Watson

I.dissent. I would deny the petition for the

writ of mandate because in my opinion section 20811 of the Education Code is unconstitutional for the reasons set forth by Mr. Justice pro tern. Frampton * in the opinion prepared by him for the District Court of Appeal in Board of Education v. Watson (Cal.App.) 45 Cal.Rptr. 72 .

Traynor, C. J., concurred.

Assigned by the Chairman of the Judicial Council.

This proceeding in mandate involves the constitutionality of section 20811 of the Education Code. Petitioners, the governing boards of several public school districts in Los Angeles County (hereinafter called the districts), seek a writ of mandate to compel the Assessor of Los Angeles County to provide them, by May 15, 1965, with information as to the value of tax-assessed property in their respective districts, assessed by him for the 1965-66 fiscal year together with the estimated assessed valuation of taxable property appearing on the secured roll, the unsecured *832 roll, and solvent credits. Section 20811 of the Education Code requires him to provide this information, but he has refused to do so, contending that the section is unconstitutional and that it is impossible for him to comply with it.

Section 20811 provides in pertinent part: “(a) This section shall apply only to those counties having a population in excess of 4,000,000 and to every school district within such a county for which the Board of Supervisors fixes the annual school district tax rate. ... (b) Upon written request of the governing board of any school district submitted to the county assessor on or before…