1.22
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
-c.yu*,
--
consolidation. e8 NO8 appoint4 at
ed it8 local tax rat4
A taxpeylsr roi~ss a
board of the 00n60iidat8a
ich ia located ia that part
own aa District So. it on the
talidatioa was aads after Jsnuery 1,
‘Is tha taxpayer oorreet in his contention that the
Board wll1 have to wait another par to ta% hlo prOpart
for sohool pnrpostwa
In the oaao of CodeM et al 78. Ftato, I.06 5. ‘dl.567, the
COW held that 630 dUlJ OOX&B%itUtd board Of trWhS8 Or aa iode-
Panda6 rghool cliatrlot,created by rpblal act June 19, 1918, were
iioc. T. k4. rrfmble, ?age e
authorized to lrty a rralstsnance tax in Soptezber, 1918, upon the
property of tha taxpayer a8 0r January 1, 1915. This holQlng ~98
upon the theory that 811 propsrty owned on the first of January of
any year is subjeot to my tax authorized by law, whether author-
ized tharetorora or during the year, and whloh my be levied by the
bdy given the power to levy, at any tlroe during the year.
Xn the 011ae of Blewltt T. mgargsi County Line Independent
Lohool Dirtriot, 28& S, ;F. 291, the Comlsrion oi Appeals cited and
6laouessd with approval the loregoing 6eclalon and held that the
prlnolple of 1~ therein snunolatsd should apply llkewlro to a eltua-
tion where the taxable property maa situated on January 1st of the
tax year in territory aubseqtisntly amexed during euoh year to sn
indoqmdent aohocl district. 'a'hllethe case of Csdsaa v. State,
aupra, inroired property lnoludsd in en iAdPpeildent sohool distrlot
thereafter created, in oontrti6t to this case wtioh involved territory
annexed to an existing independent rohool'dirtriot, the court reoon-
OiiSd this distinotlon with the rOllOWing ~sWy.le~~l
‘A fair oonslderntlon of theststutss makeg pro-
rlslon for the oreation of lnde9endent sohool bistrlota
leaves r10 reasonsblc ground to aonolude that the Legis-
lature lntsnded that no liability for tax98 for aohool
purposae in a hchool Qletrlot Ehould arire until the
year following the creation of tha distrlot; nor did
the tsglslsturs intcL6 that the rules of law governlog
taxation for school purpoeea, of property 13 newly
annexed tmrltcry, ohouid be different frm tboae w&ioh
govern the p%xatioa of property in a newly created dis-
triot ."
'1~ the sate effect and turning upon an ldantioal foot eltua-
tiGt is the later case of Yorktown ?odependent .Sohool Distriot, et al
TO. iirrlerbaoh, et al, by the coz~isaion of Appeala of Texea, reported
at 18 2. 1.. (26) 1030.
Althoueh the facts or the instant oaae present a eirrerant
aapeat from tbG% of tta case oitsd and dis0tiasea above, In that
a consolidation or two existing oommcn school districts 1s here
inrol~ed rather tOan the oreatlon or a mw lndapendsnt aahool district
or the annexation of territory to an exlstlng Independent sohool
district, we nevertheless submit that the prinoiplas of law announce6
in the foregoizig 6aolslona should be ooctrollfng of tho question
berore UB. .U in those oases, it oan be reasoned here that the
statutes governing the OOnsOlldstiGn of two existing and contiguous
.
Hon. T. x. :rimble, ?aee 3
oo~pmon :Chool di6triots afford “no reasonable ground to oonolude
that the Ls.&elature intmdad that no liebillty for taxer for sohool
purpoeer in a aohool dlrtrlct ehould arlre until the year following
the areatloo of the Ulotrlot.* The conoolldetion of the two oom~on
school district8 lnrolrsd here 18, to all intent8 and purposes, and
,~sssured by the princlpleo of taxation announce& in the above autb-
orititm, the erection ot e new district, known as a mooneolidated
Wmswn rchool dletrlatrm And we find nothing in the Btatutes to
rmove this case iron tha prlnaiples of taxation lnaounoed in the,
toregcing cases for consolidated independent school dirtriots, newly
Oreated independent sohool dlstriats, or independent eohool dietriotr
to which territory hsr bean annexed. On the contrary Artlole E814,
Yernon’a Amotated Clrll Statutes, point8 to aa opposite intent in
provldlng, in part, ea follows:
“TEx~D~ and bondiw powara e& are provided for elre-
ahere in the laws of this Sate sre hereby gtmranteed to
nuoh coodoli&ate$ dOtrict.*
'lie therel'ore amwer your queation in the negatfrr. The
porltlon of the taxpayer oannot be austalned under the autborititir,
and.p,roperty altuated on Yanuary 1, 1939, in Comon Sohool Distriot
Ho. 17 ot Xuecea County will be subject to tam8 duly lsvle6 end
amessed thereafter by the proper authorities of the Coasolldeted
Coreaon Yobool orertad by a consolidation cf Cclrpt~ Yohool Dlstriete
Nor. 0 end 17 OS eela County.
Trueting that the toregoing eatief8ctorlly amwara your
inquiry, we are
Your0 rbry truly