Oregon Advisory Opinions August 30, 1961: OAG 61-129 (August 30, 1961)
Collection: Oregon Attorney General Opinions
Docket: OAG 61-129
Date: Aug. 30, 1961
Advisory Opinion Text
OAG 61-129.
District Attorney, Marion County
You have requested an opinion as to whether or not under ORS 266.160, relating to elections for the ORGAnization of park and recreation districts,
"* * * it is required that a board of election must be appointed for each precinct within a proposed Park and Recreation District, or whether it is intended by the statute that a board of election be appointed for each polling place in the district where two polling places are selected by the Court and the district divided into two precincts for the sole purpose of the election by the Court."
It is assumed that the precincts mentioned in your first alternative refer to those established under ORS 246.410 for county or state-wide elections generally.
ORS 266.160 (1), relating to park and recreation districts, provides:
"The county court, at least 15 days prior to the election, shall select one, and may select two, polling places within the proposed district. It shall appoint a board of election for each precinct within the proposed district, to be composed of three qualified persons, residents of the district, and make all suitable arrangements for the holding of the election."
A precinct is a division of a town, county, district or other political or public entity for election purposes. Anderson v. Crow, (Tex. Civ. App. 1953) 260 S.W. (2d) 227, 233. The precinct is the area served by the polling place.
It follows that if the county court selected only one polling place for the proposed park and recreation district under the provisions of ORS 266.160 (1), then the entire district would be the precinct for the election; and, if two polling places are selected, then each
of the two areas served by each of the polling places would be the precincts.
A question substantially similar to the one you have presented was considered in Anderson v. Crow, supra, where the question was whether a polling place should have been provided for each of the precincts designated for county-wide elections generally or whether one polling place for the entire school district for the purpose of a school district bond election was sufficient. The court held that the entire school district for the purpose of this election constituted a single precinct and that it was not necessary to provide polling places in each of the election precincts for county-wide elections. The court said:
"The Legislature, so it seems to us, has clearly and reasonably differentiated between the use of Commissioner's Courts precincts as election precincts in county-wide elections and their use for such purposes in political subdivisions containing less than a county. To adopt the interpretation advocated by contestants would, as this record reflects, lead to very awkward results.
"The election here would have to be held in twelve Commissioner's precincts in some of which the usual voting places lay outside the boundaries of the district, and this for the purpose of casting an average vote of about four hundred. Much more explicit legislative language would be required to impose such burdensome election machinery upon school districts when other similar quasi-public corporations are not so hampered."
As was pointed out in Opinions of the Attorney General, 1944-1946, p. 12, the selection of one polling precinct is mandatory under the Oregon statute relating to the creation of park and recreation districts, and the selection of an additional polling place is discretionary, but the designation of a greater number of precincts for such election would be of doubtful validity.
It is therefore my opinion that the precincts in the proposed park and recreation district for which election boards should be appointed under ORS 266.160 (1) relate to the polling place, or the two polling places, as the case may be, selected by the county court under this section.