Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1939 )

-.
.-
- -
%-JXE A-rro~n;~u Gmnzm~
OF-I?ExAs
March 30, 1939
Gerald C. Mann Au- Il.TszxAEs
X-B-
A-mm- OXXIIAL
Honorable Ben J..Dean
District Attorney
Breckenridge,Texas
Opinion No.O-513
Ri: Zliblgllity of County
School Trustee to serve
as Election Judge 6r
Clerk In'Independant
School Trustee Election
,DearSir:
This department is in receipt of your letter of
March 14, 1939, requesting an oplx$otyuponthe following:
queatlon:
"+asmuch as under ,thep&vieiom-~of'Arti-
cle 275s tbe~.electlon.ofm9mol -tm$eee. of ,831.
lndependen-t..echoolid?.s$rlct
organized-,Ynder.
that portIon of..the~-S~hool:,Larr--ie.-deq~ated,
for the.``.flxyt:
Saturda~Xn Aprilil.%%:;it your
opinlon,Wat .&‘manppho~.``(~s.holding.the
office
of count;;v.
school trustee:underArticle 2676
would ``prohlbL$ed~f&ym,ac$~ing .a8,a judge-or
clerk oi.-an:
eleotion~:far..echool,,.~hlaCee
.o@in
indepamjentaa~ooL-.dj.t3tz+t?,~'
.'I8an.``e~eption:``,~d
uade~.$@e.prqvie-ions
``
of Article ?75&IR.S.:agenera``L(lection.or
a
special election?!
Article -26f~i7.R~c.s.:
1925 pOVide8 that county 8chool
trustee 'shall~bepaid $3.00 per day,~but not to,exceed $36.00
in one year". ,Theg are elected.under Article 2676 and have
numWous duties to perform as provided by the various statutes
pertatnlng to public schools.
.Artlcle2758,.,R.C.S.1925, pertains to the election
of school trustees in independentschool districts created
Ben J. ;iean,Maroh =O, 1939, ?age 8
fIonorable
follow%:
"Any CormdOn crohooldi8triCt containing
seven hundred inbabitaotaor more may fern
an incorporationr0r free Oohool purpose8
only, rhloh may OT may not inolucO tithln
it8 band6 eny town or villago lnaorporateb
for aunloipal purpoae6,the 8am not having
O88uEMd control of the publla $TOO SOh0016
Xithin it.6limits. The territory 80 inoor-
poratea BbeU hOmlnafter by Oalled nn "in-
dependent sohool di8triOt" and 8Oia @OOr-
poration 8hOllbO 18u 0.w in 8 lqu8r*l 8
888~ u nay be pnotioablo with nforaoe to
of l lbool buildm.g
t& loootlon
Artiol.8
am5 ooawn8 ah0iollowbgprov1oioa1
Artiola 8940, R.C.S. lQ%b, xuWr Title %C, XLOOfiion~,
OOD-
hill8 th8 f01bW~ pl’Oti8iOIl; .,;
*No one who hold8 an 0rti88 of profit or
Crud pllaor the United matoe 011this state,
or in any alty or town la thir @Bate of wlth-
in thirty Ely8 after rO81&Xbring Or baiq die-
mlsao& tray any m&h offioa, oxos# a notw
pobllo, or whe i8 a ourdfdak r0r 0ffi00, or
,
Honorable Ben J. Dean, March 30, 1939, page 3
"No one who holds an office of profit
or trust under the United States or this
State, or In any city or town in this State
or within thirty days after reslgnlng or
being dismissed from any such office, ex-
cept a notary public, or who Is a candidate
for office, or who has not paid his poll
tax, shall act as judge, clerk or supervisor
of an election. . . .'
You also call attention to Chestnut vs. Wells, 280
S.W. 351, and 278 S.W. 465, as holding that Article 2940,does
not apply to a special sbhool tax election, but applies .only
to general or primary elections.
Chestnut vs. Wells (T.C.A. Ft.Worth, 1926) 280 s~.w.
39, lnvo1ved.aschool tax election contest in a common school
district on the ground that an election officialwas a school
tivstee:
Chestnut vs. Wells (T.C.A. Ft.Worth, 1926) 278 S.W.
465, was a contest of an election-to determine whether school
districts should consolidate. Two ground8 were presented ln
this case, Le., an election official was a trustee of one
of the districts.and the electaon judge failed to write his
name on the outside of theballot.
In each of these cases the ground-of contest,was
one provided only under the general lay. The court;relylng
on the holding and-language-ofChief Justice Gaines ln:Waills vs.
Williams, 108 SiW. 153, held that the elections In question were
purely apeclal and the provisions of the Terre11 Election Law
were not applicable. The speclflc holding in Wallls v8. Wll-
Hams was that the general law providing for the prlntlng of
ballots did not apply to a.speclal election to locate a county
seat since the general election laws were not applicable?
InScherz vs. Telfer.(T.C.A.X&tin, 1934) 74'.SiWi
(26) 327,.the court held that the general law providing for
the signature of.the election judge on the ballot was appllca-
ble to common school trustee elections since the general.law
would apply to all matters not covered by Articles 2745, 2746
and 2746a.
We are of the opinion .thatthe reasoning of the court
In the foregoIng case Is equally applicable to elections held
under .Artlcle2758, and that It properly dlstlnguishesthe
cases in'the light of Wallis vs.~Wllllams. The court in Scherz
vs. Telfer states:
iionorable
Ben J. bean, Narch 30, 1939, Page 4
Suoh elections as above enumerated are oleorly
local in character, of infkequsnt ocourrenoe,
apply only to a given looallty, em usually
final, the matters voted upon einposea 0r st a
single eleotion,and are not recurrlng in abar-
aoter. * 4 l ke think the eleotlon of oozzon
sohool trusteea does not oonstitutea special
elaotloa dealt rlth In the abovo -4eolslona.
Suuh eleotion is not confined to any given lo-
uality, nor to any glvon lndlvi4pa1,nor to say
limited alaes of lndlvlduals. On the contrary,
artiol~18-2745,Z744 antI 8746a relate to all con-
~88OhOO1 diStX'iSt8 thlW&AOUt th0 StStS, and
‘%th
O ollOOtiOa Of the t-t@88 thOrOOi, proride
iOr OUOjl llSOtiion lMh fe8E t&OU@lOUt t?lO 8-t..
~4 a r e?hr efol88ontla&ly
ro g8norol lntlmir
lpplioatloa. ft.18 llOW SOttlSd that S SOhOOl
b i8t00 t l 00mty oirhr, r 0~u lr 0d to h k 8
thO~OOll8titUtiOlul Oa th Ond that 0 OOntOSt a t
‘h i8 llOOtiO~ 18 l'8ftBd. t0 th8 &8lWWdl’hW.’
Wo ore of thn opldoa that a min holding'%hodSioa of
OOUU~
8OhOS~tZ'ltStSSUZM3S~&t%Sh~676UOuld be~rOhibitidliZ4br
‘AMole8940 irolnEating es a jut&B or olork of t3ndlooei611 for 8OiWO1
of an lndepsndont
trrut80 SShOO1 dA8triot held ua6.r Jbtiole imeJ..