.

March 7, 1939

Honorable **A.** M. Pribble County Attorney Mill8 county Goldthwa,ite, Texas
Dear Sir: Opinion No. G-339
Re: Residential andproperty qualifications ofelector inschool consolidation election held under Art. 2806,R.C.S. 1925.

Under date February 10, 1939,you submitted three questions for **dur** coasLderation and opinion, involving certain school laws of Texas. Your third question is not related in subject matter tothefirst two, and **for** that reason will be answered in a separate opinion. Your first two questions, which may be logically grouped in this opinion, are as follows:

‘1. Is itnecessary for a voter to be a property owner if he is otherwise qualified to vote in a school consolidation election7
“2. What is the time required to satisfy residence requirement to qualify a voter to vote in a school consolidation election 7”
Article 288.6,Revised CfviI Statutes, g,overns theconditions, mode and manner ofholding elections for the consolidation of several contiguous common school districts or independent school districts, such as involved in the two foregoing questions. But this governing statute is silent as to theproperty-holding and residential quaBficat.ions of electors in such school consolidation e&?&ions. andwe must. consequently, turn to the auffrage requirements andprovisions written into the Organic Law andthe gen- .eral statutes thereunder.

.We shall, **of** course, assume that the persons offerfng to vote in these school consolidation elections do not fall within the five classes to which suffrange is denied under Artic,le 6, Section 1. Constitution of Texas. and thatsuch persons are inal3things qualified electors under the Constitution and statutes generally, except insofar as their right to vote might be affected by theproperty-owning and residential qualifications involved inyour .questions.. . . 1

Honorable A. M. Pribble, page 2 (O-339)

qualifications of a voter in school consolidation elections, we find thatthis question is ma& toturn, by tha controlling constitutional provision and statutes declaratory thereof, uponthe question ofwhether such school consolidation election is ‘for the purpose of issuing bonds or otharwise lending rcredit,$r credit, or expending money or assuming any debt,” uponthe part of such school district or political subdivision, within the meaning and inkndment ofSection 3a, Article 6, Constitution of Texas, which read6 as fol1Qws: “When an eiection is held by any county, or any number of counties, or any political sub-division ofthe State, or any political sub-division ofa county, or any deffned district now or hereafter to be described and defined within theState andwhfch may or’may not include towns, villages or municipal corporations, or any city, town or village, for’the purpose of issuing bonds or otherwise lending credit, or expending money or assuming any debt, only qualified electors who owntaxable property intheState, .county. political sub-division, district, city, town or village where such election is held, and who have .dulyrendered the same for taxati& shall be qualified to vote and all electors shall vote intheelection pre- ,cinctoftheir residence.”
Prior to the adoption ofthe foregoing amendment to the Constitution of Texas onNovember 8, 1932,there were noexpress property-holding requirements for **voters** in elections involving the issuance ofbonds. the levy of taxes, etc. in school districts and other defined districts and political subdivisions, but only property requirements for such elections in incorporated cities and iMms, under Section 3.Article 6. Constitution of Texas.

Article 2955a,Vernon’s Annotated Civil Statutes, is merely de- .claratory of Section 3x, Article 6, Constitution of Texas, and in fact fbllows the above-qftotpd language of such constitutional prwision word for word.~

Section 3a. Article 6, Constitution of Texas, was construed by the Court of Civil Appeals at El Paso inthe Casey of O’Brien, et al, v. Snelson, et al, 82S.W.(2) 679, inaofar as same governs the qualifications of electors in school consolidation elections under Article 2806, Revised Civil Statutes.;The court held thatthe right tovote in such elections was notlimited

‘toelectors awning taxable property, which had been duly rendered for taxation, since such election did not involve Ylendingcredit or expending money **or** assuming any debt” within this constitutional provision limiting right to vote to such electors, inasmuch as the election did notinvolve assumption by consolidated district of outstanding bonds of the old district. and another election would be required to determine whether taxes should be levied for consolidated district.Honorable A. hf. Pribble, page 8 (O-889)

, The constitutional and statutory provisions above adverted to and the decision of the Court of Civil Appeals thereunder, conclusively point to a negative answer to your first question But to avoid confusion and to properly limit this opinion, we strass thatsuch negative answer proceeds upon the assumption thatthe school consolidation election under inquiry, Iihe that involved in the case discussed above, is for the purpose onl~of voting a consolidation of school districts and does not embrace a vz onthe assumption of outstanding bonds or thelevy oftaxes. Because, in this connection, we ,findthatArticle 2807.Revised Civil Statutes, allows the question of the assumption of outstanding bonds Of an old school district and Levy of taxes **therefor.** to be submitted to thevoters, along with the question of theproposed consolidation of such school districts, all inthe same election. While your letter does not so indicate, should the fact be thattheelection in question is **for the**  twofold purpose ofvoting onthe question Of.consolidation and uponthe question of assumption of.bonds and levy oftaxes, as permitted by **Article** 2807.Revised Civil Statutes, fhenwe would be constrained toanswer your question inthe affirmative.

.Turning now toyour second inquiry. we find that same is likewise foreclosed by the ~wstitution and statutes, and theauthorities there-

..Jander. Section 2,Article .6. Conatitutioh of Texas, fixes the residential qualifications and requirements of electors generally, as follows:

“Every person subject tonone of the foregoing disquslifications, who shall have attained theage oftwenty-one years andwho shall be a citizen ofthe United States andwho shall have resided inthis State one year next preceding an election and thelast six months within the district or county inwhich such person offers to vote, shall be deemed a qualified elector;... - Although this constitutional provision is self-enacting, the Legislature, by Article 2955,Revised Civil Statutes, fined residential require**ments** for qualified electors in identical language, butadded this further provision: I

. . . In any election held only in a subdivision ofa county for the purpose of determining any local question or proposition affection only such subdivision ofthe county, thenin addition to the foregoing qtilifications, thevoter **must** have resided in said county for six months next preceding such election

. . . * Although there are certain constitutional and statutory provisions requiring an elector to vote in the election precinct ofhis residence,Honorable A. M. Pribble. page 4 (O-339) ...-I

there is no required length oftime for such residence as a qualification for voting. The only requirements for length ofresidence as qualifications for suffrage have been hereinabove quoted. andwe see they apply only to theState, district and county and nottoprecincts, political subdivisions or defined districts.

This construction is sustained inthe case of Warren, et al v. .Robinson. 32S. W. 2d 871. involving a road district bond election, wherein the court overruled the contention that since theelection was held only in a subdivision of a county, six months residence in such subdivision was required by law.

Our answer toyour second question, therefore, is that an eLector otherwise qualified, may vote in a school consolidation election, under Article 2806.Revised Civil Statutes, if he shall have resided inthis State.oneyear and in the countywherein such school districts lie, for six months next preceding such election.

**Yours** very truly
ATTORNEYGENERALOFTEXAS

BY /s/ Pat M. Neff. Jr.

Pat M. Neff, Jr. Assistant
PMN:N:da
APPROVED
/s/ Gerald C. Mann
ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS