Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

cc.. Gf sa OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS AUSTIN Apprll13, 193s / Eonorable T. Bi. 'i'rimble First Assistant State Superintendent Austin, 'terse zje?lr sir; ur hater or mxob 81u, .D, with the Qrsnr %S.D. ropwfticm in this pet%ttlon e Contsat Go\urtyLlim C.8.D. OS t&l texrltorybelong- Coleman Comty CM rttarh- OS ool%mam aouuty. @rlndstefiuoubl like azwuarad I*: altlcpnab4 subm%ttad to Ml4 th% one petition, In the form h attachti?"' 3%~ follouing aopl4a of roaolotlonsacw~paw ywar letteri 200. r. L . 'I‘rirnble, April 13, 1939, Rege 2 snd partly In Coleman Couutp, Texas, hereby petition your honor to order au election to be held on hprll 15th. 1939, at Content Schoolhouse in &mid Content Consolidated Coitntyilne Common ; "chocl District No. 3, for the purpose OS determining whether or not that part of aaid Content Consolidated County-Line Common tchool District !?o-!', which lies and is situated in huunels County, Lex~SF. and being more fully described in School histrict Reoord of ~~~ Ruuuels County, Texas, Vol. 1, Papa 97, shall be consoll- dsted f'orschool urposcs with Crews Commoa ::choo bl;;Jg;ir in Idnels County, Yeres,sza;; M;F&Lbei, and for the further purpo 6 irhetharor’not that nart of the Content Coneolldat4d County-Lin4Go-n School Dlstrlot Wc 3 hi h li4rrin 'Eobrmn county. Texas. mor4 fnu.~ a&ik:~ in School Dietriot Bsao& ot R&ale Oount$, T4xa8, Vol. 1, pa908 91 and 92, shall be oonsolldatedfor school 'PIIFPOIKI~ with the Rorlo4 Commm SohoolDlstrlot.888.in Coleman tiounty,Texas, aaId.dlatriot6 b4ing ooetlguous. "Wltn4sa our hurds this th4 ZSrd day o? l@rch, 19S9. (Sl@md)" ~ --e-w C-n Sahool Dlstrlctj3,which 114s and-1s atltuated~in Bunn4le Oounty,~Tsxaa, and being more fully desorlbed in School Distrlot Recorda of Runnols County, Texas, Vol. 1, page 97, h4r4by maks applloationto the Donorable Nuntg Jwl~e or Runnsle County, T4xa8, for an 814oti@2nto b4 held on April 15th. 1939, at Crera Sohoolhourr4 ior the purpose of d4terminlngwhather or not a majority of ths legally qualifiedvoters of said dllrtrlctdesire that Crews Consolldatad Common Sohool histrict #R, of Runnals County shall be consolidated with that Portion 6t Content EonaolidatedCounty Line Common School Metriot #3 that lies ti~iiy in tunnels county, Yerae. for school &rpoaea. *Witn4sa our bands this the 23rd day of Maroh, 1939. (Signed)" Her.. in.2:. I‘rlnble,April 13, $939, Yaea 3 facts subzitted with this request are neager and 'i'hc We have had sozcedifficulty in determining whether the above petl- tions gurport to follow any particular statute or a combination 0r 1eCislative acts. Articles 2806 and 20115,Kevised Civil Statutes, 1926, provide for the orfymlzation an& dlssolutlon of consolidated school districts. Article 2806 provides In part as follows: ",S;)n the petjtlon of twenty (20) or .amajority of the legally qualified voters of each of several contiguous common school districts, or cont=ua independant sohool- districts pray- for the oonsolidation of euoh districts ror school purpos%s, the Ootmty Judge shall issue an ordsr for an aleotlon to be held on the sams &ay ln oaoh suoh dlstrlot. . .* Artiole ax.6 prorides: %uoh oonsolliIate& distrlotsmay in the same mnaor provided for their oonsolldatlon,bs dlssolved,andthe: districts inoltadadtheraln rastora4 to thakr orlp$nal~-. status, except that it 8bal.lnot'ba n40484427 to provl6& polling place.8in eaoh dfstrlot. Saoh:suoh dlstrlot whsn so restored shallassusm an4 bo liable.forits pro rata part of thq outstandingflnanolalobl&pHilossof t&o oonsoli&steddietriot, so* pro rata pert to be:.?maedoa the relation the total assessed valuation of all~property in the dlstrlof bears to fhs total assssss4 valuation of property in the oonsolldatsddlstrlot, as shown by the aesessmentrolls or the dlstrlot for the ourrant yr. No eleotlon for the dissolutionOS said oonsolldata4 dlstrlots shall be held until three ysars have alapssd after the date of the eleoflon at which suoh dlstrlots were oonsolldated.* without quotw same, we note aleo Artlole 874Zb, 8eC. 6a, contains ths same ess%ntlal elements material hero as Art1010 e806, except that it more speclfloally provides for esparats petitions + and requires the action of the County Board of Trustees in sach aounty. Manifestly, the petitlone set out above 4r4 lnsuf~lclent to ootaplywith our stetutes oiiooneoli6atlonof dlstrlots and dis- solution of consolidated districts. Articlqs &SO6 and %Pab, Ssc. Sa clearly contemplate the oonsolidatlon or tw6 or more *school dletricttP ae contracted to the d%taohment of a part Of a HOE. T. t'.?rirr.ble, April 13, 1939, Page 4 district aildattachment to another. Article 2815 clearly ccntelcplat that wheo a consolidated district is dissolved the original districts shall return to their original status. IS this is to be a disaolu- tion and the districts returned to their original status, by what theory would the Colman County part of the dissolved consolidated district vote GUI the question of whether the iiunnelsCounty part and the Crews Comon School histrict in Xunnels County should oon- solidate? In like manner, how viouldthe Runnels County portion after dissolution of the consolidated district join in a petition to call an eleotion on the question of whether that part of the old Content Consolidated District beiog in Coleman County should con- solidate -withNovice in Coleman County? That is a question purely between the consolidating distriots. We do not think the patitltm IS rriflolsntto oall au elao- tion to dlsrolve Co&ant ConrolldatedDistrist under Artlola 8815. In the riret plaoe It doe8 not purport to be au llsatlon to dls- ~olvs the oon8olIdetaddistriot but one to deteoh It8 territory, (It not appearing rrom the facts $lvan whether this 4lvI~Ion hollows old district llnnseor not;) end then oonrolldetethose dateohed portion8 with other dlstrlota. But If It should be eontended that a 4188olutlonI8 nsoeasarilyoonsentad t0~i.ntoting to oonsolidete Its parts with other diatrlots,we eel1 attantlon to tha saae of ConsolidatedOo@mon Sohool Dlstrlot Wo. 5 v. Wood, (T 0 A 19957, Writ dIsmIssed),1lS 8. W. (9) 851, whardn It we8 held that In order to oomply with that part of Article 7~3.5whloh provldee that dlwolutlon may be effected In the same manner a8 oonaolIdetIon, one or mora petltlons, elmed by ZOTamty of the~le(pally quallrlsdvoters ol aaoh of the rormerly e%ImtIng dlatrlotsmust b e leaurad and a petmn from the dlstrist asa'wh~le 2.8ln8Pitl- .oient. Aooording to this oaaa, a pajorlty iota o? the aon8olIdatad dImtrIot a8 a whole would not be aurilolentto dIs8olte but there must be e majority vute in saoh of the old dlrrtrlsta. We next oome to the question of whether the petition oomplies with Art&ale S745f providing for transfer of territory. klthout pasring upon the questlon ot whether 97481 applies to oon- solidated districts lying In two or more oountiea, we examine the provisions or this statute. Artlole S745f, Aote 1986, 44th Leg., p:TQO, Ch. 559, % 2, prorides: The petition shallgive the mete8 and bounds of the proposed district an'dbe signed by a~mjorlty of .the ,.qualiried voters residing In eaoh territory to be dataohsd;" Hon. 1~.L. ?rimble i April 13, 193Q, Z)ape5 of this statute is that the petition is The plain vjordixq? to be signed, not by a majority cl’the voters from the whole district but by.a majority “in each territory to be detaohed.r Article 2742f further provides: n that before any portion of any district has any pa&‘tiereof detached au eleotlon shall be held at which the qualifiedtaxpaying voters of such diatrlct eoupht to be divided shall first vote by a majority vote to alvlde said distrlot and shall define the part of said original dletriot sought to be deteohed; . . .v Y'hsqueatlon to be voted upon Is not whether a part of a with another but whather the dlatrlot dletrlot shall bo oonrolld.dbted ahall be qivlded end territory deteohed. Arter the voter8 glre their oonsant to the dl~l8lou, the County Boefl or Trwtees detaohes th? territory and etteoheclto another dlatrlot, oreatlug a new dl&trlot which we do not thluk we8 lnteuded~tobe a~woou8011datod dlatrlot* as that term 1s used la Our statutes. Xradditlon to this, before the newly oreated dlatrlot la a Yallh dirtriot,the LeglUhtuI?e.mUStIVktlfythe eotlon of the CoMty Board a8 provided lu the statute. An addltlonaiprovlslon OS Artlole Pi4Sr 18: R . . . and provided further t&t the dlatrlot to whloh suoh territory is desired to be added aheii have au eleotlon at rhloh the qualliled taxpaying votera of mob orlgllml dlatrlot to whloh moh terrltmy Is sought to be added ehall~voteby a majority vote to assuue-thatpMusrtloa&e f the Qistrlot rrom ~&ion Nob the detaohed territorybeam to the orlginel~ dlatrlot from which deteohed, and at.aeld eleotlon only those quallfled taxpayiugvoters lnslde the territory of the newly formed distrlot tvhall.vbte.w The only pus&Ion voted on In this phase of the statute Is whether the lndobtednesala to be assumed and not whather the territory shall be added. We note that the quest&m preaentqd In the Crsws ConsolidatedDistriot petition Ia whether it @hail be oonaolidatedwith a portion of the Content'DistrIdtand not whether lt,wIll esmme a proportionatepart of the indebteduese. The word- ing of this petltlon lndloa~bs that the dlstrlotswere attempting to oomply with Artlole SSO6 or ArtJole ST&b, Seo. 5, but aa pointed.outabove, this it.'&8 noe'dolia. Undoubtedly these petition8 wouid not satiety the pro- vision8 0f~Artloleti74ar. Hon. T. K. 'I'rfmble, April 13, 1939, rage 0 The view we take of these petitions renders the question of whether the propositions can be submitted in one petition wholly academlo. We are of the opinion that the fern:of the petitions submitted is insuffiolent to call an election for the purpose of dividing or dissolving Content County-Line Consolidated District No. 3 or to consolidate or attach ite parts to other school districts. Yours very truly ATTORI4ZYGENERALOF?EXAS : : .