Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1944 )

OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS
AUSTIN
a0n. William F. Jackson
COUllty AttOrIBy
Yfaailer County
Hempstead, Texas
I)ear 3'~. Jaokeon:
%'e have received
reoent date end quote from
~I'
subdivisions. On the 22d day of Maroh, 1544, the
Commissioners' Court rescindad its original order f.o%
oounty-wide stock law election and called sn election
to be held in the two subdivisions uhioh, taken
together, compose the entire area or 'kaller County.
The election was held and stook law oerried in the
greater Tortion of the county and railed to oarrp In
what was designated as :?ubdivision Number Tvo. On
July 10, another petition was gesented for county
Eon. ‘Xllior? y. Jackson, ?age 2
Ada stook law eleotion under Artiale 6954, which
MS sipped by some three hundred freeholders of
Yeller County, and no action was taken by the
Cohvnissioners~ Court on such petition, pending
your opinion.
*The question raised isl Upon the filing
or the rim petition ror a oounty-wide hook
law eleotlon, wa6 it ,mandetorg upon the Com-
misaionerel Court to oall a oounty-wide stoak
;;x&eleotion cr oould they - - at their diaore-
-- oonaider petitions therearter riled which,
in etreot, oalled ror simultaneous eleotlone in
two arbitrarily designated subdivisions? It la
my opinion that the provisions or Artiole 6954
makes it mandatory upon the Commiesionersl Court
to order a oounty-wide stock lsw elaotion upon
the presentation of a petition signed by 100
free-holders of ?ialler County and that until
suoh eleotlon is ordered and held, any election
covering eubdivieiona or the oounty would be
void.
“The election which waa held resulted in
the roilowing vote: Btook Law Preoinot Number
One, which inoluded the greater portion oi 3aller
County, voted in favor or the stook law. In whet
wan deaigrmted as Stock Law Preolnot Number Two,
whloh included the smaller QOX%iOnor the oounty,
the vote was against a stock law.,,
*Artdole 6964 provi&es that:
*Whenever an eleotlon is held under
the QrWisiOna 0r this chapter ror any
oounty or subdivision, no other election
ror auah purpose ehall be held within
the looality ror the spaoe or twelve
months thereafter; but the defeat of the
proposition ror a county shall not prevent
another election ircxn being held imediate-
ly thereeiter for any subdivision of suoh
oounty, nor shall a defeat oi the propoai-
tion for any nubdivision prevent an eleo-
tion from being held i!rzedietely tt-erearter
for the entire aounty.’
Ifon. ::lllim ?. Zacksoc, page 3
The opponents or stock law are oontending that
beoauso tha Comnissloners~ Court ordered simultaneous
elsotlona in the two subdivisions, this should be con-
strued es a oounty-wide stook law election whloh would
prevent a oalllng of a oounty-wide stook law election
upon the ~0tAtsOIx or the raquisits number or e1aotors
now filed berora the Comissioners~ Court; but it is
obvious that ii tha atatutas mm:8 so oonotrued, the
purpos.06 or the atook laws would be nulliiled and shy
oounty-rida stook law eleotlon oould ba defeated on
the petition of any minority composed of ea msny a8
rirty qud+ri0d electors.
“1 advised the Coauaissionars~ Court that a
oounty-wide etook law should be oallad on the iirst
petition, and I am of tha opinion that the election
vihioh was oalled for the two rubdlvlslons ia void
and that the Connissioners* Court did not have au-
thority to oall the aleotlon on the ssoond petition
filed. It is my rurthar opinion that upon the peti-
tion of 100 or more quallflod eleotors it beoomaa
xnandatory upon the Oornmissloners~ Court to call a
county.-wlda stook law eleotlon. In other words, the
question raised la not whether the Commlaslonars’
Court has authority to call the eleotion, but whether
they have tha dlmretlonary power to reruse to call
en eleotion upon the petition ot the raqulalte num-
ber of elsotore. petitioning then for a oounty-wide
atook law sleotlon under Artlola 6954.
“It la my opinion that even though the entire
county did vote slzcultaneously in the election
reoently ordered by the Commlssloners~Court, the
vote was upon two $mtitlons which subdivided ths
oounty into preolnota and that it would, therefore,
be mandatory upon the ComniLssloners' Court to now
~11 an eleotion for ocunty-wide atook law election
upon the petitions of 300 G.ualified voter%*
Article 6954, V. 1:. C. y., provides a8 follows:
“Upon the aritten :)etitlon of one hundred
(1001 freeholders of any cf the iolloiving counties:
. . . . . . . ‘
Yeller . . . . or, upon the petition
or iirty (50) freeholders 0r any auoh subdivision
of e county as may be desorlbed in the petition,
and derlned by the Covml.asloners’ Court or my or
tha above nemed oouniiea, the Commissionera’ Court
of asld county shall order en election to be held
in such county or auoh subdivision of a county ss
may be deaorlbed in the petition and derined by
the Cocmlsnlonera~ Court, on the day named in the
order, for the purpose of enebllng the freeholdera
or such county or subdivision or a oauhty aa may
be desorlbed in the petition and diefired by the
Commissionera Court to determine whether horses,
r;uleo, Jacks, jennets, and oattle ohall be per-
mitt6d to run at large in such ocunty or such sub-
division of e county 68 my be described ir the
petition end defined by the Comisslonera’ Court.”
It is the opinion of this department, after oar&u1
study- ot thia question, that it is now tho leg61 duty of tb
Commissioners’ Court of :‘fellar County to oall a oouuty-wide
aleotlon under Artlcla 6956, Vernon’s Annoteted Civil Ctatutag
upon the written petition of one hundred (lOa), or sore
r eeholdera 0r suoh oounty. If such eleotion results in the
zsq?zz a atook law, it would control war the prior elec-
tions held in the subdlvislona. The aaid elaotions held in
the two subdivisions or Yeller County era not tantamount to
a county-wide election bnd, aa Artlola 6964, V, A. C. 3.)
plainly prwldea that a deraat of the propoeltlon in s sub-
dltlolon shall not prevent an aleotlon from being held ln-
mediately thereaftar for the ertire oounty, we see no neoeaaity
et this tine to pass upon the validity of the eleotlons here-
tofore h6ld 11%suoh subdivisions.
Trusting the foregoing fully answers your questions,
we renaln
Very truly yours,
By:
Zobt. L. Lattlaore, jr.
~isslstant.
RLL: rt