Opinion

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Court
Texas Attorney General Reports
Filed
Jul 2, 1950
Status
Published
On the bench
Price Daniel
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

THEATTORNEYGENERAL

OFTEXAS

February 21, 1950

Eon. Eulon c. Hall Opinion Ho. V-1011.

County Attorney

Grimes county Rer Authority of County School’

Anderson, Texas Board under Art. VIII,‘S;B.

116, Acts 51st Legi, R.S.

1949, ch. 334,p. 625,to

consolidate an independent

school district with an ad-

joining district, under the

Dear Sira submitted facts.

Your request for an opinion reads, in part, as

followsr

“In the Plantersvllle Independent School Ms-

trlct, @rimes County, Texas, a white school

has not been maintained for several years, but

a negro school has been maintained and la still

in operation., The scholastic census taken

April 1, 1947, disclosed that there were a

greater number of negro scholastics than whites,

but the bensus of April 1, 1948 revealed that

there were more whites than negroes, as did al-

so the census of April 1, 1949. In other words,

to clarify, here was the situation for the past

three years.

“1947-48 Negroes had the greater number of enu-

merated scholastics. A negro school was main;

tained, but no white school.

“1948-49 Whites had the greater number of enu-

merated scholastics. A negro school was main-

tained, but no white school.

“lg49-50 Whites have the greater number of enu-

merated scholastics. A negro school is being

maintained, but no white school.’

The following two questions are presented%

Under Article VIII, S.B. 116, Acts

51st i;, ., 1949, B.S., Ch. 334, p. 625 (Art,

.

Hon. Hulon C. Hall, page 2 (V-1011)

2922-18, V.C.S.) does the County Sohool Board

of Grimes County have the authority to con-

solidate the Plantersvllle I.S,D, with an ad-

joining district at this time?

2, Uhen may the Couuty School Board of

ffrlmes County exercise Its consolidation au-

thority with respect to the Plantersville I.

S.D. under existing law?

Insofar as pertineat to this opinion, Article

VIII of Senate Bill 116, Acts slat Leg., R.S. 1949, ch.

334, p, 625 (Art, 2922-18, V.C.3,) ppovideso

“within thirty (30) days from the effect-

ive date of this Act, the County Board of

Trustees of the several couuties of the State

are hereby authorlsed and vequlred to consoli-

date by order of said Board each dormant school

district wlthln the county (as helseln defined)

with an adjoining district OF disttiiCtse The

terra “dormant’ as used.hereln shall mean any

school district that fails, for auy two (2)

successive years subsequent to 1946-47 school

year, to operate a school in %he district for

the race having the greater number of enumer-

ated scholastics in %he dlstpict 0 0 *a

In opinion 190~V-855, this office held that the

fact that the Legislature defined “dormant” to apply to

any school district tha% fails for an two successive

years subsequent to the 1946-1947 SC 3 001 year, implies

that the power of the county board to consolidate there-

under shall continue beyond the thirty days from the ef-

fective date of Senate Bill 116, If the Legislature in-

tended the provision to apply onl to school districts

dormant in the school years 1947- 1 8 and 1948-49, It would

have clearly and expressly so provided,

In opinion Ro. v-856, which also construed AP-

,ticle VIII of Senate Bill 116 we held that although the

Legislature used the term “19$6-1!34i’ school year,’ Its

:intentlon, considering the Act as a whole, was to refer

to the school term which coavaenced In the Fall of;.1946

and ended in %mprlng of 1947, Therefore, if a school

district had not operated a school for the zv3ce having

the greater number of scholastlos for two successive

years subsequent to the school term which began in 1946

and ended in the Zipping of lq4vs such distrfct would be

.

;

Hon. Hulon C. Hall, page 3 (V-1011)

a “dormant’ district under and subject to the provisions

of Article VIII.

The same meaning which we have given to the

term “school year’ as used in Article VIII, should be ap-

plied to the word “year” as used In the same sentence

defining “dormant” and found In the phrase “for any two

(2) subsequent years.” Watlonal Surety Corp. vb Ladd,

131 Tex.295, 115 S;W.2d~600 [lg38) 39 T J 201

Statutes, Sec. 108. Therefore, if’s soh% d%rict’has

not operated a school for the race having the greater

number of enumerated scholastics for two successive an-

nual school terms, subsequent to the school term which

began in 1946 and ended $n the Spring of 1947, such a

dlstrlct would be a “dormant” district subject to the

consolidation provisions of Article VIII of Senate Bill

116.

Under the facts submitted, the Plantersvllle

District does not presently fall within the statutory

definition of a “dormant’ school district. This is true

for the reason that there has been operated a school for

the race (negro) having the greater number of enumerated

scholastics In the district in one of the school terms

(1 47-48) of the two successive years subsequent to the

19 $ 6-1947 school year, Since the whites did not have

the greater number of enumerated scholastics fn the

school year 1947-48, there has not been within the two

school years subsequent to 1946-47 two successive years

when no school was operated In the district for the

race having the greater number of enumerated scholastics.

The district not presently being “dormant,’ as defined

in the Act, the County School Board of Grimes County is

without authority at this time to consolidate the,Plant-

ersville District with an adjoining district OP dis-

tricts.

We till now consider then second question pre-

sented. Under the facts submltted, the whites had the

greater number of enumerated soholasti.cs during the

1948-49 school year, but no white school was maintained’.

In the district for that year. In the present school

year or term, 1949-50, whites have the greater number of

enumerated scholastics, and again no white school is be-

ing maintained in the district, By virtue of the provi-

sions of Artiole VIII, as construed in opinion V-856

and herein, we are of the opinion that authority will

lie In the County Board to consolidate Plantersville Ms-

trlct tith another district or districts following the

‘.

Hon. Hulon C, Ball, page 4 (V-10111

termkmtion of its 1949-50 school tera in the Spring of

1950. l%ls is true for the Peason that thePe till then

have been two successive annual school terms, subsequent

to the s&o01 term which began in 1946 and ended in the

Spring of 1947, in which no school was operated fop the

Pace'baving the greatest number of enumerated scholas-

tics.

The district's enumerated scholastios for the

school year 1949-1950 is that detemdned by the scholas-

tlc~census takefi.zig~l949-in accordance with Articles

2816-2822, inclb, V&3,, and not by the census to be

taken and determined in 19500

Under the facts submltted, the Planters;

ville Independent.District Is not a "doP@mt"

dlstrlct~aa defined in Article VIII,of Senate

Bill 116, Acts 5lst Leg,@, R.S. 1949, ch, 334*

p. 625, and the county School Board of Grlmes

County is without authority as of the pPesent

tZme to consolidate such district tith an ad-

joining di8trict or disttictsi Under the ex-

isting facts, the Board will be vested with

authorLty to consolidate such district follow-

ing the termination of its 1949-1950 School

terpl in'the Spring of 1950. Art, 2922-18, V.

C.S.; A. G, Opinions Was, v-855 and 856.

Yours very truly,

PRICE DAEIBL

APPROVED% Atttorney GenePal,

17; C, Davis, Jr,

county Affairs Division

Charles D, Mathews Chester Ei Ollison

Executive Assistant Assistant

CEO:mwobh

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.