State of Nebraska ex rel. The Western Technical Community College Area, appellee, v. Katie Tallon, County Treasurer of Sheridan County, Nebraska, et al., appellants, 196 Neb. 603

Newton, J. In this action respondents challenge the constitutionality of the Technical Community College Area Act of 1975 set forth in sections 79-2636 to 79-2662, R. S. Supp., 1975. The District Court upheld the constitutionality of the act and issued a peremptory writ of mandamus direeling respondents, members of the Board of County Commissioners and the County Treasurer of Sheridan County, Nebraska, to remit taxes levied for the support of the relator. We affirm the judgment of the District Court. In State ex rel. Western Nebraska Technical Com. Col. Area v. Tallon, 192 Neb. 201, 219 N.

W. 2d 454, this court held the former act to be unconstitutional on the ground that the act provided for a property tax to support a state purpose and was in violation of

Article VIII,

section 1A, of the Constitution of Nebraska. That section, as adopted in 1954 and amended in 1966, prohibits the levy of a property tax for state purposes. The substance of our former decision is embodied in the following: “Under the act with which we are concerned here, the State has assumed the direct control of major policy decisions which affect the operation of each of the seven community college areas, and the statute reflects a purpose to control the operation of all seven areas for the benefit of the residents of the state as a whole.

The provisions requiring that the tuition in any technical community college area for any resident of the State of Nebraska shall be the same as for a resident of the particular area is a strong indication of the legislative purpose to benefit residents of the entire state as contrasted to residents of particular local areas.

The direct control by the State over capital expenditures, the right to contract for acquisitions and additions, and to control and direct which facilities and training will be available in which area, together with the complete and direct control of the individual budget of each technical community college area, demonstrate the dominance of the State as opposed to the local areas in all major matters of control and operation of the statutory system.

It is undoubtedly true that such direct control will result in a more efficient and coordinated operation and avoid expensive and uneconomical duplication of facilities and services. Those particular objectives in themselves reflect the dominance of a purpose to benefit the state as a whole.” In view of our former holding, the Legislature has repealed the former act and adopted the 1975 version which is now before us. Does the present act do away with objectionable features noted in our former decision, nullify state control, and render the technical community college areas essentially local in character?

Each technical community college area is now a body corporate which may sue and be sued. Each is governed by a board elected from among the local citizenry.

These boards determine their local programs and curriculum; employ the required faculty, administrative, and other personnel; construct, lease, or purchase required facilities; do their own accounting, auditing, and budgeting; promulgate administrative rules and regulations; have the power of eminent domain; may lease or sell property; invest their funds; establish tuition rates; issue bonds; and exercise such other powers, duties, and responsibilities as may be necessary to comply with the act.

Each area is also empowered to determine and levy property taxes not exceeding 2/± mills unless more be voted by the electors, but this is no longer compulsory. The act also provides that the Legislature may appropriate state funds for the area colleges and distribute them on the basis of student enrollment. Provision is made for a state commission designated the Nebraska Coordinating Commission for Technical Community Colleges. This commission has general advisory supervision, is empowered to accept and equitably distribute federal funds, make recommendations, and provide guidance.

It has little, if any, actual authority over the technical community colleges. State aid to schools necessarily involves a commingling of state and local purposes. The interest of the state in education is evidenced by the constitutional provision for free common schools and the creation of colleges and universities as well as elementary and high schools. Yet, in every instance where schools are locally controlled and supported, no objection has been found to a provision for state aid. No constitutional objection thereto has been called to our attention and we know of none.

The mere granting of state aid does not render a school operation a state function. We are aware of the fact that when

Article VIII,

section 1A, of the Constitution of Nebraska, was adopted in its original and amended form, its purpose was to require the state, after the adoption of sales and income taxes, to leave the property-tax field. No state interest or function could then be financed by means of property taxes, but all traditional state interests and functions must be financed by means other than property taxes. In other words, the state Legislature cannot avoid or circumvent the constitutional mandate by converting the traditional state functions into local functions supported by property taxes.

At the time of the adoption of this constitutional provision, it was inherent in its adoption that the state would continue to administer its traditional functions and finance them by means other than a property tax. “* * * effect must be given to the intent of the framers of the organic law and of the people adopting it. This is the polestar in the construction of constitutions.” 16 Am. Jur. 2d, Constitutional Law, § 64, p. 239. There is no conflicting tradition relating to state support of technical community colleges.

The schools and junior colleges taken over by the technical community colleges were, at least generally, local in nature and supported by local property taxes. Those receiving state aid still were required to have local participation as provided for in the present act. The technical community colleges are no longer dominated by a state board or subject to a compulsory property tax levy of 1 mill. The area boards exercise the same powers and functions as other political subdivisions and the operation of each respective college is controlled by its area board.

The state commission acts only as a conduit for federal funds and in an advisory capacity. It has no real power but is designed to give such assistance and advice as may be helpful in the operation of the colleges, to discourage unnecessary duplication in educational and training fields, and promote uniformity. A properly operated state commission may render it unnecessary for the Legislature to lay down a multiplicity of rules under its plenary authority. The technical community colleges are now in largely the same position as our school districts.

They operate on a strictly local basis subject only to guidelines laid down by the Legislature. “Where state and local purposes are commingled in a statutory enactment creating a new, independent, statewide system of technical community college areas, the crucial issue of the use of property tax levies to support the system turns on a determination of whether the controlling and predominant purposes are state purposes or local purposes. The application of the constitutional amendment prohibiting the State from levying a property tax for state purposes hinges on that determination.” State ex rel.

Western Nebraska Technical Com. Col. Area v. Tallón, supra. We conclude that the present legislative act is not violative of

Article VIII,

section 1A, of the Constitution of Nebraska, and the judgment of the District Court is affirmed. Affirmed.