-. 

.- 

- - 

%-JXE A-rro~n;~u Gmnzm~ 

OF-I?ExAs 

March 30, 1939 

Gerald C. Mann Au- Il. TszxAEs 

X-B- A-mm- OXXIIAL 

Honorable Ben J..Dean 

District Attorney 

Breckenridge, Texas 

Opinion No.O-513 

Ri: Zliblgllity of County 

School Trustee to serve 

as Election Judge 6r 

Clerk In'Independant 

School Trustee Election 

,DearSir: 

March 14, 

queatlon: 

This department is in receipt of your letter of 

1939, requesting an oplx$otyupon the following: 

"+asmuch as under ,the p&vieiom-~of' Article 275s tbe~.electlon .of m9mol -tm$eee. of ,831. 

lndependen-t..echoolid?.s$rlct organized-,Ynder. 

that portIon of. .the~-S~hool:,Larr--ie.-deq~ated, 

for the.~~.flxyt: Saurda~Xn Aprilil.%%:;it your 

opinlon,Wat .& ‘man ppho~.~~(~s.holding.the office 

of count;;v. school trustee:under Article 2676 

would ~~prohlbL$ed~f&ym,ac$~ing .a8 ,a judge-or 

clerk oi.-an: eleotion~:far..echool,,.~hlaCee .o@in 

indepamjent aa~ooL-.dj.t3tz+t?,~ ' 

.'I8 an.~~e~eption:~~,~d uade~.$@e.prqvie-ions ~~ 

of Article ?75&IR.S.:a genera~~L(lection.or a 

special election?! 

Article -26f~i7.R~c.s.: 1925 pOVide8 that county 8chool 

trustee 'shall~be paid $3.00 per day,~ but not to,exceed $36.00 

in one year". ,Theg are elected. under Article 2676 and have 

numWous duties to perform as provided by the various statutes 

pertatnlng to public schools. 

.Artlcle 2758,.,R.C.S. 1925, pertains to the election 

of school trustees in independent school districts created 
fIonorable Ben J. ;iean, Maroh =O, 1939, ?age 8 

follow%: 

"Any CormdOn crohool di8triCt containing 

seven hundred inbabitaota or more may fern 

an incorporation r0r free Oohool purpose8 

only, rhloh may OT may not inolucO tithln 

it8 band6 eny town or villago lnaorporateb 

for aunloipal purpoae6, the 8am not having 

O88uEMd control of the publla $TOO SOh0016 

Xithin it.6 limits. The territory 80 inoorporatea BbeU hOmlnafter by Oalled nn "independent sohool di8triOt" and 8Oia @OOrporation 8hOllbO 18u 0.w in 8 l qu8r* l 8 

888~ u nay be pnotioablo with nforaoe to 

t& loootlon of l l bool buildm.g 

Artiol.8 am5 ooawn8 ah0 iollowbg prov1oioa1 

Artiola 8940, R.C.S. lQ%b, xuWr Title %C, XLOOfiion~, OODhill8 th8 f01bW~ pl’Oti8iOIl; .,; 

*No one who hold8 an 0rti88 of profit or 

Crud pllaor the United matoe 011 this state, 

or in any alty or town la thir @Bate of wlthin thirty Ely8 after rO81&Xbring Or baiq diemlsao& tray any m&h offioa, oxos# a notw 

pobllo, or whe i8 a ourdfdak r0r 0ffi00, or 

, 
Honorable Ben J. Dean, March 30, 1939, page 3 

"No one who holds an office of profit 

or trust under the United States or this 

State, or In any city or town in this State 

or within thirty days after reslgnlng or 

being dismissed from any such office, except a notary public, or who Is a candidate 

for office, or who has not paid his poll 

tax, shall act as judge, clerk or supervisor 

of an election. . . .' 

You also call attention to Chestnut vs. Wells, 280 

S.W. 351, and 278 S.W. 465, as holding that Article 2940,does 

not apply to a special sbhool tax election, but applies .only 

to general or primary elections. 

Chestnut vs. Wells (T.C.A. Ft.Worth, 1926) 280 s~.w. 

39, lnvo1ved.a school tax election contest in a common school 

district on the ground that an election official was a school 

tivstee: 

Chestnut vs. Wells (T.C.A. Ft.Worth, 1926) 278 S.W. 

465, was a contest of an election-to determine whether school 

districts should consolidate. Two ground8 were presented ln 

this case, Le., an election official was a trustee of one 

of the districts .and the electaon judge failed to write his 

name on the outside of theballot. 

In each of these cases the ground- of contest,was 

one provided only under the general lay. The court;relylng 

on the holding and-language-of Chief Justice Gaines ln:Waills vs. 

Williams, 108 SiW. 153, held that the elections In question were 

purely apeclal and the provisions of the Terre11 Election Law 

were not applicable. The speclflc holding in Wallls v8. WllHams was that the general law providing for the prlntlng of 

ballots did not apply to a.speclal election to locate a county 

seat since the general election laws were not applicable? 

InScherz vs. Telfer.(T.C.A. X&tin, 1934) 74'.SiWi 

(26) 327,.the court held that the general law providing for 

the signature of.the election judge on the ballot was appllcable to common school trustee elections since the general.law 

would apply to all matters not covered by Articles 2745, 2746 

and 2746a. 

We are of the opinion .that the reasoning of the court 

In the foregoIng case Is equally applicable to elections held 

under .Artlcle 2758, and that It properly dlstlnguishes the 

cases in'the light of Wallis vs.~Wllllams. The court in Scherz 

vs. Telfer states: 
iionorable Ben J. bean, Narch 30, 1939, Page 4 

Suoh elections as above enumerated are oleorly 

local in character, of infkequsnt ocourrenoe, 

apply only to a given looallty, em usually 

final, the matters voted upon einposea 0r st a 

single eleotion, and are not recurrlng in abaraoter. * 4 l ke think the eleotlon of oozzon 

sohool trusteea does not oonstitute a special 

elaotloa dealt rlth In the abovo -4eolslona. 

Suuh eleotion is not confined to any given louality, nor to any glvon lndlvi4pa1, nor to say 

limited alaes of lndlvlduals. On the contrary, 

artiol~18-2745, Z744 antI 8746a relate to all con- 

~88OhOO1 diStX'iSt8 thlW&AOUt th0 StStS, and 

%O th o l lOOtiOa Of the t-t@88 thOrOOi, proride 

iOr OUOjl l lSOtiion l Mh fe8E t&OU@lOUt t?lO 8-t.. 

~4 a r e ?hr eforo l 88ontla&ly g8norol lntlmir 

l pplioatloa. ft.18 llOW SOttlSd that S SOhOOl 

b i8t00 t l 00mty oirhr, r 0~ulr 0d to h k 8 

thO~OOll8titUtiOlul Oa th Ond that 0 OOntOSt a t 

h i8 l lOOtiO~ 18 l'8ftBd. t0 th8 &8lWWdl’hW.’ 

Wo ore of thn opldoa that a min holding'%hodSioa of 

OOUU~ 8OhOS~tZ'ltStSSUZM3S~&t%Sh~676UOuld be~rOhibitidliZ4br 

‘AMole 8940 iroln Eating es a jut&B or olork of t3n dlooei611 for 8OiWO1 

trrut80 of an lndepsndont SShOO1 dA8triot held ua6.r Jbtiole imeJ..