- .

”

,.

I.

MAY 8, 1951

Hon. A. M. Aikin, Jr., Chai- Opinion No. V-1173 Senate Committee on Education 52nd Legislature Re: Effect of SenateBill 250, Austin,Texas apportioning the State into twenty-two congressional Districts,upon the composition of the twenty-one member State Board of EduDear Senator: cation.

We refer to your request for an opinion of this office con-' cerningthe effect of proposed SenateBill 250 of the 52nd Legislature, apportioningthe State into twenty-two CongressionalDistricts, upon the compositionof the twenty-onemember StateBoard 'ofEducation. The proposed legislation,Senate Bill 250, provides for twenty-twoCongressionalDistricts,and the caption of that bill reads as follows:

"AnAct to apportion the State of Texas into CongressionalDistricts,naming the Counties composingthe same, and providing for the election of a member of the Congress of the United States from each district,repeala all laws and parts of laws in conflictherewith, and declaring an . emergency." Section 8 of ArticleVII, Constitution of Texas,~ provides inpart:
'The Legislature shallprovideby law for a State Board of Education,whose members shallbe appointed or elected in such -er and by such authority and shall serve for such terms as the Legislature shallprescribe not to exceed six years. . . .l(
There is no provision in the Texas Constitutionwhich relates to the methodby which members for a State Board of Education shallbe appointed or elected, nor which fixes the number ofmembers which shall constitutethat board. Section 8 of Article VII, supra, leaves these matters entirelywith the Legislature.. -

-.

Hon. A. M. Aikin, Jr., page 2 (V-1173)

Pursuant to the above constitutional'mandate,the 51stLegislatureenacted Senate Bill 115, creating an elective StateBoard of Education. S.B. 115, Acts 51st Leg., R.S. 1949, ch. 299, P. 537.

Section 1 of Article II of Senate Bill 115, supra,originally provided:

"There is hereby created the StateBoard of Education, to consist of twenty-one (21)members. .Onsmember of the State Board of Education shallbe elected from each of the twenty-one (21)CongressionalDistricts of the State of Texas-as th;y now exist and as they shallbe changed from time to time." (Emphasisad&d.) However,Article II of Senate Bill 115 was subsequently amended by the same legislature in House Bill 964, Acts 5lst Leg., R.S. 1949, ch. 546, p. 1056, codified in Vernon's civil StatutesunderArticle 2654-2. The caption of House Bill 964 reads In part as follows:
"AnAct
. . . creating the State Board of Education and dividing the State into EducationalDistricts for the purpose of selectingmembers thereof;
. . ." Article 2654-2, V.C.S. (H.B.964, supra),provides in part:

. "Section 1. There:.is hereby created the State Board of Education, to consist of twenty-one (21)members. One (1)member of the State Board of Education shallbe elected from each of the twenty-one (21) CongressionalDistricts of the State ofTexas."

. "Sec. 2. A specialelection shallbe held in each of the twenty-one (21)CongressionalDistricts of the State of Texas on the secondTuesday& November, 1949, for the purpose of electing the initialmembers of the State Board of Education, suchmembers so elected at such election to hold office until January 1, 1951,
. . ."
"Sec. 5. At the general election in 1950 there shall be elected, in conformitywith the general election laws of this State, from each of the CongressionalDistricts, one (1)member of the State Board of Education. The members of saidBoard elected at said election in 1950 in Districts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 shall serve for a termof two (2) years beginning January 1, 1951; the members of saidBoard elected at said election in 1950 in Districts 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14 shall serve for a term of four (4) years beginning January 1, 1951; and the~members.of saidBoard elected atHan, A. M. Aikin, Jr., page 3 (V-1173)

said election in 1950 in Districts 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21 shall serve for a term of six (6) years beginningJanuary 1, 1951. At the general election in 1952 and at each general election thereafter, members shallbe.elected, In conformitywith the general election laws of this State, to the Board officeswhich will become vacant on December 31 of that year. The members thus elected shallhold office for a term of six (6) years, beginning January 1 immediately following such election." “Sec. 6. In case of resignation or death of a member of said Board, or in case a position
. . . otherwise becomes vacant, the Board shall fill suchvacancy . . . by appointment of a qualifiedperson from the affected district,
. . . end, at the next general election after any such vacancies occur,members on saidBoard from the affected districts shallbe elected
. . . to fill such vacated offices for suchnnexpiredterms. ..,. ."
"Sec.g. . . . No person shallbe eligible to serve on saidBoard or be elected thereto unless he shall be... a qualifiedelector of his district,
. . ."
It is settled law that statuteswill be construed so as to carry out the legislative intent. 2 Sutherland, Statutory Construction (3rdEd. 1943) 333, Sec. 4701. When such intent is once ascertained, it will be given effect even though the literalmeaning of the words used therein is not followed. Wood v. State, 133 Tex. 110, 126 ~.~.2d 4 (1939);Longoriav. State, 126 Tex.Crim. 362, 71 S.W.2d 268 (1934);Trimmier v. Carlton, 116 Tex. 572, 296 S.W. 1070 (1927); Hidalgo County Drainage Dist. No. 1 v. Davidson, 102 Tex. 533, I.20 S.W. 849 (1909).

Furthermore, it is a well established rule of statutory constructionthat the Legislature is presumed to have intended that which is reasonableanq effectual rather than that which Is productive of absurd or anomalous consequences. Statutes shouldnever be given a constructionthat leads to uncertainty, injustice,or confusion if it is possible to construethem otherwise. 39 Tex. Jur. 222, 246, Statutes, Sets. 118, 131; 39 Tex. Jur. 176-184, Statutes, Sets. 93, 95, 96.

Highly significant in the ascertainment of legislative intent herein is the fact that the clause "as they now exist and as they shallbe changed from time to time" is absent Ln House Bill 964, the amendment of Section 1 of Article II of Senate Bill 115. By its act of expunging these words from the original act by the amend3tory law, the Legislature thereby definitely fixed the number of members. .A

Hon. A. M. Aikin, Jr., page 4 (V-1173) .

to be elected end serve on suchboard at twentylone. This it had authority to do under Section 8 ofArticle VII, Constitutionof Texas.

Additional evidence of legislative intent is present In the above quotedportion of the caption'ofthe amen&tory House Bill 964, supra,wherein it expresslyprovides for "dividingthe State into Educational Districts for the purpose of selectingmembers" on the elective State Board of Education created therein. In construinga statute,a court is not restricted to,its body. 39,Tex. Jur. 226, Statutes, Sec. 121. The caption,when consideredwith Section 1 of the body of the act, as itmay be In the dstermlnation of ambiguities and in arriving at legislative intent, indicatesthat the intention of the Legislaturewas to adopt, for the purpose of "EducationalDistricts," the same areas previously established and recognized as CongressionalDistricts inArticle 197,V.C.S. Westervelt v. Yates, 145 Tex. 38, 194 S.W.2d 395 (1946). Thus, the Legislature accomplished the purpose expressed in the caption, "tb divide the State intoEducationalDistricts," in Section 1 of Its bill by reference to and adoption of the then established confines of CongressionalDistricts.

InTrimmier v. Carlton, 116 Tex. 572, 296 S.W. 1070, 1074 (1927),the court stated:

"Statuteswhich refer to other statutesand make them applicable to the subject of legislationare called 'reference statutes,'and are a familiar and valid mode of legis- ( latlon. The general rule is that when a statute is adopted by a specific descriptive ,reference,the adoption takes the statute as It exists at that time, and the subsequentamsndment thereof would not be within the terms of the adopting ': act 'I
. See also Cameron v.-.Waco, 8 S.~.2d 249 (Tex.Clv.App.1928); 39 Tex. Jur. 129, Statutes, Sec. 66.

By the expediency of reference, the Legislature thereby relieved itself of definingv&rbatim within House Bill 964 the boundaries or composition of the twenty-one "EducationalDistricts" created therein. Identificationof such educational districtswill always be available in the officialpublication of the State laws under Senate Bill 195,Acts 43rd Leg., R.S. 1933, ch. 135, p. 344, regardless of a repeal or amendment of that law for CongressionalDistrict purposes only.
For yet another reasonwe think House Bill 964 must be construed in the manner expressedherein. It was reasonable to contemplate at the time House Bill 964 was enacted that the State might become entitled to more or less than twenty-one Congressmen and that the C_ongressionul Districtswould be Increased or diminished to createHon. A. M. Aikin, Jr., page 5 (V-1173)

newly defined districts. To construe "EducationalDistricts" to be coterminouswith CongressionalDistricts as changed from time to time would be to construe the law in violation of that provision in House Bill 964 which provides that the StateBoard of Education shall consist of twenty-onemembers. It is reasonable to assume that the Legislaturehad no intentionof producing such a conflict. Or, if perchancea twenty-secondCongressionalDistrictwere lawfully created, the qualifiedvoters in such twenty-secondCongressionalDistrict might have no representationon the State Board of Education. This would be construinga law so as to disfranchisepart of the voters when the clear intent of House Bill 964 was for the enfranchisement of all qualifiedvoters of this State. Statutes shouldnot be construed to disfranchisevoters when they reasonablymay be construed otherwise. Thomas V. Groebl, 147 Tex, 70, 212 S.W.2d 625 (19.948). If the act had so intended, it would have been unconstitutional. Smith v. Patterson, 111Tex. 535, 242 S.W. 749 (1922). We find no evidence of suchan intention in House Bill 964.

An examination of the captionand body of proposed Senate Bill 250 of the 52nd Legislature reveals that its sole expressed purpose is to reapportionthe State of Texas into CongressionalDistricts, naming the counties composingthem. Since it is our opinion that there has been createdby House Bill 964 educational districts as distinguished from CongressionalDistricts, Itwould necessarily follow that proposed SenateBill 250, ifpasse3, could have no effect to change the compositionof the educational dls:ricts as established In House Bill 964, nor to change the composition :,f the twenty-one member State Board of Education.
SUMMARY I Proposed Senate Bill 250 of the 52nd Legislature, apportioning the State into twenty-two CongressionalDistricts, would have no effect upon the composition of the twenty-one member State Board of Education. House Bill 964, Acts 5lst kg., R.S. 1949, ch. 546, p. 1056; Art. 2654-2, V.C.S.
APPROVED: Yours very truly,
J.C. Davis, Jr. PRICE DAilIEL CountyAffairs Division Attorney General
E. Jacobson Reviewing Assistant --4sLz.7~~ d BY Charles D. Mathews Chester E. Ollison First Assistant Assistant CBO:mw:pwb