON et al. v. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION et al.

    No. 48182

    Supreme Court of Louisiana

    249 La. 604; 188 So. 2d 419; 1966 La. LEXIS 2289

    June 30, 1966

    CASE SUMMARY

    PROCEDURAL POSTURE: Plaintiff residents filed a motion to dismiss the appeal of defendants, the State Board of Education and its members, from a judgment of the district court (Louisiana) that issued a permanent injunction enjoining defendants from carrying out a resolution that approved the establishment of an educational center or university branch.

    OVERVIEW: Defendants passed a resolution that approved the establishment of an educational center or university branch. The residents instituted a proceeding to enjoin defendants from carrying out the resolution. The district court held that the resolution was unconstitutional and issued a permanent injunction that enjoined defendants from carrying it out. Defendants perfected an appeal to the court. The residents filed a motion to dismiss defendants' appeal on the ground that the court lacked appellate jurisdiction over the matter. The court denied the residents' motion to dismiss the appeal. The court determined that it had jurisdiction over the matter because defendants' resolution was an "ordinance" within the meaning of La. Const. of 1921, art. VII, § 10(2). The court ruled that the term "ordinance" in § 10(2) was used in its broad and general sense rather than in a restricted one. The court found that an application of the narrow meaning to the term "ordinance" would have rendered § 10(2) meaningless with respect to boards and other subdivisions of the state, which acted only through and by resolutions.

    OUTCOME: The court denied the residents' motion to dismiss defendants' appeal.

    State Court Review
    HN1 La. Const. of 1921, art. VII, § 10(2) provides that cases in which an ordinance of a parish, municipal corporation, board or subdivision of the state, or a law of the state has been declared unconstitutional are appealable to the Supreme Court of Louisiana. More Like This Headnote


    Ordinances & Regulations
    HN2 The word "ordinance" can have a very broad or quite a narrow meaning. It can refer to all of the legislative enactments of a municipality, such as motions, resolutions, decrees, laws, etc., or it can simply mean a permanent rule of action commonly known as a law.

    Ordinances & Regulations
    HN3 A "resolution" is only a less solemn or less usual form of an ordinance. It is an ordinance still if it is anything intended to regulate any of the affairs of the corporation, and if it is in substance and effect an ordinance. While there are in some instances and for some purposes, fundamental distinctions between a resolution and an ordinance, there is no such broad distinction between a resolution and other acts of an administrative or quasilegislative board. Almost any one of these acts not required to be by ordinance may be in the form of a resolution.

    State Court Review
    HN4 The term "ordinance," as it appears in La. Const. of 1921, art. VII, § 10(2), regulating the appellate jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of Louisiana with respect to a board of the state, is used in its broad and general sense, rather than in a restricted one; and it refers to and includes "resolutions" of a state board.



    COUNSEL: [***1]
    Jack P. F. Gremillion, Atty. Gen., Harry Fuller, 2nd Asst. Atty. Gen., Willie D. Maynor, Special Counsel to the Atty. Gen., William O. Bonin, Ray F. Mestayer, Knowles M. Tucker, New Iberia, for defendants-appellants.

    Domengeaux & Wright, James Domengeaux, Lafayette, Kleinpeter & Barnett, Robert L. Kleinpeter, Baton Rouge, for plaintiffs-appellees.

    JUDGES: Hamiter, Justice.

    OPINIONBY: HAMITER

    OPINION: [*606] [**419] ON MOTION TO DISMISS.

    The eleven plaintiffs herein, who are residents of the Parish of Lafayette, instituted this proceeding to enjoin the State Board of Education and its individual members from carrying out a resolution of such board which approved the establishment in New Iberia (Iberia Parish) of an educational center or branch of the University of Southwestern Louisiana (located in Lafayette Parish).

    The district court held that the resolution of the board contravened Article IV, Section 14 of the Constitution of Louisiana which prohibits the establishment of an educational institution except on the approving vote of two-thirds of the members of each house of the Legislature (this was not obtained). Accordingly the court issued a permanent injunction as prayed for. [***2]

    Thereafter the defendants perfected an appeal to this court.

    [**420] The case is presently before us on plaintiffs' motion to dismiss the appeal, it being alleged therein that this court lacks appellate jurisdiction of the matter.

    A determination of the issue presented by the motion depends on the interpretation to be placed on the following pertinent, underscored, portion of Article VII, Section 10 of the Louisiana Constitution (as amended): HN1"The following cases only shall be appealable to the Supreme Court:

    [*607] "(1) * * *

    "(2) Cases in which an ordinance of a parish, municipal corporation, board or subdivision of the state, or a law of this state has been declared unconstitutional." (Italics ours.)

    Movers urge that the "resolution" of the State Board of Education, which has been declared unconstitutional herein, is not an "ordinance" and, hence, this court is not vested with jurisdiction of the appeal.

    Several cases in our jurisprudence have been cited by the respective litigants concerning the meaning of the term "ordinance" but none is precisely in point, an interpretation by our courts of the constitutional provision in question not having been required [***3] previously.

    However, we did point out in Chapman et al. v. Bordelon, 242 La. 637, 138 So.2d 1 that "Generally the word 'ordinance' is understood to mean a legislative act of a municipality, * * *. This is not necessarily so in all cases, however, for * * * 'ordinance' is often used as a generic term which encompasses all of the acts of a municipal board or council whether administrative or legislative in nature. * * * Thus it will be seen that HN2the word 'ordinance' can have a very broad or quite a narrow meaning; that it can refer to all of the legislative enactments of a municipality, such as motions, resolutions, decrees, laws, etc., or can simply mean a permanent [*608] rule of action commonly known as a law." (While the author of this opinion dissented from the conclusion reached by the majority in Chapman v. Bordelon, supra, his dissent was not because of a disapproval of the observations of the majority opinion just quoted. Rather, it was due to his view that a consideration of all of the provisions of the statute there being interpreted would disclose an intent that the term "ordinance" was to be used in its narrow sense.)

    In McQuillian, The Law of Municipal Corporations, [***4] Volume 5, Section 15.08, pages 71-73 it is said: "Sometimes, however, the word 'ordinance' is used interchangeably with the words 'by-laws', resolutions', 'regulations', 'orders', etc." And further: HN3"'Resolution' is said to be only a less solemn or less usual form of an ordinance. 'It is an ordinance still if it is anything intended to regulate any of the affairs of the corporation,' and if it is in substance and effect an ordinance. While there are in some instances and for some purposes, fundamental distinctions between a resolution and an ordinance, there is no such broad distinction between a resolution and other acts of an administrative or quasilegislative board. Almost any one of these acts not required to be by ordinance may be in the form of a resolution."

    In our opinion HN4the term "ordinance", as it appears in the aforequoted constitutional provision regulating our appellate jurisdiction with respect to a board of this state, is [*609] used in its broad and general sense, rather than in a restricted one; and that it refers to and includes "resolutions" of a state board. Our primary reason for this conclusion is that we know of no way in which such a board acts and [***5] functions except by resolutions. Should we apply the narrow meaning to the term "ordinance" herein we would render the constitutional [**421] provision meaningless with respect to boards and other subdivisions of the state which act only through and by resolutions.

    For the reasons assigned the motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.


  3. #3

    Default Re: Establishment of New Iberia Educational Center Nixed

    Amazing that Lafayette survived so many shortsighted people. You can be smart and a dumbass at the same time. Hopefully we’ve outgrown it.


Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: March 8th, 2016, 06:50 pm
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: January 6th, 2016, 03:50 pm
  3. Establishment of McNeese and ULM
    By NewsCopy in forum Up On LA
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: April 16th, 2010, 09:45 pm

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •