Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1949 )

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