San Antonio Union Junior College Dist. v. Daniel, A-1424.

• Decision Date: 03 December 1947
• Docket Number: No. A-1424.,A-1424.
• Parties: SAN ANTONIO UNION JUNIOR COLLEGE DIST. v. DANIEL, Attorney General.
• Court: Texas Supreme Court

Page 995

206 S.W.2d 995

SAN ANTONIO UNION JUNIOR COLLEGE DIST. v. DANIEL, Attorney General.

No. A-1424.

Supreme Court of Texas.

December 3, 1947.

Original proceeding for mandamus by San Antonio Union Junior College District against Price Daniel, Attorney General, to require respondent as Attorney

General to approve certain refunding bonds.

Petition denied.

Davis, Hall, Clemens & Knight, and A. V. Knight, all of San Antonio, for relator.

Price Daniel, Atty. Gen., and Ocie Speer, Geo. W. Sparks, and W. T. Williams, Asst. Attys. Gen., for respondent.

BREWSTER, Justice.

This is an original proceeding for mandamus filed by relator, a junior college district, to require respondent, as Attorney General, to approve certain refunding bonds which relator seeks to issue.

On December 15, 1945, pursuant to an election, relator issued $940,000 of Building, Site and Equipment Bonds, payable semi-annually on June 15 and December 15, of each year, and bearing interest at 1¼ per cent. per annum. They were duly approved, registered and sold under authority of Art. 2815h, Vernon's Annotated Civil Statutes.

These bonds contained no prepayment option, but the holder of $80,000 of them maturing on December 15, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1972, and 1974, offered to surrender his bonds for 76 refunding bonds of the district for $1,000 each to be dated June 15, 1947, to bear interest at 1 per cent. per annum and to mature serially on June 15, for the years 1948 through 1957, inclusive. Relator accepted this offer and its trustees ordered the issuance of its Building, Site and Equipment Refunding Bonds in the sum of $76,000, to effect the agreement. A transcript of all proceedings had to issue them was submitted to respondent for approval, but he refused on the ground that a junior college district is not authorized to issue refunding bonds.

Relator claims both express and implied authority to issue refunding bonds, by virtue of the following two provisions of our statutes:

Sec. 5, art. 2815h, V.A.C.S. "The Board of Trustees of Junior College Districts shall be governed in the establishment, management and control of the Junior College by the General Law governing the establishment, management and control of Independent School Districts insofar as the General Law is applicable."

Sec. 1, art. 2815h—3b, V.A.C.S. "* * * the governing boards of all public Junior Colleges organized, created and established under the laws of Texas, in any manner, shall have power to issue bonds for the construction and equipment of school buildings and the acquisition of sites therefor, and to provide for the interest and sinking fund for such bonds by levying of such taxes as will be necessary in this connection, subject to the limitations hereinafter imposed. Such governing boards shall also have power to levy and collect taxes for the support and maintenance of such Junior Colleges, provided that no bonds shall be issued and no taxes collected until authorized by vote of the majority of the qualified voters of the Junior College District in which such Junior College is located, at an election called for that purpose in accordance with the provisions of the General Law providing for similar elections in Independent School Districts. The election for the issuance of such bonds; for the levying of such tax or taxes, shall be ordered by such governing board upon petition signed by two hundred and fifty (250), or a majority, of the qualified property taxpaying voters residing in such district, praying for the issuance of such bonds and/or the levying of such tax or taxes. It shall be the duty of such board to order such election, and the same shall be conducted and the returns made to such board. The issuance of bonds for Junior College purposes, and the provision for the sinking fund for the retirement thereof, and the payment of interest and the levying of taxes for the support and maintenance of the Junior College, shall, in so far as same is applicable, be in accordance with the general election laws and the laws governing the issuance of bonds and the levying of taxes in Independent School Districts, * * *."

Although the original Act authorizing the establishment of junior colleges, Acts 1929, 41st Leg., ch. 290, p. 648, has been amended several times, sections 5 and 1 have not been materially changed. See Acts 1935, 44th Leg., ch. 57, p. 140; Acts 1936, 44th Leg., 3rd C.S., ch. 480, p. 1990; Acts 1937, 45th Leg., ch. 69, p. 134, ch 76, p. 143; ch. 130, p. 248; Acts 1939, 46th Leg., Spec.Laws, ch. 36, p. 680, ch. 37, p. 684; Acts 1941, 47th Leg., ch. 5, p. 6, ch. 330, p. 535; Acts 1945, 49th Leg., ch. 191, p. 258; and Acts 1947, 50th Leg., ch. 70, p. 101.

Relator insists that it has express authority under these two sections to issue refunding bonds because they show the legislative intent to give junior college districts all powers conferred on independent school districts, particularly the power to issue refunding bonds, under Art. 2789, V.A.C.S. The argument is that Art. 2815h was intended merely as a framework for the establishment of junior college districts without any expression "in and by its own terms of all the powers, rights, duties and liabilities of such districts"; that it is fundamentally a reference act; that, therefore, such districts may issue refunding bonds because school districts may do so under the terms of Art. 2789.

While Art. 2815h is in some respects a reference statute, it is clearly not so in all. Analysis of art. 2815h—3b, sec. 1 shows that it accomplishes three things, namely, (1) it gives governing boards of junior college districts power (a) to issue bonds for constructing and equipping school buildings and for acquiring sites and (b) to liquidate those bonds by levying taxes; (2) it grants them power to levy and collect taxes for the support and maintenance of such colleges as they may construct and equip and acquire sites for; (3) it prescribes the means by which those powers may be exercised to effect those purposes.

Manifestly, it is wholly unnecessary to go to the statutes relating to independent school districts to find out whether a junior college district has power to issue bonds and for what purposes they may be issued, when Sec. 1 plainly says they can be issued and clearly prescribes that the purpose of their issuance shall be to construct and equip school buildings and to acquire sites therefor. Moreover, it would be idle to refer to those statutes to determine whether relator can liquidate its bonds so issued, when Sec. 1 says it can, by levying taxes. If the question be how such districts can raise money to support and maintain their colleges after construction and equipment, Sec. 1 answers: by the "power to levy and collect taxes." As to those matters, then, Sec. 1 is clear, explicit and self-sufficient; so, as to them, it cannot reasonably be held to be merely a reference statute.

But it is not explicit as to the form and substance of these bonds, including the procedure for their issuance; it is not explicit as to how an election to authorize the bonds and taxes to pay them shall be conducted; it is not explicit as to how a sinking fund to liquidate the bonds shall be set up. Therefore, since detailed instructions as to all those matters can be found in the statute relating to independent school districts, we clearly have the purpose of the Legislature when it said in Sec. 1, "The issuance of bonds for Junior College purposes, and the provision for the sinking fund for the retirement thereof, and the payment of interest and the levying of taxes for the support and maintenance of the Junior College, shall, in so far as same is applicable, be in accordance with the general election laws and the laws governing the issuance of bonds and the levying of taxes in Independent School Districts." There relator can get full directions as to the procedure to be followed if it would issue bonds; but as to the purposes for which it may issue them, it has complete instructions in Sec. 1, Art. 2815h—3b, supra.

Since the procedure for bond issuance requires extended and detailed writing, the Legislature properly referred to other statutes on that subject in order to avoid encumbering our statute books by unnecessary repetition; but since it spoke specifically on the purposes for which relator has power to issue bonds, we may reasonably suppose that it did so fully. 50 Am.Jur., p. 57, Sec. 36. So we are obliged to hold that with respect to relator's power to issue bonds, Sec. 1 is complete within itself and therefore exclusive.

Much that has been said applies to the contention that Sec. 5, Art. 2815h, authorizes relator to issue refunding bonds. Its language is that the trustees of junior college districts shall be governed in the establishment, management and control of the junior college by the general laws governing the establishment, management and control of independent school districts in so far as those laws are applicable. There is, of course, a clear distinction to be drawn between the district and the college, which the district is designed to create, so we think the language is clearly limited to the authority of the trustees to direct the college and that it has no reference to their authority with respect to the district, which alone can issue bonds.

We are supported in this view by the construction which the Legislature itself put on section 5 by the language of the caption to the original Act, Acts 1929, 41st Leg., ch. 290, p. 648. As relating to Sec. 5, the language of the caption is: "An Act * * * providing for the government and administration of such Junior Colleges and the location of same * * *." (Italics ours.)

Moreover, both sections 5 and 1, supra, in substantially their present language, appeared in the original Act of 1929; and all attorneys general since that time have consistently held that junior college districts have no power to issue refunding bonds. Since that official is...