Does Arkansas's law against running for two offices on the same election date apply to school board candidates?

Plain-English summary

Senator Larry Teague asked whether Act 158 of 2017's amendment to § 7-5-111 swept school-district offices into the statute's "no running for two offices on the same date" rule. The amended statute reads: "A person shall not run for election for more than one (1) state, county, municipal, district, or township office if the elections are to be held on the same date." Act 158 added the words "district" and "township." Senator Teague wanted to know if the new "district" reference covered school-district director positions.

The AG concluded no. School-district director offices are not "district" offices under § 7-5-111. Two reasons. First, throughout Arkansas's general election laws (§§ 7-6-102, 7-6-220, 7-5-205, 7-5-701), "district" offices are listed alongside "state," "county," "municipal," and "township" offices, with school-district candidates handled in separate provisions. The general election laws consistently distinguish "school district" positions from "state or district" and "township, municipal, or county" positions. Second, the school election laws (§§ 6-14-102, 6-14-111, 6-14-115) provide a parallel and complete framework specifically for school-district director elections: filing procedures, political-practices pledge timing, write-in counting, election returns, certification.

Read harmoniously, the general election laws' "district" category does not include school-district directors. So adding "district" to § 7-5-111 did not bring school directors into the statute's scope. As a practical matter, a person can run for school board and another office (state, county, municipal, district, or township) at the same election without violating § 7-5-111. The AG noted the answer to question two ("yes") came with the qualification that the school director position is not "another" office of those types.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 2017. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule, deadline, or remedy mentioned here.

How the harmonization canon worked here

The AG used a textbook application of City of Ft. Smith v. Tate's harmonization rule: "All statutes on the same subject are in pari materia and must be ... made to stand if capable of being reconciled." Section 7-5-111 lives in the general election laws (Title 7, Chapter 5). The school election laws (Title 6, Chapter 14) regulate school-district elections. Both have to be read together.

When the general election laws use "district" alongside state, county, municipal, and township, they consistently refer to legislative districts (state senate, state house, congressional, judicial). They do not refer to school districts. The AG cited several supporting provisions:

• Section 7-6-102 sets political-practices pledge filing rules for "state or district offices" and "county, municipal, or township offices" but explicitly addresses "school district candidate[s]" separately.
• Section 7-6-220(b)(4) distinguishes "school district, township, municipal, or county office" from "state or district office" in expenditure reports.
• Section 7-5-205 covers write-in candidates for "state or district office" and "county or township office," parallel to but separate from the school-district write-in rule in § 6-14-111(g).
• Section 7-5-701 (general election returns) is parallel to § 6-14-115 (school district election returns).

The school election laws have their own complete framework. Section 6-14-111 sets candidate filing rules for "candidate[s] for a position on the board of directors of a school district." The general election laws' "district" terminology does not pull double duty.

The AG concluded that, when § 7-5-111 says "district," it means the legislative-district usage from the general election laws, not the school-district usage from the school election laws. Adding "district" expanded the statute's scope to legislative districts (e.g., a person cannot run for both a state house seat and a state senate seat at the same election), but did not reach school directors.

Common questions

Could a person run for school director, state senator, and city alderman at the same election?
Under this opinion, yes for school director and state senator (different statutory tracks); no for state senator and city alderman (both within § 7-5-111). Section 7-5-111 prohibits running for more than one office of the listed types, but the school director position is not one of those types. So a candidate could appear on the same ballot for school director and one other office covered by § 7-5-111.

Are there other dual-office prohibitions that apply to school directors?
Possibly. Article 19, § 6 of the Arkansas Constitution (no person to hold more than one civil office at a time, with exceptions) is the major one. Specific statutes also disqualify particular combinations (e.g., school director cannot also be a school employee in some configurations). Those are separate questions outside this opinion.

What was the policy purpose of Act 158 of 2017?
The Act added "district" and "township" to § 7-5-111, which previously listed only state, county, and municipal offices. The legislative concern was apparently the gap that allowed someone to run for two legislative-district offices, or two township offices, on the same date. The school-director question was a side effect of the word choice; the AG's interpretation kept school directors outside the new scope.

What if there is a conflict between § 7-5-111 and the school election laws?
Under City of Ft. Smith v. Tate, the statutes are read harmoniously and reconciled when possible. The AG's reading reconciles them: § 7-5-111 covers offices in the general election laws' category vocabulary; school directors are covered by the parallel school election laws and are not within § 7-5-111's "district" reference.

Could the legislature change this by amending § 7-5-111 to specifically include school district offices?
Yes. The legislature can add school-district offices to § 7-5-111 if it wants. The AG's interpretation reads the current text; it does not foreclose future legislative action.

Background and statutory framework

Arkansas separates elections into two statutory tracks: general election laws (Title 7) for most political offices, and school election laws (Title 6, Chapter 14) for school-district director and related school positions. The two tracks have different filing periods, write-in rules, certification procedures, and candidate qualifications. Some references cross over (e.g., the general election laws note the school-specific filing requirement), but the substantive rules are kept separate.

Section 7-5-111 lives in the general election laws and uses the general-election vocabulary. Act 158 of 2017's addition of "district" and "township" expanded the statute within that vocabulary; it did not reach into the school election laws.

Section 7-5-111 also has a final note (acknowledged in the opinion's footnote): "[t]he general election laws ... apply to school elections insofar as they are not in conflict with the school election laws." That bridge runs the other way (general law applies to school elections in non-conflicting situations). It does not transform school directors into "district" officeholders for general-law purposes.

Citations

• Ark. Code Ann. § 7-5-111 (dual office running prohibition, as amended by Act 158 of 2017)
• Ark. Code Ann. § 7-6-102 (political practices pledge filing)
• Ark. Code Ann. § 7-6-220(b)(4) (independent expenditure reports)
• Ark. Code Ann. § 7-5-205 (write-in candidates, general)
• Ark. Code Ann. § 7-5-701 (general election returns)
• Ark. Code Ann. § 6-14-102 (school district candidate position)
• Ark. Code Ann. § 6-14-111 (school district candidate filing)
• Ark. Code Ann. § 6-14-115 (school district election returns)
• Weiss v. McFadden, 353 Ark. 868, 120 S.W.3d 545 (2003) (statutory construction)
• City of Ft. Smith v. Tate, 311 Ark. 405, 844 S.W.2d 356 (1993) (in pari materia)
• Green v. Mills, 339 Ark. 200, 4 S.W.3d 493 (1999) (read in context)
• Brock v. Townsell, 2009 Ark. 224, 309 S.W.3d 179 (clear meaning)
• Thompson v. Younts, 282 Ark. 524, 669 S.W.2d 471 (1984) (no strained construction)

Source

• Landing page: https://arkansasag.gov/divisions/opinions-foia/attorney-general-opinions-search/

Original opinion text

Opinion No. 2017-124
December 13, 2017
STATE OF ARKANSAS
ATTORN EY GENERAL
LES LI E R_UTLEDGE
The Honorable Larry R. Teague
State Senator
P. 0. Box 903
Nashville, AR 71852
Dear Senator Teague:
This is in response to your request for my opinion regarding Ark. Code Ann. § 7-
5-111 (Supp. 2017), which states:
A person shall not run for election for more than one (1) state,
county, municipal, district, or township office if the elections are to
be held on the same date.
The words "district" and "township" were added to the statute by Act 158of2017,
and you pose the following questions in light of the amendment:
1) Given the addition of the word "district" to this section, are
elected school-district offices now included within the statute's
scope?
2) Could a person run for election to the board of directors of a
school district and another state, county, municipal, district or
township office if the elections were held on the same date?
RESPONSE
In my opinion, the answer to your first question is "no." Based on standard rules
of statutory construction, none of the offices identified in Ark. Code Ann. § 7-5-
111 includes the office of school-district director. The answer to your second
question is "yes," in my opinion, with the understanding that the position of
school-district director is not "another" state, county, municipal, district, or
township office.
323 C ENTrn STREET. SUITE 200 · LITTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72201
TE LEl'HONE (501) 682-2007 · FAX (501) 682-8084
ARKANSASAG.GOV The Honorable Larry R. Teague
State Senator
Opinion No. 2017-124
Page 2
DISCUSSION
Question 1: Given the addition of the word "district" to this section, are elected
school-district offices now included within the statute's scope?
This question is one of statutory interpretation. The cardinal rule of statutory
interpretation is to construe a statute just as it reads, giving its words their ordinary
and usually accepted meaning in common language. 1 Courts will not resort to a
strained construction of statutory language for the purpose of restricting or
expanding a statute's plain meaning.2 The statute must be "read in a harmonious
manner[,] if possible," with other statutes covering the same subject matter.3 To
the extent the statute "conveys a clear and definite meaning, there is no need to
resort to the rules of statutory construction."4
Section 7-5-111 is part of the general laws governing elections. When section 7-5-
111 is read harmoniously with these laws, as required by the established rules of
construction, I believe it becomes clear that the word "district" does not include
the office of school-district director.
First and foremost, section 7-5-111 's reference to "state, county, municipal,
district, or township office" mirrors the general election laws, which contain
various provisions applicable to candidates for "state," "district," "county,"
"municipal," and "township" office .. A review of these provisions reveals that a
school-district office is not included in any of these offices. For example, Ark.
Code Ann. § 7-6-102 addresses the filing of political-practices pledges by
candidates for "state or district offices" and "county, municipal, or township
offices."5 And this statute recognizes that a separate filing provision applies to a
1 See Weiss v. McFadden, 353 Ark. 868, 120 S.W.3d 545 (2003).
2 Thompson v. Younts, 282 Ark. 524, 669 S.W.2d 471 (1984).
3 City of Ft. Smith v. Tate, 311 Ark. 405, 409-10, 844 S.W.2d 356, 359 (1993) ("All statutes on
the same subject are in pari materia and must be ... made to stand if capable of being
reconciled."). See also Green v. Mills, 339 Ark. 200, 205, 4 S.W.3d 493, 496 (1999) (internal
citations omitted); accord Op. Att'y Gen. 2016-040 (noting that it is "well established that
statutes must be read in context.").
4 Brock v. Townsell, 2009 Ark. 224 at 9, 309 S.W.3d 179, 186.
5 Ark. Code Ann. § 7-6-102(a)(l), (b), (d) (Supp. 2017). The Honorable Larry R. Teague
State Senator
Opinion No. 2017-124
Page 3
"school district candidate. "6 The distinction between a "school district" office and
a "state or district" and "township, municipal, or county office" is also reflected in
contribution and expenditure reporting requirements under the general election
laws.7
My conclusion that a school-district office is not included among the "state,"
"district," "county," "municipal," and "township" offices covered by the general
election laws is also compelled by the fact that the school election laws
specifically address all aspects of filing for the position of "school district
director."8 The qualifications to be on the ballot as a "candidate for a position on
the board of directors of a school district" are set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 6-14-
111, which establishes the period for filing a political-practices pledge and an
affidavit of eligibility.9 As noted above, the general election laws recognize this
separate filing requirement for a school-district position. 10 Section 6-14-111 also
addresses the counting of votes for "a write-in candidate for school district
director."11 These requirements are plainly distinct from the general-election-law
write-in provision, which applies to candidates for "state or district office" and
"county or township office."12 The school election laws also establish specific
procedures-apart from the general election laws-for certifying election returns
and for notifying those elected to school director.13
6 Id. at § 7-6-102(a)(2) (providing in relevant part that "a school district candidate shall file the
political practices pledge at the time of filing the petition for nomination." The filing of a petition
for nomination to a position on a school district board of directors is governed by Ark. Code Ann.
§ 6-14-111 (Supp. 2017).
7 See Ark. Code Ann. § 7-6-220(b)(4) (distinguishing, in connection with reports of independent
expenditures, between "school district, township, municipal, or county office" and "state or
district office" (emphases added) as set forth in Ark. Code Ann. § 7-6-207).
8 See Ark. Code Ann. §§ 6-14-102(c)(l) (Supp. 2017) (regarding the number of candidates for a
"school district director position" at the annual school election) and 6-14-111 (h) (Supp. 2017)
(addressing candidate filing procedures).
9 Id. at§ 6-14-11 l(c), (e).
10 Supra note 6, and accompanying text.
11 Ark. Code Ann. § 6-14-111 (g).
12 Ark. Code Ann.§ 7-5-205 (Supp. 2017).
13 See Ark. Code Ann. § 6-14-115 (Supp. 2017); Ark. Code Ann. § 7-5-701 (Supp. 2017) (general
election laws regarding election returns and delivery of certificates of election). The Honorable Larry R. Teague
State Senator
Opinion No. 2017-124
Page 4
The general election laws concerning eligibility for "state offices," "district
offices," and "county, municipal, and township offices"14 plainly do not apply to a
school-district office in light of these provisions governing the election of school-
district directors. More specific to your question, a school-district office is not a
"district" office under the general election laws. Consequently, when construed
harmoniously with the general election laws, section 7-5-111 does not include an
elected school district office within its scope.
As a final note, I recognize that "[t]he general election laws ... apply to school
elections insofar as they are not in conflict with the school election laws."15
Applying section 7-5-111 's dual-candidacy prohibition to the office of school
director would, in my opinion, be in conflict with the school election laws. As
noted above, the school election laws establish the qualifications for a position on
a school-district board of directors. And there is no provision prohibiting a
candidate for school board from running for another office.
Question 2: Could a person run for election to the board of directors of a
school district and another state, county, municipal, district or township office if
the elections were held on the same date?
Yes. See above discussion. As is apparent from the above discussion, however,
the position of school district director is not "another" state, county, municipal,
district, or township office.
Sincerely,
~~~
LESLIE RUTLEDG
Attorney General
14 See Ark. Code Ann. § 7-7-30l(a)(l), (2), (3) (Supp. 2017) (addressing the filing of patty
pledges and affidavits of eligibility by candidates for "state offices," "district offices, including,
but not limited to, the offices of State Representative and State Senator," and "county, municipal,
and township offices."); see also Ark. Code Ann. § 7-7-203(g)(l) and (h)(l)(B)(i) (Supp. 2017)
(providing that a list of all "nominated candidates for county, township, and municipal offices"
shall be certified by the county election board to the county clerk, and that certificates of
nomination for "Unites States, state, and district offices" shall be filed with the Secretary of
State).
15 Ark. Code Ann.§ 6-14-101(Repl.2013) (emphasis added).