c
. .

RE 

### ~ORNEY GENEKAL OFTEXAS

Dr. J. W. Edgar Commissionerof Education Texas Education Agency Austin, Texas

Dear Dr. Edgar: OpinionNO. 

### ~~-648
Re: Validity of certain action taken at a meeting of trustees of an Independent School District subsequent to the election but prior to the qualification of newly elected trusteeswho were not notified of and did not attend saidmeeting. Your request for an opinion recites that three new trusteeswere elected to the Board of Trustees of an Independent School District on April 4, 19%. On April 14, 1959, sixmembers of the old Board met at a special calledmeeting. Verbal notification of the meeting was given by the prlnclpal of the school to all seven formermembers of the Board. The seventhmember, one of those defeated in the election, did~not attend. One candidate elected on April 4, 1959,was present at the meeting and soughtpermission to sit In, because he had been elected and the business appearing on the agenda therefor Involvednext year'sbusiness. The Board voted to go Into executive session, six voted therefor and the newly electedmember was asked to leave. The 'president of the old Board (defeatedat the election)presided throughout.

Your letter recites that theminutes of the April 14meeting show that the Board read and approved minutes, canvassed election returns,hired teachers, recommendedbus driver, employed cafeteriaworkers, employed janitor and approved classificationof district as a ten grade school. All teacherswere given an addltlonal extendedyear on their contract and two whose contracts expired this year were each given two-year contracts. The principal's contract was extended one more year for a total of three.Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 2 (~~-648)

The three new Board members were notified of their election on April 23, by letterpostmarked April 22.

The newly elected trustees questioned the validity of the April 14 meeting called for purposes other than canvassing of the election returns, since they were not notified of the meeting and were not given opportunity to participateas newly elected members In the transaction of schoolbusiness affecting the operation of the district for the ensuing years. Article 2750a-1,Vernon's Civil Statutes, reads as follows:
'Trusteesof any CommonSchool

District or ConsolidatedCommon School District shallhave authority to make contracts for a eriod of time not in excess of two (2

P years with principals, superintendents,and teachers of said Common School Districts or Consolidated Common School Districts,provided that such contracts shallbe approvedby the County Superintendent. No contractmay be signedby the Trustees of Common School

,,Districts or Common Consolidated School iuntilthee or trusteeshave qualifiedand taken the oath of office." (Emphasisours) The foregoing Articleprohibits trustees of Common School Districts or Common Consolidated School Districts from signing contractswith teachers subsequent to the date of the trustee election and prior to the date of qualification of newly electedmembers of the Board. This Article,however, Is not applicable to Independent School Districts. We find no provision of the statuteswhich so restricts the authority of the Board of Trustees of an Independent School District.

Attorney General's Opinion 0-765 (1939)held that valid contractswith principals, superintendentsand teachers, not In excess of the period authorizedby statute,may be executedby a majority of the Board of Trustees of a Condolidated School District although such contracts are signed after an election for trusteeshas been held in the district and before the newly elected trusteeshave qualified and taken theDr. J. W. Edgar, page 3 (~~-648)

oath of office. Thla opinion was written prior to the enactment of Artiole 2750a-1 In 1941.

Since the,Legisliturehas not seen fit to restrict the contraotlngauthority of Boards of Trustees of Independent Sohool Districtsprior to the qualificationof newly elected trustees, as it has done In the ease of Common School Districts and Common Consolidated School Districts,we are compelled to hold that the action taken by the Board of Trustees at the April 14meeting is not Illegalmerely because taken prior to the qualificationof the new Board members. Artlole 2779 of Vernon’s Civil Statutes authorizes and directs that the trustees shallmeet within twenty days after the election or as soon thereaftera8 poesible for the purpose of organizing. We find no statutoryrestrlotionsupon the authority of the old Board to administer the affairs of the school district until such time a8 the election returnshave been canvassed, certlflcates of electlon issued to the newly,electedmembers and : the latter heavequalified. According to 

### yourrequest, It appears that these steps ,wereaooomplished In the manner and within,the time presoribedby law in the instant case.

Business transactedand oontracts entered Into by a Board of Trustees of an Independent School Diatriat, under the faots stated,are not Illegal merely because occurring aubse-’ quent to the election of three (3) new trusteesbut prior to their qualifying for office.

Very truly your8,
WILL WILSON Attorney General of Texas

Leonard Pasamore Assistant LP: rm:mfhDr. J. W. Edgar, page 4 (~~-648)

APPROVED: OPINION COMMITTEE C. K. Richards, Chairman
J. Milton Richardson Marvin H. Brown, Jr. Marvin R. momas, Jr. RBvIEWFJ3

FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BY: W. V. Geppert