Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Honorable Jules Damianl, Jr. Opinion No. Ed-1384 Criminal District Attorney Galveston County Courthouse Re: Whether a political party Galveston, Texas has authority to nominate a candidate for the'office of County Tax Assessor- Collector to go on the General Election ballot, rrherethe Incumbent Tax Assessor-Collector died with more than two years left in his term of office, such death occurring too late to select a nominee Dear Mr. Damiani: at the Primary election. In your letter you state1 __ elected to "John H. Oberndorfer-was the office of Assessor-Collector of Taxes of Galveston County, for a period of four years, at the General Election In Novem- ber, 1960. as provided by the provisions of Art. 1.6,paragraph 65 of the Consti- tution UT the State of Texas, and held that office,until his death on may 31st, 1962, during the middle of his term of officef . "The vacancy in the office of Assessor- Collector of Taxes has been filled by ap- pointment by the Commissioners Court as provided for by Art. 2355, R.C.S. until the next general election. "The office of Assessor-Collector of Taxes was not on the ballot at the Demo- cratic Primary election of Saturday, May 5th, 1962." . You have asked the following questions! "As there wasno nominee for the of- flee of Assessor-Collector of Taxes on Honorable Jules Damianl, Jr., page 2 Opinion No. NW-1384 the May Primary Election ballot, the quee- tlon arises, does any political party (either Democratic, Republican or other- wise) have the authority to meet and nominate a nominee, whose names would be printed upon the Official Ballot at the ,~ General Election to be held on November 6th, lg62? "Secondly - should the Attorney General hold and/or should a court of competent jurisdiction decide that a political party does not have the authority to nominate a candidate whose name would go upon the General Election ballot In November, and further should no petition of an Indepen- dent candidate be filed with the county judge, as provided by Art. 13.53, Election Code, would the Electoral Board have the authority to place the office of Assessor- Collector of Taxes on the General Election ballot in November, so that a voter would have the right to write-in the name of a candidate of his choice, for said office, as is provided for In Sec. 16, Art. 7.14, Election Code, under the provisions of the voting machine laws; Galveston County having adopted and are using voting ma- chines In all elections?" Art. 6.04, Texas Election Code, reads In part as follows: "If a nominee dies or declines his nomination, and the vacancy so created shall have been filled, and such facts shall have been duly certified in accord- ance with the provisions of this Code, the Secretary of State or Cocunty Judge, as the case may be, shall promptly not!fy the official board created by this law to furnish election supplies that such vacancy has occurred and the name of the new nominee shall then be printed upon the official ballot, If the ballots are not already printed. D e .: "If a state or district official who is serving a four (4) or a six (6) Honorable Jules Damiani, Jr., page 3 Opinion No. W-1384 year term should die or resign on the even numbered year In which he is not a candidate, after the filing date of the first primary election and before the printing of the ballot for the gene- ral election, the state committee for each political party in the case of state officers and the appropriate dis- trict committee for each political party in the case of district officers shall have the power to name a nominee for such position and to certify the name to the proper election board to have the name printed on the general elec.- tlon ballot. 0 . .” Art. 13.56, Texas Election Code, reads as follows: “A nominee may decline and annul his nomination by delivering to the officer with whom the certificate of his nomination is filed, ten (IO) days before the election, If It be for a city office, and twenty (20) days in other cases, a declaration in writing, signed by him before some officer authorized to take acknowledgments, Upon such declination (or In case of death of a nominee), the executive com- mittee of a party, or a majorit,yof them for the State, district or county, as the office to be nominated may re- quire, may nominate a candidate to supply the vacancy by filing with the Secretary of State In the case of State or district officer, or wlth.the county Judge, in the case of county or precinct officer, a certificate duly signed and acknowledged by them, setting forth the cause of the vacancy, the name of the new nominee, and office for which he was nominated and when and how he was nominated. No executive committee shall ever have power of nomination, except where provided for by law.” pm- phasis addew Honorable Jules Damlanl, Jr., Page 4 Opinion No. WW-1384 Art. 6.04, Election Code, provides the procedure to be followed If an-office holde&who holds a state or district office ____~- should ~~~ d’Feor resiiz ~..~ -n In the middle of his four or six -term. Art. 13.56 sets out the procedure to be followed in the case of death of a party nominee, or declination of nomi- nation by a party nominee. Mr. Oberndorfer did not hold a state or district office: he held a county office. So, Art. 6.04, Election Code, does not apply to your situation. Mr. Oberndor- fer was not a nominee; 1962 is not the year for County Tax Assessor-Collector’s terms of office to expire. No party nomi- nees were selected In the Primary elections of 1962. Had Mr. Oberndorfer’s death occurred earlier irthe year, it would have been possible for the County Executive Committee of each party to announce that they would accept applications from candidates for the unexpired term of Mr. Oberndorfer, announce the amount of the filing fee and set a deadline for filing. This was done this year In Travis County, upon the death of its Tax Assessor- Collector. See Attorney General’s Opinion No. ww-827 (not a - plicable to State and district offices. Meyers v. Smith, 31F; S.W.2d 631). But Mr. Oberndorfer’s death occurred after the First Primary election of May 5, 1962. The person appointed by the Commissioners Court serves only until the General Election of November, 1962. His successor will be selected at that elec- tion, and will serve out the remainder of Mr. Oberndorfer’s term. This situation is clearly not covered:by the Election Code. In Brewster v. Massey, 232 S.W.2d 678 (Clv.App. 1950; Mand. over- ruled) the courts were faced with a Similar Situation. To show the sikilarity of situations, we quote from the Court’s state- ment of the facts, at page 679: “Prior to January 1, 1948, /r949 q Judge Walter Morris was elected to serve a term of four years beginning on Janu- ar:-2, 1948, flg&g g as Judge pf the 67th District Court, a district com- nosed of the area which comprises Tar- rant County. Judge Morris qualified and served as judge of such court un- til h4s death on August 4, 1950. Since the year 1950 fell in .the middle of his term, and since his death occurred af- ter the Democratic primary election was held that year, no one was nominated in the 1950 primary election for such office. “At the regular state convention of the Democratic Party held fn Mineral “ . Honorable Jules Damlani, Jr., page 5 Opinion No. WW-1384 Wells on September 12, 1950, Harris Brew- ster, the relator in this proceeding, was nominated by the convention for the of- fice In question as the party nominee to appear on the Ncvember ballot. Tne nomi- nation by the convention was made on re- commendation of and pursuant to a reso- lution adopted by v.lestate executive committee of the party, and the nomina- tion was duly certified by the proper officers of the party to the county clerk of Tarrant County." At page 682, the Court stated: III . . the statutes do not require, nor contemplate, that nominations be made in the primary election for offices which are not expected to become vacant at the end of that year. 'Therewas no way a valid nomination could have been made in the primary election for judge of the 67th District Court in 1950, while the Incumbent was still alive and serving, and had been elected for a term which was not t'oexpire until the end of 1952. D y an And at page 68$, the Cou.rt, held: "I?lestate convention, under all the decisions, Is th? most authori- tative body of the party9 at least with respect:to a.ff'airsof the party within the state, and under the prin- ciples which we have referred to un- doubtedly has aluthorityto attend to the business of the party in such way as it sees fit, subject to such regu- lations and limitations as have been Imposed by the statutes. There was presented to the state convention a situation where an important public office was to be filled in the gene- ral election. S , S Under all the pro- nouncements of our courts, we feel com- pelled to hold that the nomination was Honorable Jules Damiani, Jr., page 6 Opinion No. W-1384 valid. . . . The right of the party and of all its members to .have a noml- nee on the November ballot cannot be ignored,." In 1951 the Texas Election Code was enacted, and included therein was Art. 6.04, su ra When a vacancy occurred in the riminal District Court No. 3 of Harris office of judge of the zP--* County, on June 1, 19.58,in the middle of the judge's four year term, the Democratic District Committee selected one Love as the Democratic nominee for that office. Thereafter, the Demo- cratic State Convention, acting on a resolution by the state executive committee, nominated one Krichamer, as had been done in the Brewster v. Massey case, S.W.2d -269 (Civ.App., 1958) the ?%%'he$ $zt" ktMi?g:' z:zc- tlon Code, was the law governing the situation, and'ruied'that Mr. Love who had been select,edby the District Committee was the Democratic nominee, and not Mr. Krichamer, who had been selected at the state convention. 'Ihecase of Williams v. Huntress, 153 Tex. 443, 272 S.W.2d 87 (19.54)presented another situation not covered by statute. A new court had been created, the Special 37th District Court of Bexar County. By the terms of the statute creating the court, such court did nrt come into existence until September 1, 1954. Mr. Spears was selected by the Democratic County Convention to be the nominee, and Mr. Williams was selected by the Democratic State Convention to be the Democratic nominee for such office. The Court stated at page 88: ,I . . . We have found no statute specifically placing the power of appointment for a district office where the need for appointment arises from the fact that a new office has been created In such a fashion that the nominee is not selected at the regular primary. "The law is 'settled that where the legislature has not specifically regulated party affairs, the party itself has the right to prescribe rules and regulations governing it- self. . . . II . . . \: . . Honorable Jules Damlani, Jr., page 7 Opinion No. WW-1384 “We hold that In this situation the State Convention had the power to select a candidate for district office and that it legally exercised that ,power. It seems to be uncontro- verted that relator does have a regu- lar certificate of nomination from the State Democratic Convention.” The Court ruled in favor of Mr. Williams, who had been selected as the Democratic nominee by the Democratic State Convention, While we find no case in which the State Convention of a party has selected a nominee for an office, which is purely of a county or precinct nature, nevertheless, we are of the opinion that the following conciuslons may be drawn from the above cases: 1. A political party is entitled to have a nominee for every office which is to ‘bevoted on by the people at a General ELection. 2. If the Election Code provides a method of selecting such party nomi- nee, the method provided in the Elec- tion Code is exclusive, and must be followed; otherwise, there will be no party nominee for such office. 3. If the sit.uationis one in which there Is no applicable law, then ‘IO. e the party itself has the right to prescribe rules and regulations governing Itself.” 4. The state convention of a political party /)a O s is the most authoritative body of the party . . e ,wlthrespect to the affairs J of the party within the state O D . and has authority to attend to the business of the party in such way as It sees fit, subject to such regu- lations and limitations as have been imposed by t.hestatutes.” In answer to your ‘firstq,uestion,we hold that the various bona fide political parties have the authority to nominate a ii Honorable Jules Damiani, Jr., page 8 Opinion No. W'W-1384 nominee for the office of Assessor and Collector of Taxes of Galveston County, for the unexpired term of.the late _^ John H. Oberndorfer, the names of sucn nominees to ce printed in their respective party columns on the General Election ballot in the General Election of November, 1962. Such nominations may be ,made at the state conventions of such parties, While it is not necessary to answer your second question in detail, we point out that a method must be provided for voters to express their choice by write-in vote, since the voters are not required to cast their votes for either a party nominee or independent candidates, whose names are printed on the ballot. If the voters prefer someone whose name is not printed on the ballot at all, the will of the voters must prevail. Note the statutory provisions authorizing write-in votes for paper bal- lots In Art. 6.06, Election Code, and for voting machines in Sec. 16, Art. 7.14, Election Code. SUMMARY Where a County Tax Assessor-Collector died in office In the middle of his term, during an elec- tion year when he was not required to run, after the party primary eiectlon has been held, but prior to the General Election to be held that year, there being no applicable statutes in the Election Code governing such a situation in the case of a county office, the various bona fide political oarties have the authority to nominate nominees for such office, the names of such nominees to be printed in their respective party columns on the General Election ballot as candidates for the remainder of the unexpired term of such of- fice. Such nominations may be made at the state conventions of such parties. A method must be provided for voters to express their choice by write-in vote, since the voters are not required to cast their votes for either a party nominee or independent candidates, whose names are printed on the ballot. If the voters prefer someone whose name Is not printed on the ballot at all, the will of the voters must prevail. Yours very truly, WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas Honorable Jules Damiani, Jr., page 9 Opinion No. WW-1384 -Y Riley &gene Fletcher Assistant REF:rk APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE W. V. Geppert, Chairman L. P. Lollar Sam Stone Grady Chandler REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: Leonard Passmore