ELmarable J. A. Guest 

County Attorney 

camp couuty 

Pittsburg, Texas 

Dear SFr: opiIlion Be. o-llo6 

Re:Independent school district taking 

over schools of a city under 

Article 2783b has the right to 

cdlect &liwWent t-axes assessed 

by the city for school purposes. 

we have your letter in which you say2 

9% city of Pittsburg has been operating forthe past forty 

years under &Mole 2783b, Civil Statutes, and has been 

lavyingOneDo~rf~school~~uon~cbOneB[~ed 

Dellars valuation. An election was held April, 1938, at which 

election the 8cparation of the schools from the city was 

a* author ised. There is now, on the city's tax rolls, 

sona Twenty-five Thousand Dollars in delinWent twea that 

were levied by the city for school purpeses. The Board of 

Trustees ef Plttaburg Independent Schsel District, elected 

since the divorcement ef the city and scheels,are desirous 

of collecting the delinment school taxes now on the city's 

'3.a~ rolls. Since they have assumed the outstandingbonds 

and indebtedness against the school district, they think 

they have authority te collect said delinquent taxes and. 

slpply same for school purposes." 

As ve understand it the territory of the district has not been changed. 

You desire to know uhether mr net the present Pittsburg Independent School 

District has the right to collect the taxes that were assessed and levied 

for s&eel purposes by the ci* of Pittoburg prior to the change in the 

s&eel district's organization in 1938 and that have not yet been ma. 

1n1905 theLegislature pclsseda law-as SenateBill 218 oftbe29th 

Legislature, Regular Sassian, which still renmins en the statute be&s 

of Texas as Article 2768 muI 2771, Bevised Civil Statutes, and which 

read as folleus: 
- - 

Honorable J. A. Ciuest, Page #2 (O-1106) 

“Article 2768. Any city or town in this State may acquire 

the exclusive control of the public free schools within its 

limits. Any city or town which has heretofore, under the 

Act of March 15, 1875, or any subsequent lav, assumed central 

d the public free schools vithin its limits, and has 

oontinued to exercise the same until the present time, or any 

city or town which may hereafter determine so to do by 

majori* vote of theproperty tax payers of mid city or town 

voting at an election held for that purpose, amy have 

exclusive control of the public free schoels vithin its limits." 

"Article 2771. Schools thua organized and provided for by 

incorporated cities and towas shall be subjeot to the general 

laws, so far as the sameare applicable; but each city or tam 

having control of schools,within its limits shall constitute 

a separate school district, ,and may provide for the organization 

of schools and the appropriatiom of its school fuuds in such 

manner as may,be best suited to its population and condition." 

The authority for these statutes is f0ma In Article VII, Sectlen 3, and 

Article XI. Section 10, of the Constitution of T-8, which read in part 

as folkws: 

"Sec. 3. ~. . . the Legislaturermyalsoprovideforthe 

formationof school district (8) by general laws: . . ." 

"sec. 10 The Legislature may constitute any city or tovn a 

separate and independent school district. . . ." 

1n 1935 the Legislature passed a lmr known as House Bill 831 d the 44th 

Legislature, Regular Session, which is now condified as Article 2783b, 

Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes of Texas. It provides in section 1, 2, 

3, and 4 that "the term %nmicipol school district' . . . ahall include 

any city or town constituting a separate and independent school district 

under authority of Sectien 3, of Article VII of the Constitution, and/ 

or Section 10, Article XX, of the Constitutiom, boundaries of the school 

corporation being the sama as the boundaries of the city or town" in 

those cases vhere the uity has a populatien of 30,000 or less, and that 

"when any Qaunicipal school district' . . . shall desire to have the public 

schoolvithin its limits separated from muuieipal control" the same shall 

be dome by one hmudred voterspetitioming for am election, and an election 

being held in which all of the qualified voters decide whether or not the 

schoola should be seprated from the city, and if a majority vote for such 

a separation then an indepandent scheol district is thereby created, and 

said law (&use sill 831, 44th Jag.) then provides in sections 5, 7, 8, 

and 9, as fell&: 
Honorable J. A. Sues+., Page #3 (0-llO6) 

"sec. 5. Except as herein denied or limited, all the power8 

conferred upon independentsohooldistricts and/or twns 

and villagee incorporated for free school purposes only, by 

Title 49, of the Revised Civil Statutes of Terss, of 1925, 

andawndm2nt.s thereto, lncludingtherightto anuexccmt~us 

~rltoryfcaschool~~es,andthcri~ttolevyb~ 

and issue bonds for school FUXpOseS, as provided by Senaral 

Law, are hereby conferred upon any independent school district 

separated from municipal control under the provisions of this 

Act; . . ." 

"Sec. 7. That the Board of Education or board of trustees of 

such independent school district, after separation from 

municipal~control, shall have authority to provide for the 

taxes of said independent school district to be assessed by 

the Assessor and Collector of Texas of the city of vhich such 

school district vas formerly a part, or to have the taxes of 

said district assessed and collected by an assessor and 

collector appointed by the board of trustees. Such assessor 

and collector shall be sllowed and paid such compensation as 

is now or may be hereafter provided by law." 

"sec. 8. The title and rights to all proparty owned, held, 

set apart or iu any way dedicated tc the use of the public 

schools of the city or town, and/or heretofore vested in 

such city or tomand/orthemayor, chairmanoftha commission, 

city council, city cossission or board of schooltrusteea 

of such city or town, prior t- separation from municipal 

control as herein authorized and provided, shall be and are 

hereby invested in the Board of Education or board of trustees 

of such independent school district, after separation from 

municipal control, and shall be managed and controlled by 

the Board of Education or board of trustees thereof, as is mm 

or may hereafter be provided by law." 

"Sec. 9. Allbouda issuedbyaxdoutstanding against any 

such city or town, as a mnicipal school district, and all 

obligations, contracts and indebtedness existing against the 

city or town, as a nuuicfpalschool district shall become tha 

obligations and debts of the independent school district at 

the time of its separation from municipal control, and the said 

independent school district, after separation from municipal 

control, shall be held to have assumed the discharge of all such 

obligati6ns, contracts, and indebtedness, .aud:,tha same shall be 

eniorceable aud collqztible from, paid off and.dischar@ by thq 

said independent schools district, as,if originally created.by it as 

a separate land independent school district; and it shall not be 

necessary to call an election within and for-such district for 

the purpose of assuming such bonds and other indebtedness." 
Honorable J. A. Guest, Page # 4 (0-1106) 

We assume that the public schoolsin the city of Pittsburg were controlled 

by the city under the a~l:hority of Arr:.icle VII, Section 3. and Article XI, 

Section 10, of tha Constitution, and Articles 2768 and 2771 of the Statutes (quoted above), and that the change of the control of the schools 

from the city to the newly created independent school district was under 

the authority and procedure of Article 27&b, which did not become a 

law until 1935. 

We think that.prior to the change in the control of the Pittsburg schools, 

by a vote of the people, in 1938, the city of Pittsburg constituted a 

school district, and that its status as a school district was distinct 

from its status as a municipality, even though the same city council or 

governing bodygoverned the schools end the muMcipalityj and when the 

change occurred in 1938 it merely amounted to changing the form and 

name of the school district. The nev independent school district was 

the sama district as the former city school district, having a different 

name and a different governing organization. This belief on our pert is 

supported by the case of Temple Independent, School District v. Proctor, 

(Tex. Civ. App.) fl 9. W. ,(2) 1051, in which the court, speaking through 

Justice Daugh, said: 

-.. . . It is now settled, however, that, where such city does 

assums control of its schools, such control, so far as the 

schools are concerned, doas not become merged into ani become 

a part of the municipal government as such. And where the 

tilts commissiq~rs or city council retain control of its public 

schools it acta in a dual capacity -- one as a governing body 

of the city in ita status as a municipality, and the other as 

the controlling or governing board of its schools. The two 

capacities are not to be confused. City of Rockdale v. 

Cureton, 111Tex. 136, 139, 229 9. W. 852; City of Fort 

Worth v. Zane-Cetti (Tex. Corn. App.) 278 S. W. 183. In so 

far as it acts in its strictly municipal governmental 

capacity, its powers are referable to Article 11 of the 

Constitution and title 28 of the B. S. (Article 961 et saq., as 

amended (Vernon's Ann. Civ. St..Art. 961 et seq.). Whereas, in 

the management and control of its schools, its powers are refaable 

toArticle 7 of the Constitution and.title 49 of the R. 9. (Article 

2584 et sea,., as amended (Vernon's Ann. Civ. St. Art. 2584 et seq.) . .." 

It is apparent from a reading of Article 2783-0 that the board of trustees 

of the independent school districts created under the act have all of the 

ordinary powers of a school district governing body, including "authority 

to provide for taxes", and that "the title and rights to all property 

owned, held or in any,way dedicated to the use of the public schools of 

the city . . . prior to the separation from municipal control" vests and 

passe8 to the new independent school district and 18 subject to ItSi 

control, when such new district is created, and that the bonds and 

indebtedness and obligations of such city, "as a municipal,school district", 
Honorable J.A. Guest, Page #5 (O-1106) 

areasszaed and teken over by the newly created independent school district. 

We think this indicates that it was the intention of the legislature for 

the new independent school district to take the place of the old city 

district and for the new district to take over everything, both tangible 

and intangible, from the old district, including assets and liabilities. 

We can not conceive of the legislature intending for the new district 

to be obligated to pay the old district's debts without having the right 

to collect the money due the old district. When one person takes over 

another person's business he ordinarily acquires the "accounts receivable" 

as well as the "bills payable". We have been unable to find any Texas 

appellate court case on this particular question, but we do find significant 

language in 56 Corpus Juris 271, as follows: 

" . . . Where a district is dissolved, abolished, or 

destroyed, and one or more new districts are created 

from the territory thereof, or its territory is annexed 

to one or more existing districts, the new or other 

district or districts. in the absence of contrary statute, 

become and are entitled to all the property and rights 

of the old district, . . ." 

The authority to collect these delinquent taxes was clearly one of the 

vrights of the old district," and the new district is entitled to that 

right. 

Our answer to your question is that, under the facts you have given us, 

the present Pittsburg Independent School District has the right to collect 

the taxes that was assessed and levied for school purposes by the city 

of Pittsburg prior to the change in the school district's organization 

in 1938 and that have not yet been paid. 

Yours very truly 

A!Pl!ORREY -oFTExAs 

s/CECIL c. ROTSCH 

By CECIL C. RCPSCH 

Assistant 

CCR:PL-ldw 

APPROVED AUG. 15, 1939 

s/ GESALD c. l4m-N 

ATTORNEY CgloERALmTExAs 

APPROVED OPINIOA COhQiRTSS 

BY R. w. l?.cHAIRMAR