Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN a0n. William F. Jackson COUllty AttOrIBy Yfaailer County Hempstead, Texas I)ear 3'~. Jaokeon: %'e have received reoent date end quote from ~I' subdivisions. On the 22d day of Maroh, 1544, the Commissioners' Court rescindad its original order f.o% oounty-wide stock law election and called sn election to be held in the two subdivisions uhioh, taken together, compose the entire area or 'kaller County. The election was held and stook law oerried in the greater Tortion of the county and railed to oarrp In what was designated as :?ubdivision Number Tvo. On July 10, another petition was gesented for county Eon. ‘Xllior? y. Jackson, ?age 2 Ada stook law eleotion under Artiale 6954, which MS sipped by some three hundred freeholders of Yeller County, and no action was taken by the Cohvnissioners~ Court on such petition, pending your opinion. *The question raised isl Upon the filing or the rim petition ror a oounty-wide hook law eleotlon, wa6 it ,mandetorg upon the Com- misaionerel Court to oall a oounty-wide stoak ;;x&eleotion cr oould they - - at their diaore- -- oonaider petitions therearter riled which, in etreot, oalled ror simultaneous eleotlone in two arbitrarily designated subdivisions? It la my opinion that the provisions or Artiole 6954 makes it mandatory upon the Commiesionersl Court to order a oounty-wide stock lsw elaotion upon the presentation of a petition signed by 100 free-holders of ?ialler County and that until suoh eleotlon is ordered and held, any election covering eubdivieiona or the oounty would be void. “The election which waa held resulted in the roilowing vote: Btook Law Preoinot Number One, which inoluded the greater portion oi 3aller County, voted in favor or the stook law. In whet wan deaigrmted as Stock Law Preolnot Number Two, whloh included the smaller QOX%iOnor the oounty, the vote was against a stock law.,, *Artdole 6964 provi&es that: *Whenever an eleotlon is held under the QrWisiOna 0r this chapter ror any oounty or subdivision, no other election ror auah purpose ehall be held within the looality ror the spaoe or twelve months thereafter; but the defeat of the proposition ror a county shall not prevent another election ircxn being held imediate- ly thereeiter for any subdivision of suoh oounty, nor shall a defeat oi the propoai- tion for any nubdivision prevent an eleo- tion from being held i!rzedietely tt-erearter for the entire aounty.’ Ifon. ::lllim ?. Zacksoc, page 3 The opponents or stock law are oontending that beoauso tha Comnissloners~ Court ordered simultaneous elsotlona in the two subdivisions, this should be con- strued es a oounty-wide stook law election whloh would prevent a oalllng of a oounty-wide stook law election upon the ~0tAtsOIx or the raquisits number or e1aotors now filed berora the Comissioners~ Court; but it is obvious that ii tha atatutas mm:8 so oonotrued, the purpos.06 or the atook laws would be nulliiled and shy oounty-rida stook law eleotlon oould ba defeated on the petition of any minority composed of ea msny a8 rirty qud+ri0d electors. “1 advised the Coauaissionars~ Court that a oounty-wide etook law should be oallad on the iirst petition, and I am of tha opinion that the election vihioh was oalled for the two rubdlvlslons ia void and that the Connissioners* Court did not have au- thority to oall the aleotlon on the ssoond petition filed. It is my rurthar opinion that upon the peti- tion of 100 or more quallflod eleotors it beoomaa xnandatory upon the Oornmissloners~ Court to call a county.-wlda stook law eleotlon. In other words, the question raised la not whether the Commlaslonars’ Court has authority to call the eleotion, but whether they have tha dlmretlonary power to reruse to call en eleotion upon the petition ot the raqulalte num- ber of elsotore. petitioning then for a oounty-wide atook law sleotlon under Artlola 6954. “It la my opinion that even though the entire county did vote slzcultaneously in the election reoently ordered by the Commlssloners~Court, the vote was upon two $mtitlons which subdivided ths oounty into preolnota and that it would, therefore, be mandatory upon the ComniLssloners' Court to now ~11 an eleotion for ocunty-wide atook law election upon the petitions of 300 G.ualified voter%* Article 6954, V. 1:. C. y., provides a8 follows: “Upon the aritten :)etitlon of one hundred (1001 freeholders of any cf the iolloiving counties: . . . . . . . ‘ Yeller . . . . or, upon the petition or iirty (50) freeholders 0r any auoh subdivision of e county as may be desorlbed in the petition, and derlned by the Covml.asloners’ Court or my or tha above nemed oouniiea, the Commissionera’ Court of asld county shall order en election to be held in such county or auoh subdivision of a county ss may be deaorlbed in the petition and derined by the Cocmlsnlonera~ Court, on the day named in the order, for the purpose of enebllng the freeholdera or such county or subdivision or a oauhty aa may be desorlbed in the petition and diefired by the Commissionera Court to determine whether horses, r;uleo, Jacks, jennets, and oattle ohall be per- mitt6d to run at large in such ocunty or such sub- division of e county 68 my be described ir the petition end defined by the Comisslonera’ Court.” It is the opinion of this department, after oar&u1 study- ot thia question, that it is now tho leg61 duty of tb Commissioners’ Court of :‘fellar County to oall a oouuty-wide aleotlon under Artlcla 6956, Vernon’s Annoteted Civil Ctatutag upon the written petition of one hundred (lOa), or sore r eeholdera 0r suoh oounty. If such eleotion results in the zsq?zz a atook law, it would control war the prior elec- tions held in the subdlvislona. The aaid elaotions held in the two subdivisions or Yeller County era not tantamount to a county-wide election bnd, aa Artlola 6964, V, A. C. 3.) plainly prwldea that a deraat of the propoeltlon in s sub- dltlolon shall not prevent an aleotlon from being held ln- mediately thereaftar for the ertire oounty, we see no neoeaaity et this tine to pass upon the validity of the eleotlons here- tofore h6ld 11%suoh subdivisions. Trusting the foregoing fully answers your questions, we renaln Very truly yours, By: Zobt. L. Lattlaore, jr. ~isslstant. RLL: rt