Opinion

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Court
Texas Attorney General Reports
Filed
Jul 2, 1949
Status
Published
On the bench
Price Daniel
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 3.5%

The opinion

AUSTIN. TEXAS

wovember 5, 1949 ,

Boll. Gene Ii. Hlxson opinion Bo. v-944.

Couuty Attornef

Lipacomb County Be: The authority or the

Biggina, Texer ~trwtees of an iude-

pendeut aohool dls-

triot to sell unused

school houses of dor-

mant aohool diatrlota

tQllowing their OOP-

Deer Hr. Mixson: solid&ion.

We refer to your mueat presenting, in aub-

stance, the followlng data end question:

!The Llpaocmb County School Board, aot-

In& under Artlole VIII of Senate Bill 116

filat Legislature, (codified as Art.2922-lb,

In 8ernon1s Civil Statutes) by order oonaol-

idated CommonSohool Districts Won. 8, 9, 11

and a part of 6, all being dormant aohool dia-

trlots, with the Higgins Independent~Mhool~

Biatriot In such county. .Electioda h&we been

held wherein bonded indebtedness has ~%een aa-

sumed and provialon for levying a naintenanoe

tax has been made.

Located in the new diatrlot are three

abandoned aohool howea whioh were used, at

one time, by the dormant OommonSohool Dia-

trlots. Sohobl has not been held in them for

many years. They are standing in disuse, un-

repaired, end are rapidly deteriorat$ng. Ii

sold, they will probably bring $200 to $400

a piece.

Question: may the Board of Trustees of'

Hlggina Independent School Diatpict sell these

abandoned sohool houses and invest the pro-

ceeds in more oonvenlent and desirable school

property? If 80, must the consent of State

Department of Education be obtained?

We awume ior purpo8ea of th%.s 'opinion that the

,

Hon. Gene R. Mlxaon, page 2 (V-944)

buildings in question were aoqulred or oonatruoted and

maintained with public money; that they are owned and

held in trust for aohool purposes.

Artiole VIII of Senate Bill 116, dots slat

Legislature, provides in pert as follows:

” the Board of Trustees for the dis-

tkit’wlth which such dormant school dla-

trlot is consolidated shall continue to

serve, and be, the Board of Trustees for

the new dlatrlot. In each auoh oaae, the

oonsmdation order of the County Board of

Trustees shall define by legal bouudary

deaoription the territory of the new dLs-

triot ga so enlarged and extendedTnd said

order, including the description of the dis-

triot, shall be recorded in the minutes of

the County Board of Trustees and otherwise

as provided by law. ~Electlons shall be held

in such consolidated districts for the aa-

suisption of outstanding bonda, if any, for

the levying of taxes therefor, and ‘for the

levying of a local maintenance tax; said

elections to be ordered and held as now pro-

vided by laws” (Bmphasis added).

Temple I IS .D. v. Proctor, $7 S.W.2d 1047 (Tex.

Civ.App.1936, error ref.) holds that Artlole 2780 is ap-

plioable to all types of independent aahool dlatrlcta,

whether in incorporated cities or not.

Artiole 2780, Vernon’s Clvll Statutes, provides:

‘Said trustees shall adopt such rules,

regulations and by-laws as they may deem pro,?

per, and the public free schools of awh inA.

dependent aohool district shall be under ‘their

obntrol; and they shall have the exclusive

power to manage and govern said sohoola, end

all rights and titles to property for school

purposes heretofore vested in the mayor, city

oounoila, or school trustees by Articles 3995,

4013 and 4032, Revised Statutes of 1895, or

other statutes, general end speolal, eroept

such cities as era exempted by this title,

shall be vested in said board of trustees and

their successors in offioe, and their olatia

Eon. Gene H. Hlxaon, page 3 (V-944)

shall apply to any action or suit which may

arLae to whloh said board Is a party.”

Under the express provisions of Artiole VIII

of Senate Bill 11.6, a new district was created when the

county board by its order consolidated the dormant dia-

triots to the Higgins Independent Sohool District. The

truateea of former Higgins diStriQt ars now the trua-

Ftieitof the eularged new Higgins Independent School Dla-

The former common school dtatridta, defined as

dormant in Article VIII, by reason of their consollda-

tion with the Hlgglna district, have ceased to exist.

State v. Cadeohead, 129 S.W.2d 743 (Tex.Cfv.App.1939,

error ref.). Thus, the school properties, title to whloh

prior to the consolidation was veated in the boards of

trustees of the dormant common school dlatrlota, is now

vested in the Board of Trustees of the Higgins Indepen-

dent school Diatriot and their successors in office by

reason of the consolidation end in accordance with the

provisions of Article 2780, V.C.S., Love v. City of Dal-

&, 120 Tex.251, 40 S.W.2d 20, at p. 26 (1931). Houston

v. Gonaalea I.S.D., 229 3.W. 467, (Comm.App.192~); Len-

der v. Victoria Count 131 S.U. 821, (Tex.Clv.App.rViO);

T J 946 Schok, Sec.79; A.G.Oplnions Ros. O-

54e~&?:7265:

With respect to the authority of the board of

trustees of an independent school district to sell school

property of the distrikt we quote from Article 2773:

"Any houses or lands held in trust by

any city or town for public free school pur-

poses may be sold for the purpose of invest-

ing In more convenient and desirable school

property, with the consent of the State Board,

Fr Frmbozs of school trustees of such city

in such case, the president of

the schiol b;ard shall execute his deed to the

purchaser for the ssme, reciting the resolution

of the State Board giving consent thereto and

the resolution of the board of trustees auth-

orlalng such sale.”

Previous Attorney Genersl opinions O-415 and

O-1570 hold thet the prooedure to be followed by boards

of trustees of independent districta ln selling abandon-

ed school buildings and grounds is that provided in Art-

icle 2773, V.C.S. R.B.Spencer & Co. v. Brown, 198 S.W.

1179, (Tex.Civ.App.1917, error ref.). Oplnlon O-1570

Eon. Gene Ii. Mixaon, psge 4 (V-944)

further holds that independent school districta msy dis-

pose of property no longer needed for aahool purpoaea,

only if it is necessary to do so to acquire other proper-

ty whLoh is more suitable; that such property may not be

sold for the purpose of putting tbe’:prooeeda in the looal

maintenance fund of the district.

With the foregoing in mind, it is our opinion

that the Board of Trustees of the Higgins Independent

School District may dispose of the abandoned buildlags

in accordance with the procedure set out in Article 2773.

This law requires that the board of trustees meet and

sdopt a resolution evidenolng their decision to sell the

buildings. Then the cowent resolution of the State Board

of Education must be aeoured, and finally the prealdent

of the Hlggka Board of Trustees must execute the deed

to the purchaser. ‘Fhe two resolutions should recite tM

purpose of the sale, and the deed should refer to both ‘5

reaolutiow .

SUMMARY

Abandoned ,achool buildtinge in dorraant

districts oowolidsted with an independent

school district under Article VIII of Senate

Bill 116, Acts of the 5Xst Legislature, may

be sold by ,the board of trustees of the new-

ly created school dietriot In aooordanoe with

the provisions of Article 2773, ~V.C.8. hart.

2780, v.c.s.; Love v City of Dalli%, 120 Tex.

351, 40 S.W.2d. 20’ Eowtod v.‘.(ion%a~6k I.S.D.,

229 S.W.467; Land& v. Viot’otiU Coiantjr, 13

3 .W. 821; R.B.Spencer & Co. v’. BYown, 198 i.W.

1179; A.G.Opinlow Hos .0413, 0-l>m, O-5354,

o-7265.

Yours very truly,

APPROVED ATTORNEY

GENERALOF TEXAS

James E. Ferguaon

Aaalatant

&-7pW

JEF:CRO:bh:mv Cheater IE. Olliaon

Aaal8tant

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.