Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1972 )


Menu:
  •                  HE   ,~%TOKNEY         GENERAL
    OFTEXAS
    Honorable Bevington Reed                Opinion No. M- 1081
    Commissioner of the Coordinating
    Board                                 Re:   Authority of the Board of
    Texas College & University System             Trustees of Kilgore College
    P. 0. Box 12788, Capitol Station              District to provide for in-
    Austin, Texas 78711                           terior redistricting of the
    district in order that trus-
    tees may be elected accordin
    Dear Dr. Reed:                                to population.
    You have requested this office to render an official opinion
    concerning the authority of the Kilgore Junior College District to
    subdivide the district and elect members to the Board of Trustees from
    within each one of these sub-districts instead of electing all of the
    trustees from the entire district at large.
    Specifically, your question is as follows:
    "Does the Board of Trustees have the au-
    thority to provide for interior redistricting
    of the district in order that trustees may be
    elected according to population?"
    You have stated in your letter that prior to September 1,
    1969, the Board of Trustees of Kilgore Junior College District, acting
    under provisions of Section 51.072(h) of the 1969 codification of the
    Texas Education Code*, adopted the laws pertaining to Junior College
    Districts of Texas.
    Numerous amendments to this Code were enacted by the 62nd
    Legislature in 1971. Included in these changes was the renumbering
    of many of the Sections of the 1969 codification.  Those portions of
    * This first codification of the laws on education was enacted in
    1969, effective September 1, 1969. Acts 61st Leg., 1969, R.S.,
    ch. 889, p. 2735, H.B. 534.
    -5288-
    Hon. Bevington Reed, page 2       (M-1081)
    the 1969 codification with which we are concerned were carried for-
    ward by the 1971 amendments verbatim under different Section numbers.
    We will hereinafter use the new Section numbers in making references
    to the provisions of the Code which we consider.
    You have enclosed with your letter a proposed resolution
    which would subdivide the district into geographical areas of ap-
    proximate equal populations.   The proposed resolution provides that
    trustees elected from, each of the districts shall be residents of the
    district in which they are elected. This resolution states that the
    Board of Trustees of Kilgore Junior College District is now comprised
    of nine persons.  The stated need for the proposed resolution is
    predicated upon the purpose of complying "with decisions of the United
    States Supreme Court which require that trustees should be elected in
    proportion to population."
    Avery v. Midland County, 
    394 U.S. 474
    (1968) applied the one-
    man, one-vote principle to county governments in Texas. The holding
    was restricted, however, to the following, (P. 485)
    "Our decision today is only that the Consti-
    tution imposes one ground rule for the development
    of arrangements of local government:  a requirement
    that units with general governmental powers over an
    entire geographic area not be apportioned among
    single-member districts of substantially unequal
    population."
    Hadley v. Junior College District,,-3.97U.S. 50, 252 L.Ed.Zd
    45, 
    90 S. Ct. 791
    (1970) holds that a \Sunior College District is a "unit
    with general governmental powers", and that it meets the criterion set
    out in Avery. However, neither of these cases stands for the proposition
    that at-large elections are unconstitutional per se.
    Whitcomb v. Chavis, 
    403 U.S. 124
    , 29 L.Ed.Zd 563 (1970) holds
    that multi-member districts are not inherently invidious or violative of
    equal protection.  At-large elections are not, per se, unconstitutional,
    but the test is whether or not there is an invidious discrimination
    against a minority group. Dusch v. Davis,,.387 U.S. 112, 
    87 S. Ct. 1554
    (1967).
    In the absence of a finding that there exists an invidious
    discrimination against some minority group in at-large elections of
    Trustees~ to the, Board of the Kilgore Junior College District--in a
    -5289-
    Hon. Bevington Reed, page 3       (M-1081)
    direct attack on the constitutionality of Section 130.082(f) of the
    Texas Education Code--the statute is controlling.
    Section 130.082 is captioned,
    "Governing board of junior college of
    other than independent school district."
    Section 130.082(h) reads as follows:
    "Notwithstanding anything in this code to
    the contrary, the provisions of all or any part
    of the laws of this state in effect immediately
    prior to the effective date of this act and re-
    lating to the name of any junior college district
    or the name of its governing board, or to the
    number of members of its governing board, or the
    procedures and times of electing or choosing said
    members, shall remain in effect under the follow-
    ing conditions.  If, at any time before the effect-
    ive date of this act (but not thereafter), the gov-
    erning board of any junior college district shall
    specify by resolution or order the particular pro-
    visions of the aforesaid laws applicable to it
    which it desires to remain in effect, then such
    particular provisions shall continue to apply
    to said board and its district: provided that
    at any time thereafter the governing board may
    make this section in its entirety applicable
    to it and its district by appropriate resolu-
    tion or order, and thereby permanently cancel
    the effect of the aforesaid particular provisions
    of other laws. All resolutions and orders per-
    mitted by this section shall be filed immediately
    with the Coordinating Board, Texas College and
    University System."
    Prior to September 1, 1969, the Board of Trustees~ of Kilgore
    Junior College elected to avail itself of this option and to retain
    the number of trustees and the manner of their selection on its Board
    of Trustees in accordance with its previous operations.  The Board
    of Trustees consisted of nine members and has continued to operate
    with nine members by virtue of the Board's action.
    Section 130.082(f), in its relevant portion reads ,as follows:
    -5290-
    Hon. Bevington Reed, page 4        (M-1081)
    "Members of a board shall be elected at
    large from each junior college district at reg-
    ular elections to be called and held by the
    board for such purpose, at the expense of the
    district, on the first Saturday in April, in
    each even-numbered year.  . . ."
    The precise question for our decision may thus be re-
    stated: Do the provisions of Subdivision 
    (h), supra
    , which authorize
    board members to be selected in a manner different from the provisions
    of the Act, empower the board to make additional changes after the ef-
    fective date of the Act, September 1, 1969?
    It appears that the legislative intent was to create uniformity
    among the various junior college districts of the same class. Although
    the Legislature saw fit to permit an existing Junior College District
    to continue to operate under preexisting laws, we do not perceive that
    it was the intention of the Legislature to allow or permit any given
    Junior College District to change its mode of operation after September
    1, 1969, except in strict compliance with the terms of the Education
    Code. It is our opinion that it was the intention of the Legislature
    that Junior College Districts, after September 1, 1969,, should operate
    as they were operating on that date or in accordance with the terms of
    the Education Code, and no other.
    Stated another way, it is our opinion that when the Trus-
    tees of the Kilgore Junior College District elected to continue op-
    erating as they had before the adoption of the Education Code, their
    method of operation thereby became frozen and could not thereafter
    be changed, except they could elect to abandon all deviations from
    the particular provisions of the Education Code and operate in toto
    under that Code.
    We conclude under the facts presented that the Board of
    Trustees of Kilgore Junior College does not have the authority at
    this time to provide for interior redistricting of the district in
    contravention of the requirement of at-large elections of Trustees
    pursuant,to Article 130,082(f), Texas Education Code.
    SUMMARY
    The Board of Trustees under the circumstances
    and facts presented does not have authority to
    provide for internal redistricting of the Kilgore
    -5291-
    .
    Hon. Bevington Reed, page 5      (M-1081)
    Junior College District at this time in contra-
    vention of Article 130.082(f) of the Texas Educa-
    tion Code.
    Prepared by Robert Gauss
    Assistant Attorney General
    APPROVED:
    OPINION COMMITTEE
    Kerns Taylor, Chairman
    W. E. Allen, Co-Chairman
    John Richards
    Lewis Jones
    Jack Goodman
    William Craig
    SAMUEL D. MCDANIEL
    Staff Legal Assistant
    ALFRED WALKER
    Executive Assistant
    NOLA WHITE
    First Assistant
    -5292.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: M-1081

Judges: Crawford Martin

Filed Date: 7/2/1972

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017