Case ID: iowa_79/html/0466-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Given, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

The State ex rel. Wilcox v. Vreeland. The Same v. Willard.
    School Districts: population : number of directors. Where an independent school district has had a population of five hundred, and so has been entitled to and has had six directors, two elected each year, but the population has fallen below that number, only one director should be elected each year. (State v. SimJcins, 77 Iowa, 676¡followed.)
    
    
      Appeal from Tama District Court. — TIon. L. GK Kinne Judge.
    Filed, February 8, 1890.
    Actions to determine the right of the defendants, respectively, to exercise the office of director of the independent district of Montour, Tama county, Iowa. This district was organized in 1872, and, having a population of five hundred or more, six directors were elected and qualified, and two were elected and qualified each year thereafter, without question, until 1888. At the time of the election in March, 1888, one of the “holdover” directors had resigned, and the terms of two expired under the law. The board, assuming that the district was still entitled to six directors, proceeded to hold an election for one director to fill vacancy, and two for full term. The defendants were candidates for the full terms, and received the highest number of votes cast for candidates for the full term, each receiving the same number of votes. They both qualified, and proceeded to act as directors of said independent district. The cases, resting upon the same facts, and involving the same questions, were submitted together to the district court, and are again so submitted. That court found, among other facts, that on March 12, 1888, said district contained less than five hundred population, and was, therefore, only entitled to one director ; and that, as defendants were each candidates on the supposition that two directors were to be elected, when in fact there was legally but oue, neither of them is a director of said district; and adjudged that they, and each of them, be ousted from said office, from which judgments defendants each appeal.
    
      J. W. Willett, for appellants.
    
      Stivers & Strong, for appellee.
   Given, J.

No question is made but that at the time of the election, March 12, 1888, the population of this district was less than five hundred. ' In section 1802, Code, authorizing the organization of independent districts, it is provided ‘ ‘ that, in all independent districts having a population of less than five hundred, there shall be three directors elected, who shall organize by electing a president,” etc. Appellants’ contention is that this district having had the requisite population at its organization to entitle it to six directors, and there being no provision for ascertaining the population thereafter, nor for reducing the number of directors in case the population diminishes, the district will always be entitled to six directors. This position is fully answered in State v. Simians, 77 Iowa, 676. The court says: “When the population of the district falls below five hundred, should the number of the directors be diminished accordingly? We think that, under section 1808 of the Code, if the population be less than five hundred at the time of the election, two members should not be elected.” We see no reason for changing this view of the law. It follows that the judgment of the district court must be Amtbmjed.