Attorney General Opinions and Advisory Letters

Decision Information

Citations - New Mexico Appellate Reports
O'Neill v. Meyer - cited by 3 documents

Decision Content

Opinion No. 55-6069

January 3, 1955

BY: RICHARD H. ROBINSON, Attorney General

TO: Mr. E. E. Thompson

In your letter dated December 22, 1954, you inquire whether teachers at the Industrial School are under the Teachers' Retirement Act and also whether they have the benefit of the teacher tenure laws.

Section 73-12-16 of the 1953 Compilation specifically authorizes employees entitled to the teacher retirement benefits at the Industrial School to participate in the Teachers' Retirement Plan. However, Section 73-12-21 of the 1953 Compilation provides that any State institution, including the Industrial School, may refuse to participate in said plan and if it fails to give notice of its desire to participate prior to June 30, 1948, it shall be deemed an election not to participate therein. Although your letter does not so state, it is my understanding that the Industrial School elected not to participate and, therefore, is not eligible at this time to participate in such plan.

In Opinion No. 5196, dated February 17, 1949, this office held that teachers at the Industrial School could participate in the Teachers' Retirement Plan without the institution contributing 3% of the teachers' salaries to the Retirement Fund. This opinion apparently was based upon the theory that since Section 73-7-39 of the 1953 Compilation provides that the Industrial School shall be treated as a school district in order to receive its distributive portion of the School Equalization Fund, that the teachers at the Industrial School should be considered the same as teachers in any other school district so far as retirement is concerned.

In O'Neill v. Meyer, 55 N.M. 257, the Supreme Court dealt with this question relative to teacher tenure at the Girls' Welfare Home and held that being treated as a school district to participate in School Equalization Funds was not sufficient to constitute the Girls' Welfare Home a legally constituted school district, and did not change its status from that of a State institution. The Court held that teachers at the Welfare Home did not come under the Teacher Tenure Act, and this holding would be equally applicable to the Industrial School with regard to teacher tenure.

Since the Industrial School is to be treated as a school district merely to receive Equalization Funds and is not a legally constituted school district, it seems to follow that teachers and other regular full-time employees of the Industrial School do not come under the Teachers' Retirement Plan in view of the fact that the Institution elected not to participate in this plan. If it is desired that the Institution be allowed to come under the plan, legislation for that purpose would be necessary.

It is my understanding that based upon the former opinion, which is hereby overruled, that certain teachers of the Industrial School have been retired. Since the opinion authorized such retirement and the same was legal when made, we feel that the status of persons so retired from the Institution under the Teachers' Retirement Act should not be disturbed. However, no further retirements should be granted based upon teaching service at the Industrial School. In order to fully protect the teachers heretofore retired, it is suggested that legislation for that purpose would also be appropriate.

By

C. C. McCulloh

Assistant Attorney General

1954

54-6068

54-6067

54-6066

54-6065

54-6064

54-6063

54-6262

54-6061

54-6060

54-6059

54-6058

54-6057

54-6056

54-6055

54-6054

54-6053

54-6052

54-6051

54-6050

54-6049

54-6048

54-6047

54-6046

54-6045

54-6044

54-6043

54-6042

54-6041

54-6039

54-6040

54-6038

54-6037

54-6035

54-6034

54-6033

54-6032

54-6031

54-6030

54-6029

54-6036

54-6028

54-6027

54-6026

54-6025

54-6024

54-6023

54-6022

54-6021

54-6020

54-6019

54-6018

54-6016

54-6017

54-6015

54-6014

54-6013

54-6012

54-6011

54-6010

54-6009

54-6008

54-6007

54-6006

54-6005

54-6004

54-6003

54-6002

54-6001

54-6000

54-5999

54-5998

54-5997

54-5996

54-5995

54-5994

54-5993

54-5992

54-5991

54-5990

54-5989

54-5988

54-5986

54-5985

54-5984

54-5983

54-5982

54-5981

54-5980

54-5979

54-5978

54-5976

54-5977

54-5975

54-5974

54-5973

54-5972

54-5971

54-5970

54-5969

54-5968

54-5967

54-5966

54-5965

54-5964

54-5963

54-5962

54-5961

54-5960

54-5959

54-5957

54-5956

54-5954

54-5955

54-5953

54-5952

54-5951

54-5950

54-5949

54-5948

54-5947

54-5946

54-5945

54-5944

54-5943

54-5942

54-5941

54-5940

54-5939

54-5938

54-5937

54-5936

54-5935

54-5934

54-5933

54-5932

54-5931

54-5930

54-5928

54-5927

54-5926

54-5925

54-5924

54-5923

54-5922

54-5929

54-5921

54-5920

54-5919

54-5918

54-5917

54-5916

54-5915

54-5914

54-5913

54-5912

54-5911

54-5910

54-5909

54-5908

54-5907

54-5906

54-5905

54-5904

54-5903

54-5902

54-5901

54-5900

54-5899

54-5898

54-5897

54-5896

54-5895

54-5894

54-5893

54-5892

54-5891

54-5890

54-5888

54-5887

54-5889

54-5886

54-5884

 You are being directed to the most recent version of the statute which may not be the version considered at the time of the judgment.