Could Aiken County area advisory councils hear student suspension and expulsion appeals under Senate Bill 442?

Plain-English summary

In 2010, a South Carolina representative asked whether proposed Senate Bill 442 would let Aiken County's area advisory councils hear student cases involving suspensions or expulsions. The AG said the councils already had authority to hear those matters as grievances under the 1982 act establishing the district. The bill kept the relevant grievance language, so passage would leave that authority in place.

The opinion interpreted “grievances” to include student appeals from suspension, expulsion, or transfer. It noted that the law gave councils a role in hearing grievances and allowed appeals to the county board. The AG's conclusion addressed the bill as proposed, not whether it was ultimately enacted or how later law changed the process.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2010. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later
AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current
legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy
mentioned here.

Common questions

Could an Aiken area advisory council hear a student's discipline appeal? A: The AG said yes under its reading of the 1982 act. It treated suspension, expulsion, and transfer appeals as student grievances within the councils' authority.

Would Senate Bill 442 have created that authority for the first time? A: No. The AG said the bill left the 1982 grievance language unchanged and would preserve the existing authority if enacted.

Could an appeal go to the county board?
A: The grievance provision quoted in the opinion allowed appeals to the County Board of Education after presentation to the area advisory council through the area superintendent.

Background and statutory framework

The 1982 Aiken County act let the county board appoint area advisory councils, delegate additional authority to them, and hear appeals from them. The AG read that local law alongside general school discipline provisions permitting board or authorized-agent review. Because the bill did not revise the grievance clause, the AG found no change in the councils' student-discipline role.

Citations and references

The opinion discussed Senate Bill 442, Act 503 of 1982, and South Carolina Code sections 59-63-230, 59-63-240, and 59-63-250.

Official title

Questioning the interpretation of a provision contained in Senate Bill 442. Specifically, “does the bill give county school boards the authority to allow the area advisory councils to hear cases pertaining to students in their school district.”

Requester

The Honorable J. Roland Smith, Member, House of Representatives

Source

• Landing page: https://www.scag.gov/opinions/opinions-archive/november-4-2010/
• Original PDF: https://www.scag.gov/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/smith-j-r-os-9117-11-4-10-senate-bill-442-county-school-boards-hearings-students.pdf

Original opinion text

HENRY MCMASTER
AITORNEY GENllRAL

November 4, 2010

The Honorable J. Roland Smith
Member, House of Representatives
183 Edgar Street
Warrenville, South Carolina 29851
Dear Representative Smith:
We received your letter requesting an opinion of this Office as to the interpretation of a provision contained in Senate Bill 442. In regard to this bill, you ask: "[D]oes the bill give county school boards the authority to allow the area advisory councils to hear cases pertaining to students in their school district. For example cases relating to suspensions, expulsions, etc." Law/Analysis

Senate Bill 442 (the "Bill") states that it amends sections 15 and 16 of act 503 of 1982. Act 503 of 1982 established the School District of Aiken County (the "District") and the Aiken County Board ofEducation (the "Board"). 1982 S.C. Acts 3384. A portion of this act gave the Board the authority to appoint area advisory councils for each administrative area of the District. Id. Section 15 of this act states as follows: The Area Advisory Councils shall determine local policies in their respective administrative areas; provided, such policies are not inconsistent with the policies set forth by the County Board of Education. The County Board of Education may delegate additional authority to the Area Advisory Councils to the extent necessary for the effective operation of the public schools in the county. Patrons of the schools in each administrative area shall present their grievances to their Area Advisory Council through their area superintendent. Appeals may be made to the County Board of Education. Id. Bill 442 purports to amend this section by replacing it with the following language: The area advisory councils may determine local policies in their respective administrative areas; provided, such policies are not
.REMBERT c. D ENNIS BUILDING •

PosT OmcE Box 11549

•

CoLUMBTA, SC 29211-1549

•

TELEPHONE 803-734-3970

• FACSIMILE 803-253-6283

The Honorable J. Roland Smith
Page2
November 4, 2010

inconsistent with the policies set forth by the county board of education. The county board of education may delegate additional authority to the area advisory councils to the extent necessary for the effective operation of the public schools in the county. Patrons of the schools in each administrative area shall present their grievances to their area advisory council through their area superintendent. Appeals may be made to the county board of education. We presume the crux of your question deals with the interpretation of the second paragraph in section 15. We note that this portion of the Bill appears to read exactly as it did under the 1982 legislation. Therefore, the authority given to the Board in 1982 would not change ifthe Legislature adopts the Bill. Nonetheless, we must interpret the language contained in this provision in order to answer your question. "The cardinal rule of statutory construction is to ascertain and effectuate the intent of the legislature." Hodges v. Rainey, 341 S.C. 79, 85, 533 S.E.2d 578, 581 (2000). When interpreting a statute, our courts "give the words their plain and ordinary meaning without resorting to a tortured construction which limits or expands the statute's operation. Statutes, as a whole, must receive practical, reasonable, and fair interpretation, consonant with the purpose, design, and policy of lawmakers." Gattis v. Murrells Inlet VFW No. 10420, 353 S.C. 100, 113, 576 S.E.2d 191, 198 (Ct. App. 2003) (quotations and citations omitted). "Statutes should be construed with reference to the whole system of law of which they form a part, and must receive a practical, reasonable, and fair interpretation consonant with the purpose, design, and policy of lawmakers. Pitman v. R~ublic Leasing Co., Inc., 351S.C.429, 431, 570S.E.2d187, 189 (Ct. App. 2002) (citations and quotations omitted). Under South Carolina general law, school district boards of trustees have the authority to promulgate rules and regulations regarding student conduct and the authority to enforce such rules and regulations through suspensions, expulsions, and transfers of students. S.C. Code Ann. §§ 5919-90 (2004); 59-63-210 (2004). Article 3 of chapter 63 of title 59 instructs on the process by which school district boards, and in some cases school administrators, can suspend, expel, or transfer students. Section 59-63-230 of the South Carolina Code (2004) requires school administrators to schedule a conference following the issuance of a notice of suspension. This provision also allows the student's parents or legal guardian to "appeal the suspension to the board of trustees or to its authorized agent." S.C. Code Ann. § 59-63-230. Section 59-63-240 of the South Carolina Code (2004) requires a hearing before a board can expel a student from school. In addition, this provision gives the student's parent or legal guardian the right to appeal the suspension to the board of trustees. S.C. Code Ann. § 59-63-240. Section 59-63-250 of the South Carolina Code (2004), governing transfers, also contains a provision requiring a hearing and allows the student's parent or guardian to appeal the decision to the board of trustees. Thus, the general law contains provisions allowing

The Honorable J. Roland Smith
Page 3
November 4, 2010

a student's parents or guardian to appeal disciplinary decisions to members of the school district's board of trustees. The 1982 act does not specifically address what body or person has the authority to suspend, expel, transfer, or otherwise discipline students. However, one portion of the act states that the Board shall have administrative authority over the public schools located within the District. Furthermore, the 1982 act designates that the area advisory councils are to "determine local policies
..." and gives them the authority hear grievances presented to them by patrons of the schools. The term "grievance," as used in the 1982 act is not defined. Nonetheless, in our review of the general law governing schools, we believe student discipline matters are the typical types of grievances that a student might bring before a school's administrative body. Thus, we believe the Legislature intended for this term to include an appeal brought by students as a result of a suspension, expulsion, or transfer. Thus, pursuant to 1982 act, we believe area advisory councils have authority to hear cases pertaining to student discipline. Furthermore, it is our understanding in speaking with you on the matter that the District interprets the 1982 act as giving the area advisory councils such authority.

Conclusion
As noted above, in our examination of the Bill, we do not see any changes to the language in the 1982 act giving area advisory councils the authority to hear grievances. Therefore, we believe the authority given to the area advisory councils in this regard would not change by the passage of the Bill. Furthermore, based on the general authority given to boards of trustees with regard student discipline, we believe the Legislature intended for the term grievances, as used in the 1982 legislation and the Bill, to include appeals from student disciplinary matters. Accordingly, to answer your question, are of the opinion that if the Legislature passes the Bill, area advisory councils will maintain their authority to hear cases pertaining to student discipline. Very truly yours, Henry McMaster Attorney General

By~.~
Assistant Attorney General

REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY:
,~·'""'

,;~2),G-0-

~"RoBert D. Cook

Deputy Attorney General