Opinion

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Court
Texas Attorney General Reports
Filed
Jul 2, 1964
Status
Published
On the bench
Waggoner Carr
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

June 25, 1964

Honorable J. W. Edgar Opinion NO. c-275

Commlsslonerof Education

Texas Education Agency Re: Questions relating to

Austin, Texas 78711 the State Board of

Education's authorization

for the creation of a

county junior college

district, and the com-

missioners court's au-

thorlty to order elec-

Dear Mr. Edgar: tlons thereunder.

In your letter of June 5, 1964, you requested our

opinion on two questionswhich are as follows:

"(1) Where a first election has been

called and failed for the creation of a

county junior college district pursuant to

State Board authorizationgranted in 1958,

does a CommissionersCourt have authority

to call a second or subsequentelection in

1964 or thereafter?

“(2) Does a CommissionersCourt have

authority under Section 19 of Article 2815h

(where a first election authorized,properly

ordered and held failed) to order a second or

subsequent elections; and if so, legally must

such election(s)be held within 12 months after

the State Board of Education'sinitial author-

ization therefor?"

You state that authorizationwas obtained from the

State Board of Education on March 3, 1958, which authorized the

calling of an election toward the establishmentof a Galveston

County Junior College District. In March or April of 1958 the

election was held in Galveston County for the creation of a county

junior college district but failed to carry. It appears now that

-1320-

Ron. J. W. Edgar, page 2 (C- 275)

interested citizens from Galveston County plan to ask the

Galveston County CommissionersCourt to call an election for

the creation of a county junior college district, based on the

authorizationgranted by the Board in 1958.

You further state that in September of 1963 the State

Board of Education adopted the policy that authorizationfor the

creation of a junior college district, if deemed desirable, will

be based on the following conditions: (1) the authorization

will expire 12 months after the date of authorizationif no elec-

tion has been conducted for the purpose of creating the college,

and (2) if the original election to create a junior college dis-

trict fails to carry, successiveelections may be conducted provided

that such elections are conducted within the 12 month period.

To answer your first question we must look to the

provisions of Article 2815h, Sections 18 and 19 of the Revised

Civil Statutes. Section 18 provides in part that:

"Whenever it Is proposed to establish a

Union Junior College District, or a County

Junior College District, as above provided, a

petition praying for an election therefor, signed

by notfewer than ten percent of the qualified

taxpaying voters of the proposed territory, shall

be presented to , . .the CommissionersCourt or

CommissionersCourts of the county or counties

involved . . . It shall thereupon become the

duty of the . . .CommisaionersCourt or courts,

so petitioned to pass upon the legality of the

petition. . .It shall then be the duty of the

.CommlsslonersCourt or courts, as the case

ia; be, to forward the petition to the State

Board of Education."

Section 19 provides that if the State Board of Education

approves the establishmentof the junior college district:

.it shall then be the duty of the

Commis&ners Court or courts, as the case

may be, to enter an order for an election to

be held in the proposed territory within a

time of not less than twenty days and not more

than thirty days after,such order is issued

to determine whether or not such Junior College

District shall be created and formed. . . .'I

The language of Sections 18 and 19 indicates that a

petition signed by at least ten percent of the qualified taxpaying

-1321-

Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 3 (C- 275)

voters of the propozed territorymust first be presented. ThSs

petition prays for an election' in Section 18; and under Section

19 If the petition Is approved by the State Board of Education,

then the CommissionersCourt has the duty to order "an election"

to be held in the proposed territory within a time of not less

than twenty days and not more than thirty days after such order

‘isissued. A majority vote of the qualifi d voters voting in

"said election,' determines the question 0: whether'to establish

a junior college district.

Thus, we see that Article 2815h is clear in stating

that a petition prays for an election. Based upon such petition

the "further procedure" aumorized by the State Board of Education

is the ordering of an election by the CommissionersCourt. No-

where in this statu= is it stated that a petition shall be the

basis for more than one election. Rather, the initiatingpetition

and the resulting Board authorizationgive the CommissionersCourt

the authority to order only one election for the creation of a

County Junior College District.

Therefore, we answer your first question in the negative.

The CommissionersCourt will have authority to call an election in

1964 only after new authorizationhas been obtained from the State

Board of Education under Article 2815h.

It follows that your second question must also be

answered in the negative. That is, where a first election has

been authorized, properly ordered, and failed, a Commissioners

Court does not have authority under Article 2815h, Section 19 to

order a subsequent election under this initial authorization.

SUMMARY

Where an election for the creation of a

county junior college district has been called

by a CommfssionersCourt pursuant to State Board

of Education authorizationgranted In 19.58,and

such election failed to carry, the commissioners

court does not have authority to call a subsequent

election based on this initial authorizationob-

tained in 1958.

Where a first election has been authorized,

properly ordered, and failed, a commissioners

court does not have authority under Article 2815h,

Section 19, to order a subsequent election under

this Initial authorization.

-1322-

Hon. J. W. Edgar, page 4 (C- 275)

Very truly yours,

WAGGONW CARR

AFtb??hdk

By:

E. Lawrence Merrlman

Assistant

ELM:sj:mkh

APPROVED:

OPINION COMMITTEE

W. V. Geppert, Chairman

Ed Boldlng

Jerry Brock

Edward Moffett

Milton Richardson

APPROVED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL

BY: Stanton Stone

-1323-

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.