. .
THEA NEY GENEIRAL
Honorable Ed Keys Opinion No. C-629
County~Attorney
Ward County Re: Questions relative to
Monahans, Texas election of county school
trustees when the boundaries
of certain precincts have
been changed by the Commis-
Dear Mr. Keys: sioners Court.
You have requested an opinion on whether, in the
election to be held.on April 2, 1966, for county school
trustees in Ward County, the two trustees to be elected
from commissioners precincts should be elected in accordance
with the boundaries of the precincts as they now exist or~as
they will exist under a resolution of the Commissioners Court
of Ward County which is to take effect on January 1, 1967.
The resolution, adopted on Novsmber 1, 1965, recites that the
redivision is being made "for the convenience of the people
of said County," and that the Court is acting pursuant to
the provisions of the Constitution of the State of Texas and
Articles 2351 and 23513 of the Revised Civil Statutes of
Te'xasD The resolution does not mention precinct offices
either specifically or in general terms, or in any manner
undertake to state the effect of the redivision, other
than as follows in the final paragraph of the resolution:
"BE IT FURTRRR RESOLVED that such redivision
shall be effective for all puPposes as of January 1,
1967, and that the provisions of Section 1 (a) and
(b), Article 2351&, R.C.S. of Texas, as amended,
shall apply to such redivision of Ward County,
Texas; and the County Judge of Ward County, Texas,
'is hereby authorized and empowered to execute all
instruments and documents on behalf of the Commis-
sioners Court necessary to carry out the terms
and provisions hereof.
Section 1 of Article 2676, Vernon's Civil Statutes,
reads in part as follows:
Hon. Ed Keys, page,2 (C- 629)'
"SeCtion 1. The general management and
control,of the public free schools and high
schools in each-county, unless otherwise -
provided'bylaw shall be vested in five (5)
~county,sChool,trusteeselected from the
county, one (1) of whom shall be elected
from the county'at large by the qualified
voters of the county and one (1) from each
Commissionerls Precinct by the qualified
voters of each Commissioner's Precinct who
shall hold office for a term of two (21
years. The time for such election shall
be the first Saturday in April of each
year; the order for the election of county
school trustees to be made by the county
judge at least thirty (30) 'days prior to
the date of said election, and which order.
shall designate as voting places within
each common or independent school district
the same voting place or places at which
votes are east for the District Trustees
of said common and independent school
districts, respectively. * y *'.
Paragraphs (a) and (b) of Article 2351&, V.C.S.,
enacted in 1965, read as follows:
"0a W henever the Commissioners Court
changes the boundaries of commissioners
precincts or of justice precincts, it may
specify in its order a future date, not
later than the first day of January following
the nextgeneral,election, on which the
changes shall become effective. If an
election for any precinct office mid
before the effective date of the order, :.
tie office shall be filled at the election
by the voters of the precinct as it will
exist on the effective date of the change
Tn boundaries. A person'who has resided
within the territory embraced in the new
boundaries for the length of time required
to be eligible to hold the office shall
not be rendered ineligible by virtue of
the precinct’s not having been in exist-
ence for that length of time.
-3051-,
Hon. Ed Keys, page 3 (c-629)
"(b) When bouridariesof commissioners
precincts are changed, the terms of office
of the commissioners then in office shall
not be affected by such change, and'each
commissiomer shall~be entitled to serve
for the remainder of the term to which he
was elected even thou&the change in
boundaries may have placed'his residence
outside of the precinct for which he was
elected." (Emphasis supplied.)
The answer to your question turns on whether the term
"precinct office" as used in the underscored'sentence in Article
23513 is intended to include county schooltrustees'who are
elected from commissioners precincts. In our opinion, the
Legislature intended the term to refer only to officers who
are elected by commissioners precincts and justice precincts
at the general election for state and county officers on the
first Tuesday after the firstMonday in November of even-
numbered years (Election Code, Art. 2.01), and did not intend
to include county school trustees within the term.
It is an elementary rule of statutory construction
that the meaning of a word or phrase should be determined with
reference to the context in which it is used, and that the same
word or phrase may have different meanings in different statutes.
53 Tex.Jr.2d 214, Statutes, Seo. 147+ Cf. Att'y Gen. Op.
WW-111OA (1962), holding that county school trustees are not
county or precinct officers within the meaning of Article XVI,
Section 64 ofthe Constitution, which provides terms of four
years for "the elective district, county snd Erecinct offices
which have heretofore had terms of two years.
In Attorney General's Opinion Noo.c-580 (1966), it
was stated that the purpose of paragraph (a of Article 23513
was to change the rule in Brown v. Meeke, 94 S.W.26 839 (Tex.
Civ.App. 1936, error dism.3, which held that Where an order
of the commissioners court changing the boundaries of justice
precincts, entered prior to the filing deadline for,primary
elections, provided that the changes were to become effective
on the first 'dayof January following the next general election
and that precinct officers were to be elected at that election
in accordance with the new boundaries, an attempted nomination
of a constable for the new precinct was void. That ca6e, it
should be noted, dealt with an office filled at the general
election for state and county offices.
-3052-
Bon. Ed Keys, page 4 (C-629)
Article 23513 sets the first day of January following
"the hext genersl election” a6 the limitation on p'oetpbnement
of the effective date of the order., Although every election"
which is held at regular fixed intervals is a general election
in the broad sense of the term, in common parlance it usually
means the general election for state and county offices.
Greenwood v. City of El Paso 186 S.W.2d 1015 (Tex.Civ.App.
945 ; Att'y Gen. Op. No. C-43 (1963). The fact that Article
2351 specifies the first day of January following the election
as the cutoff date for postponing effectiveness is evidence
that the latter meaning was intended'in this statute.' The
first day of January coincides with the beginning date of
regular terms of precinct officers who are elected at the
biennia1 November general election, Art. 17, V.C.S., and
obviously this provision is tied in with's recognition of the
desirability of electing officers'in accordance with the new
boundaries since the full term of their service will be after
the change becomes effective. This would not be true of the
office of county school trustee. In the present case,'for
example, trustees elected in accordance with the old boundaries
will serve for almost three-fourths of a year (almost half
their full term) before the change..
Other reasons could also be advanced to support our
conclusion that county school trustees do not come within the
provisions of Article 2351*, but we believe the foregoing
reasons make the legislative intent clear enough without
further development. It is our opinion that the coming election
should be conducted in accordance with the commissioner precinct
boundaries as they now exist. There is nothing in Brown v.
Meeks, supra, contrary to our holding on this point. In that
c the court rejected the contention of one of the parties
that'he was entitled to the nomination for the old precinct,
but it was on the ground that neither the commissioners court,
the candidates, nor the voters had understood that the nomina-
tion to be made was for the old precinct and not on the ground
that a valid election for the nomination could not have'been
held if it had been 80 intended. (In that case, the office of
constable of the old precinct would not have been in existence ,
on the date of the beginning of the new term, but in this case
the office for the precinct as it now exists will continue
for almost 9 months.after the new term of trustee begins.)
We therefore answer your question by stating that in the
election to be held on April 2, 1966, a candidate for the
office must be a resident of the precinct in which he is
running, as it now exists, and only the voters residing within
the precinct as it now exists may vote for that office.
-3053-
. .
Hon. Ed Keys, page 5 (C- 629)
As a further question, you ask for an opinion, In
thtievent our answer to your first question ia thatthe
clectidn should be held in accordance with presently existing
boundaries, on'what effect the change ifi~boimdaAes'wil1 have
dn the stat&of these newly elected~trustees when the order
of the commissioners court takes effect ofiJanuary 1; 1967."
You also ask what ePfCct it Wlll~'heveon the status of the two
trustees who were elected from commissioners precincts in
1965 -
We are of the opinion that both questions are
controlled by the holding In Childrere”County v. Sachse,
158 Tex. 371, 312 s.W.2d 380 m9U1,“t.o the effect that a
change in-precinct boundaries‘does’not create a vacancy in
the office of county commissioner or deprive the Incumbent
of the right to hold office for the ,remalnder of his term,
and this ia true ‘even though by reason of such change his
residence Is not within the pficlnct aa redefined.” The later
case of Whitmarsh v. Buckley, 324’&W.2d 298 (Tex.Civ.App.
1959 explaindd the basis oftthe holding to be that a county
comm4ssioner, although elected from a.preclnct, serves the
entire county aa a member of the commirsloners court; that
he Is elected not to act for just hir precinct but to serve
the whole county. This Is also true for a county school
trustee, even to a greater extent than for county commissioner.
Incidentally, the’rule of the Sachse case was enacted into
statutory form for the office ofty commissioner in
paragraph (b) of Article 23513, quoted above. Although the
statute does not apply to the office of county school trustee,
the rule -in the Sachlrecase by analogy doea apply. We
therefore hold t-e change in boundaries on January 1,
1967, will have no effect on the tenure of either the
trustees elected in 1965 or those elected In 1966.
Where an order of the cammisrioners coust
changing the boundaries of commiarioners pre-
cincts, to become effective on January 1, 1967,
was entered in November, 1965, the county school
trustees who are to be elected from commis6ioners
precincts in the election to be held on April 2,
1966, should be elected from the precincts as
they now exirt rather than aa they will exist on
January 1, 1967. Article 2351*, V.C.S., doe6
not apply to the office of county school trustee.
-3064-
. .
Hon. Ed Keys, page 6 (c-629)
The change in boundariea dtiJ&nuak$ I;,1967,
will have no effect on thi 'tiM.M?of iither'the'
trustees elected iri1965"6r those'ilecttidin 1966.
Childress County v. Sachae, 158 Tex. 371, 312
e . 360 [193U) .
Yours very truly,
WAGG0RF.RCARR
Attorney General
By:a+ %= %cx,ec_
Mary K. Wall
Aseiatant
MKW:ra:sj
APPROVED:
OPINION COMKU'TEE
W. 0. Shultz, Chairman
John Reeves
Ralph Rash
Gordon Case
Wade Anderson
APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: T. B. Wright
-3055-