## Facts

- A former common school district was consolidated into a central school district; the former district’s voters were authorized by N.Y. Education Law § 1804(6) to decide whether to close the local school and dispose of the school property, with net proceeds distributed among taxpayers of the former district.
- The central district’s board called a special meeting of qualified voters of the former district to vote on closing the school and alternative disposal proposals: sale to a church for $2,000, sale to a grange for $3,000, or sale by public auction.
- Voters approved closing the school.
- A motion to vote next on the public-auction proposal was ruled out of order; the proposition to sell to the church for $2,000 was then voted on and passed 32–24.
- The meeting ended without a vote on the $3,000 grange proposal or on public auction.
- Taxpayers challenged the sale, asserting that choosing the lower offer was arbitrary and that the preference for a church effectively conferred an improper benefit on a religious entity.
- The Commissioner of Education, on administrative appeal, upheld the sale; Special Term annulled that determination; the Appellate Division reversed and reinstated the Commissioner’s decision.

## Issues

1. Whether Education Law § 1804(6) requires a former common school district’s property to be sold to the highest bidder or by public auction after centralization.
2. Whether the Commissioner of Education acted “purely arbitrarily” or contrary to law in approving a $2,000 sale where a $3,000 offer was available.
3. Whether acceptance of the lower offer, given the purchaser’s religious character, constituted an unlawful gift or otherwise violated constitutional limits.

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals affirmed the Appellate Division and sustained the Commissioner’s determination.
- Education Law § 1804(6) does not expressly mandate sale to the highest bidder or by auction.
- The Commissioner’s approval of the sale was not “purely arbitrary” and therefore was not subject to annulment in an Article 78 proceeding.
- Procedural objections to the voting order at the special meeting did not warrant overturning the Commissioner’s decision on this record.

## Legal Principles

- Judicial review of the Commissioner of Education’s determinations is narrow; the determination is final unless “purely arbitrary” or contrary to law.
- Where the governing statute does not impose a highest-bidder or auction requirement, courts will not add such a condition through review of an administrative determination.
- In disposing of public property under delegated authority, decisionmakers may consider non-price factors (including the character of the purchaser and intended use) so long as the choice has a rational basis and is not a disguised, prohibited gift.
- A sale for less than another available offer is not, without more, an unlawful donation; a challenger must show irrationality, lack of authority, or a sham transfer.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld the Commissioner of Education’s approval of selling former school property to a church for $2,000 despite a higher $3,000 offer, holding that the statute did not require acceptance of the highest bid and that the Commissioner’s determination was not purely arbitrary or unlawful under the limited scope of Article 78 review.


Matter of Ross v. Wilson, 308 N.Y. 605 (N.Y. 1955)