Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1944 )

Honorable Frank B. Lloyd
District Attorney
79th Judicial District of Texas
Alice, Texas
Dear Mr. Lloyd: Opinion No. O-599
Re: Statutory method for detaching
territory from Independent
School Districts (Article 27&P).
Your recent letter concerning the Alice Independent School District
submits the following inquiry:
"The Alice Independent School District does not coma under
the jurisdiction of the County Board of Trustees for the
reason it has morethan 500 scholastics. The Alfred Inde-
pendent School District and also the Armagosa Common School
District are under the jurisdiction of the County Board
"It has been preposed to cut off a part of the Alice
Independent School District and attach the same to the
Alfred Independent School District, and cut off another
portion of the Alice Independent School District and attach
it to the Armagosa Common School District. I have checked
the statutes and the decisions of the Courts and have
been unable to satisfy myself as to the procedure.
"I have a copy of your opinion No. O-4238 which is an in-
terpretation of Articles No. 27@e and 27&f. By reason of
the holding of the Supreme Court in the County School
Trustees of Orange County case that Articles No. 27&e and
27&2f must be construed together, it seems doubtful that
the County Board of Trustees will have jurisdiction to detach
the property from the Alice Independent School District as
above proposed.
"I have examined Article No. 2766 of the Revised Civil
Statutes and this does not seem to apply, expecially by
reason of the fact that the last sentence of that Article
prohibits any change that would reduce the taxable value
of property in any independent district against which there
are outstanding bonds issued. The Alice Independent School
District, of course, has outstanding bonds.
Hon. Frank B. Lloyd, p. 2 (O-5992)
"I wish you would advise me if in your Opinion there iS a
statutory method for detaching the property from the Alice
Independent School District as above suggested.
Section 1 and 2 of Article 27@f, Vernon's Civil Statutes, (Chapter 47,
Acts 1st CS. of 4lst Legislature) provide:
"Section 1. In each county of this State the County Board
of Trustees shall have the authority, when duly petitioned
as herein provided, to detach from and annex to any school
district territory contiguous to the common boundary line
of the two districts; provided the Board of Trustees of the
districttowhich the annexation is to be made approves, by
majority vote, the proposed transfer of territory and
provided, further, that where the territory to be detached
exceeds ten per cent (lC$) of the entire district the
petition must be signed by a majority of the trustees of
said district in addition to a majority cf the qualified
voters of the territory to be detached. The petition shall
give the metes and bounds of the territory to be detached
from the one and added to the other district and must be
signed by a majority of the qualified voters residing in
the said territory so detached. Upon receipt of the said
petition, duly siGned, and upon notice of the approval of
the proposed annexation by the Board of Trustees of the
district to which the territory is to be added, the County
Board of Trustees shall pass an order transferring the
said territory and redefining the boundaries of the districts
affected by said transfer, the said order to.be recorded
in the Minutes of the County Board of Trustees. Provided
that no school district shall be reduced to an area of
less than nine square miles.
'I** * *
"Section 2. Any outstanding indebtedness affected by
changes in the boundaries of school districts shall be
adjusted bp the County Board of Trustees as provided in
Sections 10, 11 and 12, of Chapter 84, Acts of the 40th
Legislature, First Called Session. Acts 1929, 4lst Leg.,
1st C. S ., p. 106, Ch. 47.”
The quoted statute applies to the detachment of territory from inde-
pendent school districts, with or without bonded indebtedness, in
the same measure as it is applicable to common school districts.
Prcsper Independent School District, et al., VS. Collin County
School Trustees, et al., (Tex. Civ. App.) 51s. W. (2d) 748
(affd., 58 5. W. (2d) 5).
Hon. Frank B. Lloyd, p. 3 (O-5992)
In view of the invalidity of the Act which attempted to repeal the
statute above quoted, Article 27&f, supra, is still the effective
Legislation upon the subject matter contained in its provisions.
School Trustees of Orange County vs. District Trustees of Prairie
View, C. S. D. NO. 8, 137, Tex. 125, 153 S. W. (2d) 434.
Very truly yours
AlT0BNE-fGEKERALOF TEKAS
s/ Gaynor Kendall
BY
Gsynor Kendall
Assistant
GK:bb/ldw
AET?OVED
OPINION
COMMITTEE
BY 0. s.
CHAIRMAN
APPBOVED MAY 29, 1944
s/ George P. Blackburn
ACTING ATTORNEY - OF TEXAS