### 3.

Hon. R. M. Dixon, chairman Board of Water Engineers Austin, Texas OpinionNo. WW-1 Re: Are the provisions of Article 7880-23, V.C.S., in conflictwith the provisionsof Article VI, Sections 2 or 3(a) of the Constitutionof Texas, In prescribingthe qualiflcatlons of voters at a conDear Mr. Dixon: firmatlo?election? The questionpresented in your recent letter is whether the provision of Article 7880-23, V.C.E., prescrlblngthe quallflcatlon of voters in a conflrmatlonelection, is In contravention of Article VI , Sections 2 or 3(a) of the Constitutionof Texas. In our opinion, the provisfoneof Article VI, Section 3(a) of the Texas Constitution do not apply to the type of election requiredby Article 7860-23,v.c.s. Article 7880-23, V.C.S., provides that a water control and lmprovementdistrict, before lncurrlng indebtedness, must call an election for the purpose of confirmingthe organizationof the districtbs,

a vote "of the qualifiedresident property taxpaying voters. Article VI, Section 3(a) of the Constltutlonof Texas, reads, in part, as follows:

"When an election is he.ld by any . . . defined district

. . . for the purpose of $&suingbonds or otherwise lending credit, or expendingmoney or assuming any debt, only qualifiedelectors who o!!r, taxable property in the
. . . dletrict

. . . where such election is held, and who have duly rendered the same for,taxatlon,shall be qualifiedto vote
. . .'I It iS clear that the Legislature of Texas, in enacting Chapter 25, Acts of the 39th Legislature, 1925, intendedthat the confirmationelectlon'be a step in the proceduralprocess of

### 2
Hon. R. M. Dixon, page 2 (WW-1)

creating a water controland lm&ovement dlstrlct. Cronln, 245 L.W. 2d 519 (Tex.Cfv.App., 1951). Lovett v.

It 1s the election which gives life to the districtand under such clrcumstances, it seems clear that the legislativeintent,as outlined in Lovett v. Cronln,a, must be given effect. In the instant case, no taxes can be levled, money expended,or bonds issuedbased upon the confirmation .electIon,

since the statute requires a separatevote upon these questions. 7880, Sections 23, 32, 80 and 81, v.c.s. Accordingly;tEFr:e visions of Article VI, Section 3(a) of the Constitutionof Texas, do not govern the qualification of voters at the confirmation election of a water controland improvement district. King v. Carlton Indewndent School District,lnfra: .- Article k, Section 2, of the Constitution of Texas, defines a quallf'led

voter in this language: 'Everyperson subjectto.none of the foregoing dlsquallficatlons who shall have attained the age of twenty-one (21) years and who shall be a citizenof the Unlted.Stat.es and who shall have resided in.thls State.one (1) year next preceding an eleetlon ind the last six (6) months within the district .: in which such person offers to vote, shall'b~ deemed a qualifiedelector
. . .n The.courts'o'f

this State have held that then Constitutionixclusfvely.

presorlbes.the

quc %liflcatlon

of the voters and the -a slature 1s without the pouer to prescribe any other standng v. Carlton Indevindent School Disk&, ~~'s~~: 24 408 (19%) TeX. ; Snelsonv. Murray, 252 S.W. 26 720 (Tex. 19%). ref. n.r.e.; wooi P&c Eervlce,,lll S.W. ref;, Kay v. Schneider,110 We agree with your position that the provisions of Article VI, Section 2, of the Constitution of Texas, must be superimposed over th& provisionsof Article 7880-23,V.C.S., so as to require that the election for the ~c~nflrmatlon of a water control &d improvement

districtbe.submltted to those qualified electorsas defined in that provisionof the Conetltutk of Texas. King v. Carlton IndeuendentSchool District, supra; Jordan v. Cru&lllp(- ton, 149 Tex. 237, 231 S.W. 26 641 1950
.

### 3

Hon. R. M. Dixon, page 3 (WW-1)

SUMMARY

The provisionsof Article VI, Section 3(a) of the Constitution of Texas, do not govern the electionrequiredby Article ‘(880-23, V.C.S. That statuteprovidesrequirements beyond those set forth by Article VI, Section 2 of the Constitutionof Texas, and these additionalrequirements must be dlsregarded as unconstitutional.

Very truly yours,

WILL WILSON Attorney General

ERM-s APPROVED: Elbert M. Morrow Assistant