THE ~SITORXEY GESERAL 

OF TEXAS 

Ausrrxx. TSEXA~ 78711 

May 9, 1973 

The I$onorable Oscar Mausy 

Chairman, Education Committee 

Room G-21, State Capitol 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Dear Senator Mauzy: 

Opinion No. H- 37 

Rc: Whether there exista 

a conflict between 

Article 54.203 and 55.17, 

Texas Education Code, 

aa to feer that MY be 

charged veterans. 

As Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, you have cited 

to us Articles 54.203 and 55.17 of the Education Code, Vernon’s Texas 

Civil Statutes, asking us to advise whether there is a conflict between 

the two and, if so, which of them in controlling. 

Section 54.203 is part of Chapter 54 entitled “Tuition and Fees”, 

and more specifically of sub-chapter D entitled “Exemptions from 

Tuition”. It reads, in part: 

“(a) The governing board of each institution of 

higher education shall exempt the following perrons 

from the payment of all duer, fees and charges, including fees for correspondence courses but excluding 

property deposit fees, student service fees, and any 

fees or charges for lodging, board, or clothing, provided the person seeking the exemptions were citizens 

of Texas at the time they entered the services indicated 

and have resided in Texas for at least the period of 

twelve months before the date of registration: [and there 

are then listed several categories of veterans] . . . .‘I 

Other provisions of Chapter 54 of the Education Code provide for 

tuition and various fees. 

Section 54.203 is a codification of Article 2654b-1. Vernon’s Texas 

Civil Statutes, which originally was enacted in 1933 (Acts 1933, 43rd Leg., 

Ch. 6, p. 10) and remained substantially unchanged until codified in 1971 

as part of the Education Code. 

p. 149 
The Honorable Oscar Mauzy, page 2 (H-37) 

Section 55.17 of the Education Code, on the other hand, is in 

Chapter 55 entitled “Financing Permanent Improvements” and in 

sub-chapter B entitled “Revenue Bonds and Facilities”. It provides, 

in applicable part: 

” . . . (c) Fees for the use by or availability to the 

students of all or any property, buildings, structures, 

activities, services, operations, or other facilities, may 

be pledged to the payment of the bonds, and shall be fixed 

and collected from all or any designated part of the 

students enrolled in the institution or institutions, or any 

branch or branches thereof, in the amounts and in the 

manner as determined and provided by the board in the 

resolution authorizing the issuance of the bonds; and 

said fees may be collected in the full amounts required 

or permitted herein, without regard to actual use, avail? 

ability, or existence of any facility, commencing at any 

time designated by the board. Said fees may be fixed 

and collected for the use or availability of the institution 

or institutions, or any branch or branches thereof. Such 

specific and/or general fees may be fixed and collected, 

and pledged to the payment of any issue or series of bonds 

issued by the board, in the full amounts required or permitted herein, in addition to, and regardless of the existence of, any other specific or general fees at the institution 

or institutions, or any branch or branches thereof; provided that each board may restrict its power to pledge 

such additional specific or general fees in any manner 

that may be provided in any resolution authorizing the 

issuance of bonds, and provided that no such additional 

specific fees shall be pledged if prohibited by any resolution which authorized the issuance of any then outstanding bonds. ” 

Section 55.17 in turn is based largely on Article 2909C-3, Vernon’s 

Texas Civil Statutes, which was first enacted in 1969 (Acts 1969, 6lst 

Leg.. Ch. 763, p. 2264) and amended in 1971 (Acts 1971, 62nd Leg., 

Ch. 30, p. 54). 

The caption to the 1969 Act describes it as a bill, generally, to 

authorize revenue bonds and fees to retire them. Neither the Act nor 

its caption mentions anything about exceptions from those liable for the 

fees. 

p. 150 
_^ ’ 

The Honorable Oscar Mausy, page 3 (H-37) 

Attorney General Opinion M-306 (1968) construed an exemption from 

payment of student fees allowed by Article 2654b-1, V. T. C. S. , (now 

5 54.203) against a general enactment (Art. 2654a, now 0 54.503), and said: 

“The fee exemption granted in Section 1 of 

Article 2654B-1, quoted supra, is #toted in clear 

and unequivocal language, and has continued unchanged since the original enactment of the l tatute 

in 1933. Where the Legislature has expressed itself so clearly, and has carefully delineated those 

persons who are to qualify for the exemptions 

granted, it is artificial logic to conclude that the 

plain, unqualified words do not mean what they 

say . . . . I’ 

In our opinion, the two sections do not conflict. Section 55.17 deals 

with bonds and their retirement with funds raised by fees. It does not 

specify, in any detail, those who will pay the fees. Section 54. 203 has 

nothing to do with the use of fees. It deals specifically with the question 

of who will, or more precisely, will not, have to pay those fees. The 

two are easily reconciled. 

Were there a conflict, it would be our opinion that the exemptions 

created by $ 54.203 would prevail despite any contrary language in 

5 55.17. Our conclusion is based upon the fact that S 54.203 is directly ’ 

addressed to the question of those who will be exempted from the payment of student fees, whereas § 55.17 is addressed to the financing 

of improvements and only incidentally, if at all, to the question of who 

will pay fees; that $ 55.17 can be read as applying only to fees paid 

by non-exempt persons; that in the enactment of 5 55.17 and its predecessors, there was no indication of any intention to repeal or overrule 

$ 54.203 or to abolish exemptions which had existed under that statute; 

and that the Legislature, in adopting the Education Code, had before 

it for its consideration Attorney General Opinion M-306 (1968). Code 

Construction Act, Article 5429b-2, V. T. C. S. 

It is our conclusion, therefore, that the provisions of § 55.17 of 

the Education Code authorizing the governing boards of institutions 

of higher education to set fees for the use of buildings and to pledge 

those fees to the payment of its bonds is subject to the provisions of 

p. 151 
The Honorable Oscar Mausy, page 4 (H-37) 

$ 54.203 exempting certain classes of perronr from the payment of all 

fees and charges. You have not asked and WC do not answer questions 

concerning the validity of exemptions where prior to the creation of the 

exemption& fees had Bern pledged dir security for the bonds. 

SUMMARY 

Those specified in 5 54.203. Texas Education 

Code, as being exempt from the payment of fees and 

charges, are exempt from the payment of fees and 

charges created pursuant to 5 55.17 having to do. with. * 

the pledging of student fees to secure the payment 

of improvement bonds. 

Very truly yours, 

Attorney General of Texas 

APPR V&D: 

JIIksi&~~y 

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman 

Opinion Committee 

. 

p. 152