Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1945 )


Menu:
  •                  HEAITORNEY                  GENERAL
    OFTEXA~
    AU(~TIN,,.TEXAO
    GROVER SELLERS
    Honorable Ottis E. Lock, Chairman
    Committee on Education
    House of Representatives
    Forty ninth Legislature
    Austin, Texas
    Dear Sir:               Opinion No. 0-6533
    Re: Is the limit of the power of tax-
    ation of the school districts,
    as provided In the statute stated
    herein, valid in view of the
    language of the Constitution also
    referred to? And a related ques-
    tion.
    We are In receipt of your letter of recent date
    reading as follows:
    "A number of bills have been Introduced in
    this session of the Legislature proposing to in-
    crease the maxlmum tax rate that may be levied for
    the local support of public free schools in Texas.
    A number of measures are now on the statutes making
    exceptions to the statute fixing the limit.
    "Your attention is called to Article 2784,in
    which the following language is found:
    "IThe amount of maintanance tax, together
    with the amount of bond tax of any district,
    shall never exceed one dollar on the one
    hundred dollars valuation of taxable property;
    and if the rate of bond tax, together with the
    rate of maintenance tax voted in the district
    shall at any time exceed one dollar on the one
    hundred dollars valuation, such bond tax shall
    operate to reduce the maintenance tax to the
    difference between the rate of the bond tax
    and one dollar.'
    "Your attention is further directed to Section
    3, Article 7, of the Constitution of Texas in which
    this language Fs found:
    Honorable Ottis E. Lock, page 2         o-6533
    ("***** and the Legislature may authorize
    an additional ad valorem tax,to be levied
    and collected within all school districts
    heretofore formed or hereafter formed, for
    the further maintenance of public free
    schools, and for the erection and equipment
    of school buildings therein; provided that
    a majority of the qualified property tax-
    paying voters of the district voting at an
    election to be held for that purpose, shall
    vote such tax not to exceed In any one year
    one dollar ($1.00) on the one hundred dollars
    valuation of the property subject to taxation
    in such district, but the limitation upon the
    amount of school district tax herein author-
    ized shall not apply to incorporated cities
    or towns constituting separate and independent
    school districts, nor to independent or com-
    mon school districts created by general or
    special law.'
    "You will observe the specific exception for
    the various types of schools on the one dollar llmlta-
    tion in said Article of the Constitution. We, there-
    fore, would like to have a specific answer to the
    following questions:
    "1. Is the limit  of the power of taxa-
    tion of the school districts, as provided
    in the statute above referred to, valid
    in view of the language of the Constitution
    also above referred to?
    "2. If the answer is 'no,' then do the
    statutes enable school districts to collect
    such tax as the voters in said districts
    may have authorized, or may hereafter au-
    thorize, without regard to the one dollar
    limitation of the statutes?"
    "The people in framing the Constitution, "says
    Denio, Ch. J. committed to the legislature the whole
    law-making power of the State, which they did not ex-
    pressly or impliedly withhold. Plenary power Intie
    legislature, for all purposes of civil government, Is
    the rule. A prohibition to exercise a particular power
    is an exception. In Inquiring, therefore, whether a
    given statute is constitutional, it is for those whf
    question its validity to show that It is forbidden.
    Cooley's Constitutional Limitations, Vol. 1, pages
    176-77.
    Honorable Ottis E. Lock, page 3          o-6533
    "The test of legislative power is constitutional
    restriction. What the people have not said in the
    organic,,lawtheir representatives shall not do, they
    may do.   
    60 A. 169
    ; 
    105 Am. St. Rep. 825
    .
    "But it is as true of the politIca divisions
    of the State as it Is of the State at large, that
    $g;i:azive authority must be shown for every levy
    . The power to levy taxes by these divisions
    comes from the State. The State confers It, and at
    the same time exercises    a parental supervision by
    circumscribing it.      * * +   Cooley's Constitutional
    Limitations, Vol. 2, pages 1099-1100.
    "When, however, it is said to be essential to
    valid taxation that there be legislative authority
    for every tax that is laid, It Is not meant that
    the legislative department of the State must have
    passed upon the necessity and propriety of every
    particular tax; but those who assume to seize the
    property of the citizen for the satisfaction of the
    tax must be able to show that that particular tax is
    authorized either by general or specIa1 law. The
    power inherent in government to tax lies dormant until
    a constitutional law has been passed calling it into
    action, and is then vitalized only to the extent pro-
    vided by law. Those, therefore, who act under such
    a law should be careful to keep within its limits,
    lest they rern;vzf"om their acts the shield of %ts
    protection.          Cooleg's Constitutional Limita-
    tions, Vol. 2, page 1100-1102.
    The Constitution not only has not prohibited the
    Legislature from passing any law authorizing school districts
    to levy taxes, but in the very section referred to in your
    letter, we find the following express authority:
    "And the Legislature may authorize an addi-
    tional ad valorem  tax to be levied and collected
    within all  school districts heretofore formed or
    hereafter formed, for the further maintenance of
    public free schools, and for the erection and
    equipment of school buildings therein;"
    and further provides that such tax must be further authorized
    by a vote of the property taxpayers of the district, and
    fixes a limit of $1.00 on the $100 valuation of taxable pro-
    perty, which limitation as to rate does not apply to any
    school district, since the limitation as to rate was removed
    by a proviso to that effect. Removing the limitation as to
    Honorable Ottis E. Lock, page 4          O-6533
    rate does not affect the authority of the Legislature to
    provide for a tax at any rate it deems advisable.
    From the above authorities, you will see ?;hatno
    tax is valid which is not authorized by law. The Constitu-
    tion does not limit the rate nor does it prohibit the
    Legislature from fixing the rate. Therefore, the L,gisla-
    ture, by general law, may authorize a school tax at such
    rate as it deems advisable. It is our opinion that Article
    2784 is valid.
    In view of our answer to your first question, it
    becomes unnecessary to answer your second.
    Yours very truly
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS'
    By s/C. F. Gibson
    C. F. Gibson
    Assistant
    CFG:EP:wc
    APPROVED APRIL 23, 1945
    s/Grover Sellers
    ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
    Approved Opinion Committee B,y s/BWB Chairman
    

Document Info

Docket Number: O-6533

Judges: Grover Sellers

Filed Date: 7/2/1945

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/18/2017