Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion ( 1984 )


Menu:
  •                                    The Attorney General of Texas                                   .
    JIM MATTOX                                          November 29.      1984
    Attorney General
    Supreme Court BuildIn
    Ronorable   Bill   IKey                         Opinion No. JM-235
    P. 0. Box 12548                  Chairman
    Austin. TX. 7S7! l- 2548         Public Education Ctmmittee                      Re: Effect of section 23.024 (h)
    512l4752501                      Texas House of RelBresentatives                 of the Education Code on school
    Telex 910IS7C13S7
    P. 0. Box 2910                                  trustee’s  term of office
    Telecopier  5W475-0268
    Austin, Texas    711769
    714 Jackson. Sulto 700           Dear Representative       Haley:
    Dallas. TX. 75202-4506
    2141742.8944
    You ask vhet’wr a school district     trustee,  elected to a six-year
    term in April, 19KI. is subject to having his term cut short by school
    4S24 Alberta   Ave.. Suite 160   boaFd action pursuant to section      23.024 of the Education Code.      This
    El P8s.a. TX. 79905.2793         statute,  enacted :Ln 1983, allows certain school districts     to establish
    915/533-w                        single-member districts    for electing    70% or more of their trustees.
    Acts 1983, 68th Leg., ch. 316, Sl at 1687.        Subsection (h) of section
    CO1 Texas. Suite 700
    23.024 provides:
    “ouston. TX. 77002-3111
    7131222-5888                                 At the first election         at which some or all of the
    trustee:s     are elected     from trustee     districts    and
    after     c!s.ch redistricting,      all positions       on the
    SW Broadway. Suite 312
    Lubbock. TX. 79401.3479
    board s:lall be filled.           The trustees   then elected
    SW7476238                                    shall d:&v lots for staggered terms as provided by
    Section      23.13. 23.14,      or 23.15 of this code, as
    applical):le.      (Emphasis added).
    4309 N. Tenth. Suite B
    McAllen, TX. 7850%16R5
    5121592.4547
    Sections 23.13. 23.14. and 23.15 of the code provide that trustees                in
    various classific,lt:ions    of school districts     shall have staggered terms
    of three years, six yiars,       and four years respectively.          For example,
    200 Main Plaza. Suite 400       in a school dist:::lct ~where trustees      hold six-year      terms, in any one
    San Antonio. TX. 782052787
    election   year some trustees will be up for reelection,             some will have
    51212254191
    two years remaining of their six-year         terms, and some will have four
    years remaining t> serve.       In the first regular election         under section
    An Equal OpportUnW              23.13,   23.14,   or 23.15,    all trustee    positions    sre filled,      and the
    Aftirmative Action Efvl~v~      trustees   draw lots for term8 of varioug length, thereby establishing
    the staggered terns.      -See Educ. Code 1123.13(c),      23.14(c),    23.15(c).
    It is suggested that the single-member districts     might be phased
    in over several Iwars as the trustees      complete their six-year   terms.
    Section 23.024 01: the Education Code, however. does not authorize         a
    gradual changeovw.      At the first    election,  “all  positions  on the
    board shall be filled,”   and the trustees are to draw lots for terms of
    p. 1055
    Honorable   Bill   Haley - Page Z!       (n!-235)
    varying length.      The changeover occurs at once, and unequal terms are
    necessary to reestablish      the scheme whereby only a portion of trustee
    positions   are on the bsll,H      in each election   year.    Moreover.      the
    statute   uses   mandatory lmguage       In directing   that all     positions
    “shall”   be filled.      This Flrovision effectively    ends the terms of
    incumbent trustees     who, for example, were elected      to six-year     terms
    and would otherwise have tw3 or four years to serve.
    You ask whether a trustee elected to a six-year                  term prior    to the
    effective    date of article      23.024 of the Education Code may be deprived
    of his      full    term by board            action      under that      provision.       The
    legislature      in enacting       m=I*tlon 23.024 has clearly
    s-.                                      authorized     the
    school board to take this action.                See State v. Stanfield,        
    18 S.W. 577
    (Tex.     1892).    Article     VII,      section     16 of the Texas Constitution
    empowers the legislature              ‘to fix      any term of office           for   school
    trustees,     not   to   exceed    :3:1x   years.       See   Attorney    General   Opinion
    o-1995      (1940).       Section        23.024(h)     fixes       terms    WIthin      these
    constitutional       limits.     Cf. Attorney General Opinion MU-536 (1982)
    (Tex. Const. art.        V, I6-Fixes          six-year     term for court of appeals
    judges).
    The legislature      may enact a statute        shortening    an incumbent
    officer’s     term. as long as the constitution        does not fix the term of
    office.     Popham i. Patiersvn,       
    51 S.W.2d 680
    (Tex. 1932).        In Tarrant
    County v. Ashmore, 635 S.Wrrd 417 (Tex. 1982) cert. denied, 
    459 U.S. 1038
    (1982). the Texas Supclzme Court considered”thepurported                  rights
    of duly e&ted        officehol&rs     to complete their full terms of office.”
    635 S.W.Zd at 418.          The Tzirrant County Comissioners       Court adopted a
    redistricting      plan and concurrently        ordered    that all    justice     and
    constable     precincts    and eclch office   located    therein be abolished       so
    that the newly defined of:i:tces could be filled             by appointment.       The
    justices    and constables      who were removed from office        sought damages
    and other relief       against the commissioners court, claiming an entitle-
    ment to complete their t(!Ims of office             and violation     of their due
    process rights.
    The supreme court found that there             was no taking of property in
    violation   of article  I, section   17 of          the Texas Constitution   or the
    due process    clause  of the Fifth and              Fourteenth Amendments of the
    United States Constitution.      It quoted          from State ex rel. Maxwell v.
    Crumbau h. 
    63 S.W. 925
    , 9:!i (Tex. Civ.              App. - San Antonio 1901, writ
    Tiim+
    A public offi,ce   is not ‘property,’     within the
    meaning of the ~:~~nstitutional provision       that ‘no
    person   shall   bt! deprived    of life,    liberty   or
    property without due process of law.’            It is a
    mere public    agency.    revocable  according     to the
    will and appoint,nlent of the people, .as exercised
    p. 1056
    Honorable   Bill   Hsl.ey - Psge :3    (JM-235)
    in the constitut~lon          and the laws enacted            in
    conformity therawl~th. Moore v. Strickling              (U.Va.)
    146 W.Va. 5151.   _ . ,
    33 S.E. 274
    . 50 L.R.A.        279.     In
    ;he     case    cited     the    court-    in    its   opinion
    makes . . .      the    following      quotation:      ‘It    is
    impossible     to cclt.ceive how,       under our form of
    government, a person can own or have a title               to a
    governmental office.         Offices    are created for the
    administration       of public affairs.        When a person
    is inducted       into an office        he thereby becomes
    empowered to exerc:ise its powers and perform its
    duties,    not for 111.8, but for the public,        benefit.
    It would be a mi,3nomer and a perversion             of terms
    to say that an i,ccumbent owned an office                or had
    any title    to it.’
    The Texas Supreme Court determined          that
    every public offj,ceholder   remains in his position
    at the sufferance      and for the benefit    of the
    public,  subject to removal from office  by edict of
    the ballot   box at the time of the next election,
    or before that tj.me by any other constitutionally
    permissible   means.
    635 S.W.Zd at 421.          Its de::Lsion is in accord vith the majority rule
    in other     jurisdictions,       ac shown by its survey of authorities             from
    other states.       An officer      may have a property interest       in his office
    that can be protected          agsjnst   interference   by s private person, but
    “the qualified       interest     htld by a public officer       is not ‘property’
    within     the sense of constitutional           guarantees against       governmental
    taking of property          without    compensation.”     
    Id. at 422.
            See also
    Aigginbotham v. Baton Rougjr, 
    306 U.S. 535
    (19m;                Taylor v. Beckham,
    
    178 U.S. 548
    (1900); --      Moore v. El Paso Commissioners Court, 
    567 S.W.2d 15
    (Tex. Civ. App. - El Paso 1978, writ ref’d                    n.r.e.);      Attorney
    General Opinion H-955 (19;‘i).             Cf. Childress    County v. Sac&e,         
    310 S.W.2d 414
    . (Tex. Civ. App. - Amarillo, writ ref’d n.r.e.),                per curiam.
    
    312 S.W.2d 380
    (Tex. 1958) (county commissioner’s               office     not vacated
    by change of precinct boundaries which removed his residence                   from his
    precinct).
    We conclude,  based on Jarrant County v. Ashmore, that the terms
    of incumbent school board members may constitutionally       be shortened
    pursuant to legislative   ac eion.  The trustees have no right to serve
    out full   terms that would bar the legislature     from enacting section
    23.024 and making it applicable      to incumbents.    The board’s  action
    pursuant to this sectjon      did not unlawfully    deprive  a previously
    elected trustee from serving out a full term.
    p. 1057
    Monorable Bill    Haley - Page ,4    (a-235)
    SUMMARY
    Section 23.024 of the Education Code authorizes
    certain      school.       districts       to     establish
    single-member     d:lstricts       for  trustees.      Under
    subsection   23.026(h)      of the code, all trustees’
    positions   will bir filled      by election    at the same
    time, with the result           that the terns of some
    incumbent     tNst ees      will     be   shortened.      The
    shortening   of incumbent trustees'          terms pursuant
    to section    23.024(h)     of the Education Code does
    not deprive the trustees          of a property right or
    any entitlement    t,c serve out a full term.
    s k
    Very
    -J I M
    ruly yours
    k
    MATTOX
    Attorney General of Texas
    -
    TOMGREEN
    First Assistant    Attorney   Goneral
    DAVID R. RICRARDS
    Executive Assistant Attorney        General
    RICK GILPIN
    Chairman, Opinion Committelr
    Prepared by Susan L. Garrison
    Assistant Attorney General
    APPROVED:
    OPINIONCOMMITTEE
    Rick Gilpin, Chairman
    Colin Carl
    Susan Garrison
    Tony Guillory
    Jim Hoellinger
    Jennifer Riggs
    p. 1058