Hon. L, A. Woods

Stats Superintendent De$mrtmentof Education Aurtin, Texas

Attn.% 'Hon.

T.M, Triable First Assistant

Dear Sir: opinion l$* v-573

Bet .Status

OP ~Xdinbmg JunXor College and authority 0P a junior collegedistrict to vote bonds POP purchase oP buildings.

We re$er'toyour letter to which warn attached
a letter signedby Mr. H, A.,Eodges,, AssociateDirector' of Edinbup

(1 7 Junior College,wherein inquiry is made whether the board of trustees of said junior college may set up a seprrate junior college district to be goaemed by the board of.trusteesof the~~Edinb&gConsolidated IndependentSchool District,, and (2) whether a junior collegedistrictmag,vote and idsue bonds P&P the purpose of purchasingschool buildingsas well as POP, the constructionor erection of same*

We dareadvised that the **IWnbprg** Junior Coilege'was created in 1927 in accordancewith Section 7' of Senate"Bill~276; Acts 1926, 39th Leglsiatu?e, Flrst Called Session, Ch8pter 3, 8 special law vaUdati ci&atiim oi~the Edinburg'conbolidated Indopend&nt

%El District. Section 7 provides that the board of trustees of the said independentschool district shall govern and control the junior college SO establishedr We assume Por purposes of this oplnlon th8t said junior collegewas crsated 8nd exists by virtue of full compliance with.laws applicablethereto.

Article 281 h,

? Sec. 16, Vernon*m 'CivilStatutea, enactedby the 1st Legislature, Acta~l929,no- &ar'Sersion, House Bill 10,' Chspter 290, ptiovides in part% "Any public junior colleuenow or- " " g8niz4d 8nd conductedii n the State of Texas which has been,ln actual operation prior to January 1, 1929; or which Is $8; cognizedas a stsndard junior collegebyHon. L. A. Woods, **pFg3** 2 (v-573)

the State Departmentof Fducatlon is hereby validatedand may, by action of Its board of trustees, choose to be governed by the provi ions of Acts 7 of this act (Chap. 290

1929 , and receive the privileges of the safe, at any time that it may desire to do so. (Matter in parenthesisadded).

See'alsoArticle 2815L (Small 11, Vernon’s Civil Statutes.

In Opinion No. O-4198, at page 4, this ofPice advised that as to certain junior collegeswhich existed prior to ~the

enactment of Chapter 290 of the Fortyfirst Legislature, Regular Session, this law through the adoption of Section 16 thereof, in effect, empoweredthe boards of trustees OP such junior colleges to create a junior collegedistrictby simple resolution,and that the ultimate effect of Section 15 is to create a junior college district.

We have not been apprisedwhether or not the board of trustees of EdinburgJunior Collegeh8s .adopted the provisionsof said Section 16. If it has not acted as provided in Section 16, then Section 7 ofenate Bill 276 under which the collegewas created,provides that the college shall be governedby the board of trustees of the Edinburg ConsolidatedIndependent School District. If it & or does aat as provided in Section 16 and the college district so oreated (See A. G.-OpinionNo. o-4198) is now governedby the r;;m;;ons of Chapter 290 of Acts 1929, as amended, then E 2815h, Sec. 4, is applicable in the determination of what board or body shall control the district in question.

Article 2815h, Sec. 4, provides tbet the Board of Education of such independentschool district shall be the governingbody of such junior collegedistrict.

There being no law authorizing8 junFor college districtwhose boundariesar4 coincident with the boundariesof an ihdepehdentschool district to provide POP a board of trustees comprisedof persons other than the board membera of the independentschool’distrlct, no such authority exists in the independentschool dlatrict board or in the voters of the district. Such power haa not been delegatedor prescribedby the Legislsture.. -

Hon. L. A. Woods, Page 3 (v-573)

However, a union junior-college, a county junior college, or a joint oounty junior college (8s distinguished

from a junior college district established by an independentschool district or City that has assumed control of its schools) is governed,administered and controlled by a board of sevenjunior college trustees elected from the junior collegedistrictby the qualifiedvoters in said district. Sets. 20 and 4 of Article 2815h, Vernon's Civil Statutes,

.~ With respect to pour bond question,Section 1 of Article 2%l3h-3b,Vernon's Civil Statutes, enactedby the Fiftieth Legislature (Ch. 70, Acts 1947, R.S.), provides in part as follows:

vFrom and after the passage of this Act, the. governingboards of all public Junior Colleges organized,created.andestablished um3er the laws'

of Texas, in,

any manner, shall have the power to,issuebonds POPS the construction

and equipmentof schools buildings and the acquisitionof sites therefor.

. en See also Section 7,,Article 2815h,Vernon's Civil Statutes.

The authority of the governingboards.oSpublic junior college districts to issue negotiablebonds is thus limited to the purposesdesignated in the Act: namely, SOP the construction and equipmentof school buildings and the acquisitionof sites therefor, San Antonio Union Junior ,Colle e District v. Daniel (Tex. Sup., Dec. 3, 19471, 206,%W+cf2d) 995a

The-questionthus presents itself as to whether bonds~

may be issued for the purchase of schoolbuildings under a grant of powerfor the constructionof such buildings. This questionhas never been squarelybefore the courts of this State, Therefore, we have had to resort to decisions of other jurisdictions in an effort to' arrive at the correct conclusion.

In the case of Seymour v. City of Tacoax, 6 Wash. 138+ 32 P. 1077, the Supreme Court of Washington hsd fop consideration 8 statutewhich authorizedthe is&
suance of bonds POP the constructionof certain improvements. Thst court held that "cons,truction" in the statute meant 'provide,.! and that the city could issue bonda thereunderto purchase the improvements. We quote Sror the decision,oSthe court as follows:Hon. L. A. Woods, page 4 (v-573)

"Th4 P081 purpose of this act would have

. . .. -. _.. Deen Demer expresaecl naa tne wora 'provide' been used, but w4 think the word 'construct,'

under all the circumstances, may be accorded a similarmeaning, rather than to defeat the operationof what is probably the most important feature of this law, upon the technicalalgnlSicance of a word, where it can hardly be contended that any one was likely to be deceived. As the constitution has not indicatedthe degree of particularity necessary to express in its title the subject of an act, the courts should not embarrasslegislation by technical interpretations based upon mere form or phraseology. The objections shouldbe grave, and the conflictbetween the statute 8nd the constitution palpable, before the judiciaryshould disregarda legislativeenactmentupon the sole ground that the double subjegtwas not fully expressed in the title.
Similarly,the Supreme Court of Id8ho in the
case of Ostranderv. City of Salmon, 20 Idaho 153, 117 P. 692, held 80 Pollows:

"There is one other questionpresented in the argument upon this appeal which is relied upon, which we deem proper to dispose of, inasmuch 8s the same question might be raised in case the proposedbond issue is again submitted. It is contended by the appellant that the municipality has no legal authority to purchasewaterworks already constructed, or make the same a part of the muncipalwater sgs,tem. 'phis argument Is based upon the provisionsof subdivision1, Sec. 2315, Rev. Codes: 'To provide for the construction and maintenance of necessarywaterworks and supplyingthe
same with water.' It is urged that the word lconstructlonl as used in this subdivisionwill not authorizea municipality to purchaseworks 8lre8dy constructed. we think it was not intendedby the Legislai ture, by the language thus used, to prohibit a municipalityfrom purchasingwaterworks already constructed and to make the..

Hon. L. A. Woods, page5" (v-573)'

same.allor a part of a general water ayatern for- such municipality. The very fact that the municipalityis authorizedto provide for the construction 8nd nsintenance oP necessarywaterworksImplies authority to purchaseworks already,constructed, 8nd to make the same all, or anpart of, a general system of waterworks. ,,
It is seen that both these decisionshold, in effect, that the authority to issue bonds for the construction.oPimprovements includes 81~0 the such improvements. Similarly, it is stated
on Municiual Coroorations, Section 2438, that "express power to lssus bonds to provide SOP the~conatruction and maintenance'

.of,waterworks

include1power to issue bonds to purchcrse existingwaterworksa

And the Supreme,

Court of the United States in the case of Swigart vi Baker, 229 U.S, 193, 57 L. Ed. 11146, 33 Sup, Ct.,

646, states the Pollowing~
" dl Permissionto nconstructinternal'i&provements" warranted the pvchase of a plant already built II

. . '(citing

with approval the Seymour case*)

'See also State va Thompsort (Ho.), 53 S.w.(2d) 273. Although we Sully recognize that there are decisionsof,.other stateswhich may be in conPlictwith this principle,the courts of Texashave definitelyindicated that the rule of law announcedby the WIshington and Idaho courts is the one which will be followedhere* In the, case oP,.Galveston

Theatres,

zinc. v, Larsen, 124 g.w.(2d) 936, the Galveclton Court of Civil Appesls in determiningthe sufflciency~ OP the word 'conatructedv in
a speoial issue submitted-tothe jury held that the alble me8nt "provide." The court cited with approval the above quoted Seymour case,.

And in,the ca 8 of City of Oayton v. Allred, 123 Tex. 60, 68 S.W.(2dy 172, our Supreme Court had for consideration

theprovisions of Article 1112; Vernon's Civil Statutes,which,prohibits the incumberingof a city-utilitysystem for more,than $5;000, except ,PorpUrchase money or to refund existing indebtedness., unless suthorizedby a majority vote of the qualifiedvotersHon. L. A. Woods, page 6 (V-573)



### of the city. The court held that construction money wea the aem es purchasemoney. We quote from the decision
es followar

II

. It is then further apeciflcelly &vided that such system shall not be incumberedfor more than $5,000, except for purchasemoney, etc., without such vote,

"In the instant case the City of Dayton has no sewer system end expect3 to use the money derived from the sale of these bonda in the constructlon, acquisition,

end completion of-em. It is our opinion that such e record justifiesthe conclusionthat, in so far es the proposed sewer systemhepe involved is concerned,the mortgage thereon Is for purchase money within the mes,ning of Article 1112. Vhlle it La for more .than $5,000,being for purchasemoney, it is not requiredby this statute that e vote be had. (Emphasis

added)
Although neither of these cases directly enswers the questionwhich you ask, it la our opinion that the courts have followed the principle that stetutory authority to issue bonds to constructpublic improvements include3 the authority to issue bonds to purahase such improvements unleaa the atietute would lndicete otherwise.

It seems clear to us that this prlneiple la wholly in Gonsonance with the legislative intent,which, after all, $a the final end ultimategoal to reeoh in all questions of atetutoryconstruction. For example, suppose the situationwhere a junior collegedlatrlat could purchase e building entirely suitablefor school purposea;however, if it were compelledto build the
same type of building, the cost would be much greater than the purchaseprioe of the building that had been offered. Could it be said that the Legislature would have intended that the districtwould have to construct the building, rather than effect a subatantlalsaving by purchasinge building already construoted? The answer is obvious. It 1~ our opinion that the Legislature, by the language construction end equipmentof school buildings end the acquisitionof sites therefor,* meant that the governingboard of a junior colle e dlatrict could provide e sohool. plant for the distr fct, andlion, L. A, Woods, page 7 (V-573)

that this could be accomplishedeither by the construc- \ tion or purchsse of school buildings.

SuMMArtY

If the board of truafeea of EdinOP does 16, Art-

_ burg Junfor College has adopted, adopt, the provisionsof Section icle 2815h, VernonEn Civil Statutes, tne effect thereof is to create a junior college distrIcta ion No0 O-4198,AttorneyGenerals3 Opinb

Texas public junior collegedistricts may vote and issue bonds for the purchase of buildingsalready constructedto be used for school purposes. Arts. 281521 end 2815h-3b,V, C, Se

Yours very truly,

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS

.&$?LAFW ChesterE. Olliaon Assistant

CEOsGWSss"bbsw fi
eorge W, Spark Assistant