|
§115C-518 cH 115c. EDUCATION §115Co§18
<br />
<br />611, s. 2; Nash: 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994),
<br />c. 624, s. 3; Orange: 1993 (Reg. Sess.,
<br />1994), c. 642, s. 3; Pasquotank: 1993
<br />(Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 655, s. 3; Richmond:
<br />1991 (Reg. Sess., 1992), c. 898; Rowan:
<br />1991 (Reg. Sess., 1992), c. 848, ss. 2, 3;
<br />Sampson: 1993 (Reg. Sess., 1994), c. 614,
<br />s. 4; Stanly: 1991 (Reg. Sess., 1992), c.
<br />848, ss. 2, 3; City of Burlington Board of
<br />Education: 1993, c. 277, s. 3; Bladen
<br />County Board of Education: 1991 (Reg.
<br />Sess., 1992). c. 853; Davie County Board
<br />of Education: 1985, c. 18; county of
<br />Duplin, town of Kenansville, and Duplin
<br />County Board of Education: 1987, c. 50;
<br />Hertford County Board of Education:
<br />1985, c. 123, s. 2; New Hanover County
<br />Board of Education: 1985 (Reg. Sess.,
<br />1986), c. 917; Transylvania County
<br />Board of Education: 1983, c. 579; Albe-
<br />marie City School Administrative Unit:
<br />1985, c. 74.
<br /> For provisions regarding Ashe, Avery,
<br />Brunswick, Chowan, Forsyth, Harnett,
<br />Haywood, Lee, Macon, Nash, Orange,
<br />Pasquotank, Richmond and Sampson
<br />Counties and local boards of education l'or
<br />
<br />school administrative units in or for
<br />Ashe, Avery, Brunswick, Chowan,
<br />Forsyth, Harnett, Haywood, Lee, Macon,
<br />Nash, Orange, and Pasquotank Counties,
<br />see the editor's note under § 153A-158.1.
<br /> Cross References. -- For provision
<br />exempting services, products, and prop-
<br />erties generated through vocational edu-
<br />cation instructional activities from the
<br />requirements of this section, see
<br />§ 115C-159. As to sale, lease, exchange
<br />and joint use of governmental pr~)perty
<br />by State and local governmental units,
<br />see § 160A-274.
<br /> Editor's Note. -- Session Laws 1985
<br />(Reg. Sess., 1986), c. 975, which deleted
<br />"district or" preceding "administrative
<br />unit" in the sixth sentence of subsection
<br />(a), provided in s. 25 that the provisions
<br />of the act should not be construed to
<br />abolish or in any manner affect any sup-
<br />plemental tax or any local taxing dis-
<br />trict.
<br /> Chapter 115, including § 115-126, re-
<br />ferred to in this section, was repealed by
<br />Session Laws 1981, c. 423, s. 1, and has
<br />been recodified as Chapter 115C.
<br />
<br />CASE NOTES
<br />
<br /> Editor's Note. -- Many of the cases
<br />below were decided under corresponding
<br />provisions of former Chapter 115 and
<br />earlier statutes.
<br /> Power to Acquire Land. -- Subsec-
<br />tion (d) of former § 115-126 did not give
<br />the board of education any additional
<br />power to acquire land for school put-
<br />poses. This power was given by
<br />5§ 115-27. 115-35(b) and 115-125 (see
<br />now 5§ 115C-40, I15C-36 and
<br />115C-517). Painter v. Wake County Bd.
<br />of Educ., 288 N.C. 165, 217 S.E.2d 650
<br />(1975).
<br /> There is nothing in the Constitu-
<br />tion which prohibits the board of ed-
<br />ucatlon from exchanging land which
<br />it owns for other land for school pur-
<br />poses. Painter v. Wake County Bd. of
<br />Educ., 288 N.C. 165, 217 S.E.2d 650
<br />(1975).
<br /> No Claim Would Lie Against Board
<br />of Commissioners. -- The court did not
<br />err in determining complaint failed to
<br />state a claim as to the proposed sale of
<br />school and its adjacent property; the
<br />county board of education, not the board
<br />of commissioners, holds all school prop.
<br />erty and is capable of selling and trans-
<br />ferring the same for school purposes; ap-
<br />plying this law to the case under review,
<br />
<br />no claim with respect to disposition of
<br />the school property would lie against de-
<br />fendant board of commissioners. Moore
<br />v. Wykle, 107 N.C. App. 120, 419 S.E.2d
<br />164 (1992), cert. denied, 332 N.C. 666,
<br />424 S.E.2d 405 (1992).
<br /> If a discrepancy in valuation exists
<br />it bears only on the question of
<br />abuse of discretion, and any such dis-
<br />crepancy is only one of the factors to be
<br />considered in determining whether the
<br />board has abused its discretion. Painter
<br />v. Wake County Bd. of Educ., 288 N.C.
<br />165, 217 S.E.2d 650 (1975).
<br /> Burden to Overcome Presumption.
<br />-- The burden was on plaintiffs to over-
<br />come the presumption that the board of
<br />education, in proposing an exchange of
<br />property, was acting in good faith and in
<br />accord with the spirit and purpose of for-
<br />mer § 115-126. Painter v. Wake County
<br />Bd. of Educ., 288 N.C. 165, 217 S.E.2d
<br />650 (1975).
<br /> Lease of Surplus Lands. -- A city
<br />school administrative unit contemplated
<br />by § 115-4 (see now § 115C-66) was a
<br />governmental agency separate and dis-
<br />tinct from the city, and such administra-
<br />tive unit, having acquired more land
<br />than presently needed for school pur-
<br />poses, had legislative authority to lease
<br />
<br />396
<br />
<br />
<br />
|