DuPont-Fort Lewis School District No. 7 v. Clover Park School District No. 400
Docket: No. 37697
Court: Washington Supreme Court; December 3, 1964; Washington; State Supreme Court
The DuPont-Fort Lewis School District seeks a declaratory judgment regarding entitlement to attendance credit and associated financial benefits for 93 elementary students residing on the Fort Lewis Military Reservation. During the 1962-63 school year, these children attended a DuPont-operated school within the reservation, although they lived in an area that falls under the Clover Park School District. The attendance credit in question amounts to 14,521 days, with apportioned funds totaling $24,753. The State Superintendent of Public Instruction determined that Clover Park should receive these funds, prompting DuPont to challenge this decision in Thurston County Superior Court. The court ruled in favor of DuPont, granting them the attendance credit and directing the State Superintendent to allocate the funds accordingly. Clover Park and the State Superintendent appealed this ruling.
The legal focus revolves around Washington statutes (RCW 28.48.040, 050), which generally stipulate that the district of a pupil's residence receives attendance credit unless there is mutual agreement between districts. No such agreement existed here. DuPont argues that school district boundaries within military reservations are irrelevant due to the exclusive jurisdiction of the United States over these areas, which limits the authority of the state and its subdivisions. This argument references prior case law, particularly Concessions Co. v. Morris, emphasizing that the state lacks jurisdiction over the military reservation, thereby supporting DuPont's claim for the attendance credit despite the statutory framework.
A military reservation has been established resembling the District of Columbia, with the state of Washington permitted to serve civil and criminal processes for actions arising outside the reservation. DuPont contended that the military reservation cannot be classified as part of a state subdivision like a school district, exempting children residing there from compulsory school attendance. Consequently, these children have the right to attend any school of their choice, and state schools are not obligated to admit them without tuition payment. However, RCW 28.58.210 mandates that these children be admitted to public schools in contiguous districts without tuition.
Despite DuPont's claims, the existing school districts were not dissolved upon the federal conveyance of the reservation land. Even if schools were not designated within the reservation, children could still attend schools in contiguous districts without tuition, including DuPont's elementary schools located on the reservation. This statute grants personal rights to children, but it does not provide for compensation to the district where they attend school without tuition. DuPont would need to identify another statute to secure such compensation, yet none is presented.
Both DuPont and Clover Park have been recognized as maintaining schools within the military reservation, and all apportioned funds received have been based on their operation within their respective districts. Notably, DuPont did not operate any schools in Clover Park's claimed area within the reservation. It is legally established that federal acquisition of land within a school district does not detach that land from the district. A relevant case, Harmony Grove School Dist. No. 1 v. Camden School Dist. No. 35, confirmed that the jurisdiction of a school district remains intact despite federal acquisition of land within its boundaries.
Parents of children in the Naval Ammunition Depot Area sought to enroll their children in the Camden School District, arguing that the area was no longer part of any school district. The trial court had determined that following the U.S. acquisition of the area for military use, it was no longer under the jurisdiction of the Harmony Grove School District. However, the Arkansas Supreme Court reversed this ruling, asserting that the Harmony Grove District retained its jurisdiction and legal rights over the area despite the federal acquisition in 1944. Citing similar cases, the court noted that while the federal government’s acquisition of land for military purposes may remove local taxing authority, it does not alter school district boundaries or remove land from those districts. Comparable rulings from Iowa and Texas affirmed that federal control does not change local jurisdiction. Moreover, cases like Howard v. Commissioners of the Sinking Fund of Louisville recognized cities' rights to annex federal property, provided it does not interfere with federal jurisdiction. The court emphasized that federally acquired land remains part of the state, enabling the state to adjust municipal boundaries accordingly without losing jurisdiction over the area.
Kentucky's consent for the acquisition allowed the United States to maintain exclusive jurisdiction over the area, which remains unaffected by changes in municipal boundaries. The concept of a "state within a state" does not restrict the state's authority over federal territory as long as federal jurisdiction is not interfered with. The relationship between state and federal sovereignty is characterized by cooperation rather than conflict. The case centers on whether the land containing the residences of 93 children, located within the Fort Lewis Military Reservation, could also fall under the Clover Park School District's jurisdiction. It was determined that it could, entitling Clover Park to credit for the children's school attendance under RCW 28.48.040 and 050, leading to a remand to the Superior Court of Thurston County to overturn the previous judgment in favor of Clover Park School District. Additionally, the excerpt outlines procedures for nonresident attendance credit, stipulating that pupils attending schools outside their resident district up to the ninth grade are credited to their home district unless an agreement specifies otherwise. The responsibilities of district clerks regarding notifications and attendance certification are detailed, along with the consequences of failing to comply with these requirements. Lastly, it clarifies that prior judicial language may be broader than necessary for a specific decision. All school facilities on the Fort Lewis Military Reservation were constructed by the United States, with districts operating under a permit from the U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.
Children of school age residing on U.S. reservations or adjacent to military, naval, or other federal lands in Washington are entitled to attend public schools in nearby districts without tuition. U.S. authorities managing these areas must collaborate with state and local officials to ensure compliance with state compulsory education laws. Originally, a statute enacted in 1925 mandated shared costs between the state and county for education, which was amended in 1933 to allow for reimbursement based on student attendance. However, a 1945 amendment removed all references to payment or reimbursement. Additionally, there is a reference to an application by DuPont for federal assistance, which included an assurance to the Commissioner of Education regarding the district's legal classification and territory as of the end of the 1963 fiscal year.
