THE ATTORNEY GENERAL 

AUSTIN II. T~xax 

January 8, 1960 

Hon. Jimmy Morris 

Counts Attornev 

NavarEo County" 

Corsicana, Texas 

Dear Mr. Morris: 

Opinion No. W-775 

Re: Whether or not the secretary 

of the Corsicana Independent 

School District must sign all 

notices mailed to taxpayers 

notifying them of meetings 

of the district's Board of 

Equalization to consider increasing property valuation. 

You have requested our opinion upon the necessity of 

having the secretary of the Corsicana Independent School District sign notices to taxpayers of the district, informing 

them of meetings of the district's Board of Equalization to 

consider increasing their property valuation. You advise us 

that it has been the practice in past years to have the secretary sign all such notices. 

It is our opinion that the identity of the person 

executing these notices is immaterial, and that the Board of 

Trustees of the District may designate the secretary, the 

district assessor-collector, or other person or persons to 

perform this function. 

An independent school district may proceed in either of two ways in having its taxes assessed and collected. 

Through its Board of Trustees it may (1) appoint its own 

assessor and collector (Art. 2791, V.C.S.) or (2) elect to 

have the county or city assessor and collector act for it 

(Art. '2792, V.C.S.). In either case, a Board of Equalization 

must be provided to equalize the taxes it imposes (Arts. 

2791, 2792, 2792b, V.C.S.). Where the board elects to have 

the county officials act for it, the commissioners' court, 

sitting as a board of equalization, acts in that capacity for 

the district also. Miller v. Vance, 107 Tex. 485, 180 S.W. 

739 (1913) 9 If a special assessor and collector is used, it 

becomes incumbent upon the board to provide a board of equalization before which a taxpayer may appear. St. Louis Southwestern R. Co. v. Naples Ind. Sch. Dlst., 30 S W.2d 703 (Tex. 

2iv.A~~. 1930) The t f course, must-be notified in 

some manner of-the tirnr%egiaze of the board's meeting. 

Hoefling v. City of San Antonio, 38 S.W. 1127 (Tex.Civ.App. 

loy'(, error ref.). 
Hon. Jimmy Morris, Page 2 (Opinion No. WW-775) 

Procedure for equalizing county taxes is set out in 

some detail. by Arts. 718la et seq., V.C.S. Art, 7206 directs 

that, whenever the county board of equalization finds it 

necessary to raise an assessment, it shall order the county 

clerk to give notice in writing to the person who rendered 

the property (Sec. 5). But where a special assessor, collector, and equalization board are provided by the school district, there is no such specific direction in the statutes as 

to what officer or agent shall give such notice. 

Independent school district trustees have those powers expressly granted by, statute and, as a corollary, those 

necessarilv imolied in addition or incident to those nranted, 

and final15 those essential to the accomplishment of the ob-v 

jects and purpose of the district. Thompson v. Elmo Independent School Dist., 269 S.W. 868 (Tex.Civ.App. 1925). Since 

it is a mandatory duty of the trustees to provide a board of 

equalization before which the taxpayer may-appear (Miller v. 

Vance, supra), the responsibility of having notice given to 

maxpayer of the time and place of such meetings rests 

upon them. This necessarily implies the power to designate 

the mechanics of how such notice should be given. 

SUMMARY 

It is not required that the Secretary of 

the Corsicana Independent School District sign 

notices to taxpayers of meetings of its Board 

of Equalization. The Board of Trustees may 

designate the person or persons to execute such 

notices. 

Very truly yours, 

WILL WILSON 

Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE: 

W. V. Geppert Chairman 

Tom McFarling 

Marvin R. Thomas, Jr. 

J: Arthur Sandlin 

Wallace P. Finfrock 

JRI: bet 

REVIEWED FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL: 

By: Leonard Passmore