Case Information
*1 HonorabIe~T. 'M. Thimble
Firt Assistant State Superintendent of Public Instruction
Austin, Texas opinion NO. 0-6550
Dear Sir:
Re: Under the facts submitted vhat tax rate can be assessed and oollected by the independent school district that IS to be fOFm?d in Jefferson County?
We are in receipt of your letter of May 3, 1945, In which you enclose a letter from Mr. W. 6. Holloway, Superintendent of the Fort Baches Schools. Mr. Hollovay submits the follcwlng question:
"The present board vould like to lomv the followtig informetion: (1) lo. 16 was formed by special'law of the 39th Deg., H. B. #5, Ch. #153, page 363, which granted No. 16 the power to asseas aud collect the $1.50 tax rate. The board would like to know if this $1.50 tax rate cau be assessed and aollected by tha independent district that is to be formed. (2) If the $1,50 tax rate vi11 not be legal for the independent district that is to be formed, what Is the status of the school tax rate, that is, will the independent district so formed have a $1.00 tax rate es provided by the general law, or will tim independent district have to vote on the tax rate? (3) If the independent district should vote on the tax rate of the gaueral law as provided of $1.00, and should defeat the $1.00 tax levy, what would be the status of the bonded indebtaduar8T"
Replying to the foregoing inquiry, it is our opinion that since Common School District Wo. 16 vas created by a special law granting it the power to assess and collect a $1.50 tax rate, such paver would not follov to an independent school district after the conversion of Comon Sahool District Ho. 16 into au independent school district. No. maintenance tax could be collected by the %z@nmdent school~district~lintil euch district, by a vote of the qualified property taxpaying voters of the district authorized the same. In the case of Pyote Independent School District v. Dyer, 34 5. W. I2di exact page 580, the Court mid;
- - Honorable T. N. Thimble, page 2 (o-6550)
"* * an the county school board of Ward County entered its order creating Pyote independent school district out of old common school district Bo. 4. the old district ceased to exist and all maintenance taxes theretofore voted by it ceased to be in force. This being the case, no power existed in any tax levying body to levy further maintenance taxes on the property of of the district until the new district should vote such tax in the way and manner provided by law and by the Constitution. Futhermore, the commissioners court never has the powerto levy me&enance taxes for independent school districts. Such tax must be levied by the local board. R. C.
S. of Texas 1925, articles 2784 and 2790; also the local beard usually levies all bond taxes of an independent district. R.
C. S. of Texas 1925, arts. 2784 and 2788. There is one exception to this rule, and in our opinion that exception is not involved here. The exception mentioned is where, after change in school districts, or the creation of new districts out of the old districts, there has been no provision by assumption of the indebtedness or otherwise for the payment of the bonds that are outstanding against the old district, and such facts are certified to the commissioners" court by the county school board, then it is the duty of the commissioners' court to annually levy a tax for the purpose of paying the old bonded indebtedness. See section 11, c.
84, ,Acta First Called Session lbrtleth Legislature (1927) aupra, p. 232 (Vernon'8 Ann. Civ. St. art. 2742b, sec. 11).
Bo such condition existed here. In fact, the opposite is shown, as the district prodeedad with all possible dispatch to organize Itself and assume the bonds of the old district by a vote of the people, as provided for in the act. Such being the case, the commissioners court had no authority for the levy of taxes to pay the bonds of the old common school district. In no event would this power exist unless tha new district had failed to provide for the payment thereof, and the other things provided by the act had transpired.* * *v In the case of Bigfoot Independent School District v. Canard, 116 S. W. (2d) 804, (confirmed by the Suprema Court) the Court said:
'share, after consolidated school district had voted a maintenance tax, the consolidated district was regularly converted into an independent district, the independent district could not impose the maintenance tax without having first obtained approval of voters of new district, notwithstanding the independent district embraced the identical territory which formed the consolidated district." *3 Honorable T. M. Trimble, page 3 (0-6550)
By converting the comeon school district created by special lav into an independent school district, the authority given the coqmon school district to levy a $1.50 tax rate vould not be available to the independent school district since the independent school district would be controlled by the general law, which fixes the school tax rate at $1.00 on tha $100 valuatiq; and the tax of $1.00 os the $100 valuation would not be in effect until authorized by a vote of the property'taxpayera of the district.
If the independent sahool district ahould vote on the tax rate sa provided of $1.00 on the $100 valuation, and should defeat the $1.00 tax levy, the bond tax would remain in effact but vauld have to be levied by the commiasioner6~ court since such tax wa6 a continuing tax levy at the time the bonds were issuad and remains a charge against all the property situated in said district at the time the bonds were authorized.
Yours very tru!Ly ATTOBBEI (BWWAL OF tTolK3 a/ C. F. Gibson w
C. F. Sibson Assistant
CFO: EP/ ldw
APPROVED MAY 16, 1945
a/ GROVER SELZXIE3
FIEFjT ASSISTART
ATTORlEi 0CRBRAL OF TEEAS
APmovFlD 0PIE10E COEMITTEE
BY B. W. B.
CHAIRMAR