The opinion
R-476
OF'FICE OF
.THEATTORNEY GENERAL
AUSTIN.TEXAS
PRICEDANIEL
*tTcmNEY GENERAL July 7, 1947
Hon. Carl Gilliland opinion Ro. v-295
County Attorney
Dear Smith counts .f:Re: Validity or an eleo-
Hereford, Texas - tion to~consolidate
conmon school dis-
tricts with a county
line independent
school diatriot.
Dear Mr. Gilliland:
In your letter or May 10, 1947; you-shave
requested an opi,nion Zrom this office relative to
the above subject.
The fact situation; as presented in your
request; is briefly as,follows. There are sought to
be combined into a Rural High School District six
small school districts and a County Line Independent
School District. -None of the Districts has a schol-
astic population of as much as 250. The combined
area of the seven Districts is in excess of' 100 square
miles. ,,The districts are contiguous to each other.
The lar~gerportion or the County Line IndependentSchcol
District~is located in the same county with the others
six small Districts, and the county in which~ this ~larg-
er portion is located has exercised the administrative
control of all of this district for many years past.
The County School Board of Trustees of the
county in which the six Districts, as well as the lerg-
er portion of the County Line District, are located,'
called an election pursuant to Article 2922c, V.C.S.,
to determine whether these several Districts should be
grouped to createf.a Rural High School District. The
large majority of;the votes were castin ravor of the
creation of the District and the County School Board
accordingly entered its order. Subsequent to the el-
ection, the County School Board of Trustees of the
county in which the smaller part of the County Line In-
dependent School District was located also entered en
order acquiescing in the election and the result there-
of is'the creation of a Rural Righ School District.
--
Hon. Carl Gilliland - Page 2 (V-295)
Under these facts, you have asked whether
it was necessary for the County School Board of Trus-
tees of both counties to enter their joint order call-
ing the election; or whether the action of the County
School Board of Trustees in ratifying and consenting
to the election after it had been held was a substan-
tial compliance with Article 29226.
Regarding the first part or thee question
presented, it has been previously held by this Depart-
ment that the consent of each County Board of School
Trustees was necessary to the holding of an election
to group or annex a District such as the one here ih-
volved in the creation of a Rural High School District
(Opinion No. O-1574; dated June 11, 19401, and it is
clear that at the outset it was necessary ror the Coun-
ty Boards of both counties to entier their joint order
calling the election. It is also settled (County
School Trustees of Lubbock County vs. Harral County
,Line Independent School District, 95 5~. W. (26) 2041,
that substantial compliance with Article 29226, V.C.S.,
is insufficieat , and that the terms or the statute
must be followed as they are~written. However, it is
not’ here necessary to discuss or determine whether the
subsequent action of- the county including the smaller
part of the County Line District was sufricient to
.cure the initial failure of both County Boards in not
entering their joint order for the election.
On March 20, 1947, House Bill Ro. 48, Acts
50th Legislature, Regular Session 1947, became effect-
ive. This Act validates prior acCions of School Boards
in the creation, consolidation and administration of
virtually every kind of school district. In Section 1
thereof, it is provided that Rural High school Districts
theretofore established an recognized by either State
or county authorities as SC$ 001 Districts are validated
in all respects as though they had been duly’and legally
established in the rirst instance. Asauming,~ then, that
the ‘Rural High School District involved in your request
was established in the manner described prior to the en-
actment of House Bill Wo. 48, and that both County Boasds
of School Trustees recognized it as a validly created
Rural High School District, the failure or the two coun-
ty Boards to enter a joint order calling the election is
cured by the new legislation. Weaver v. ‘Board of Trus-
tees or Wilson I. US. D., 184 5.’ W. (2d) 864; Trio 1.S.D.
v. sabinal I.&D., 192 9. W. (26) 899; Worth C.S.D. v.
Live Oak County Board, 199 5. W. (2d) 764. It follows
r
Eon. Carl Gilliland - Page 3 (V-295)
that the Rural High School Distriot involved In your
request may properly be held to be a validly exist-
ing Rural High School District.
SUMMARY
Under the facts presented, assuming
that the Rural High School District was
established in the manner described prior
to the enactment of HouseBill 48, Acts
or.the 50th Legislature, 1947, onMarch
20, 1947, and that both County Boards of
School Trustees recognized It as a valid-
ly, created Rural High.School District,
the failure of the two County Boards to
enter a joint order calling ah election.
fok the establishment or the high school'
district is cured by the 1947 legislations
cited and the ddstrict involved may proper-
ly be held to be a validly existing Rural
High School District.
Very truly yours,
ATTORRRVGRRRRALOFTEXAS
ackson Littleton
ATTORNEYGRRERAL