DAN MORALES 

.ATTORSEY GENERAL 

QMfice of tly f&tornep dBeneral 

&date of ZLexae 

May 2,1994 

Honorable Bii Ratliff 

Chair 

Education Committee 

Texas State Senate 

P.O. Box 12068 

Austin, Texas 78711 

Opinion No. DM-290 

Re: Whether the Code of Ethics and Standard 

Practices for Texas Educators continues to exist 

following the abolition of the Teachers’ 

Professional Practices Commission, and related 

questions (RQ-645) 

Dear senator RatliE 

You ask several questions about the effect of the recent legislative abolition of the 

Teachers’ Professional Practices Commission (the “commission”). Subchapter D (sections 

13.201 through 13.218) of chapter 13 of the Education Code governs teachers 

professional practices. The commission was created pursuant to section 13.203 of that 

subchapter. Section 13.202(2) provided that the term “commission,” as it is used in 

subchapter D, “means the Teachers’ Professional Practices Commission established by this 

subchapter.” Sections 13.202(2) and 13.203 were repeated by the Seventy-third 

Legislature, which passed H.B. 2585, a bii which abolished a number of advisory 

committees to the Texas Education Agency, providing in pertinent part: 

The Teachers’ Professional Practices Commission of Texas is 

abolished, and Sections 13.202(2) and 13.203, Education Code, are 

repeated. 

H.B. 2585, Acts 1993,73d Leg., ch. 771,s 19(29) at 3025. 

Fii, you ask whether the Code of Ethics and Standard Practices for Texas 

Educators (the “ethics code” or “code”) adopted by the commission continues to exist 

following the abolition of the commission. If it does, you ask “what are the means by 

which to amend the Code of Ethics and Standard Practices, if any?” You note that section 

13.210, which has not been abolished, requires the commission to “develop and adopt a 

‘code of ethics and standard practices’ which shag regulate and govern the conduct of 

members of the profession.” Id 3 13.210(a). Subsection (d) ofthat section authorizes the 

commission “to revise or adopt amendments to the code of ethics and standard practices.” 

Zd 5 13.210(d).’ 

‘scdion13.21qa)ofthcEducationcodcrequirtsthcco mmission to hold public hcarimgs before 

developing aad adophg lhc ethics code 8ection 13.210(c) mpim the Texas Education Agency to 

submitthepmfesstonslsta&rdstkvela9oibytbecc mmtssion to “all active cutigcsted pmf&oasl 

pasonnclina~~todmrmiacapprovalocdiaapprwal~eachindividualstandard.” The 

LxlmmtssioaisrequiredtogivethcRsultsofthe tefcmdm ‘cooaiduation bdorc finally adoping lhc 

p. 1543 
Honorable Bill BatlifT - Page 2 (DM-290) 

We believe that the ethics code continues to exist despite the abolition of the 

wmmission. The legislature did not repeat subchapter D in its entirety, nor did it repeal 

any of the provisions in subchapter D that refer to the ethics code. tie, e.g., id. 

$5 13.202(3), ,210, ,211, .213. It is clear that the legislature was purposehdly selective in 

repealing only sections 13.202(2) and 13.203, and that it did not intend to repeal the ethics 

code. 

We also believe that a mechanism exists to amend the ethics code. The ethics code 

has been adopted as an administrative rule by the Texas Education Agency. See 19 

T.A.C. ch. 177. Given the legislature’s abolition of the commission and retention of the 

provisions regardii the ethics code, we believe that the Texas Education Agency has the 

implied authority to amend the code. See Educ. Code 5s 11.02, 11.24(a) (“the State 

Board of Education shall take actions necessary to implement legislative policy for the 

public school system of the state”). Therefore, we conclude that the Texas Education 

Agency has the authority to amend the ethics code just as it would any other 

administrative rule. See id.; see also Gov’t Code ch. 2001 (Administrative Procedure 

Act); 19 T.A.C. ch. 173 (rules governing the Texas Education Agency’s rules and 

Nh%ld&l~ process).2 

Next, you ask who now has the authority to hear wmplaints filed under subchapter 

D. Section 13.213 of the Education Code provides that the wmmission “shag be 

authorized to receive written wmplaints from any certified teacher of alleged violation by 

any member of the profession of any rule or provision of the code of ethics and standard 

practices, and may hear the matter. .” After hearing a complaint, the wmmission is 

rewired to “file its recommendations with the commissioner of education and shag also 

6le with him a transcript of any evidence presented before it.” Educ. Code $13.213(d). 

Section 13.214 of the Education Code authorizes the commissioner to take action based 

on the recommendation of the commission. He is not required, however, to adopt the 

tindings and recommendations of the wmmission, and may adopt rules of procedure for 

the conduct of hearings before him pursuant to subchapter D. See id. 5 13.214(c).’ In 

addition, section 13.211 authorizes the wmmissioner to warn or reprimand, or suspend or 

revoke the teaching certificate of a teacher who violates the ethics code. Given that the 

commission has been abolished and that its recommendations were not binding on the 

wmmissioner in the first place, we believe that under sections 13.211 and 13.214 the 

(footlao contimlcd) 

staodah.” Edoc. Code 0 13.210(c). wo pmfcssional standards disapprovul in the roferondmo vote shall 

he adopt&.” Id. 5 13.210(e). 

‘WeQaotcoasidcrhuetheanenttowhicbifany,theTucasEducationAgmcywouldk 

mqoimd to adhere to the procedmw set forth in section 13.210 in amcnding or rcwising the ethics cod% 

%e annmitiowr and ammission’s pmcedorcs for hearing complaints u&r subchapter D am 

saforthin~~157.65andchaptcr181ofvolumc19oftheTarasAdministrati~codc. Hearingsand 

*.toti= amdmiona gcncmliy arc govan hy chapter 157 of volume 19 of the Texas 

Admmmlhcodc. 

p. 1544 
Honorable Big RatlilT - Page 3 (DM-290) 

authority to hear complaints regardmg violations of the ethics code is now vested with the 

commissioner. Any complaints that were pending before the commission at the time of its 

abolition are now pending before the wmmissioner.4 

Finally, you ask “if the Commissioner does decide to reinstate the [commission] in 

the futunz, will it retain the same statutory authority it had prior to the repeal of [section] 

13.202(2), and [section] 13.203, and wig it have jurisdiction to hear those claims that were 

brought to the [commission] prior to the effective date of H.B. 25851” Section 11.958(b) 

of newly enacted subchapter H of chapter 11 of the Education Code provides that the 

wmmissioner may re-establish any advisory committee provided that it is re-established in 

accordance with subchapter H.s Section 11.954 requires the commissioner to adopt rules 

that state the purpose of an advisory committee and “describe the task of the wmmittec 

and the manner in which the committee will report to the commissioner.” Section 11.954 

suggests that the legislature intended to give the commissioner gee rein to establish the 

purpose and authority of any m-established advisory wmmittee. Therefore, we believe 

that if the commission were m-established, its authority and jurisdiction would depend 

upon the rules adopted by the commissioner pursuant to section 11.954. 

4WeQnotw~dabercwb*hertheTucaFEducationAg~wouldkrcquircdmadoptncw 

mgulatioas to implemeot ” a,athori~. See 19 T.AC. 5 157.65, and ch. 181; see a/so 19 T.A.C. ch. 157; 

Gov’t Code ch. 2001 (Admmskative FVoahue Act); 19 T.A.C. ch. 173 (rides gowning the Texas 

Educatioll Age&s roles and Nlclnaking process). 

hbchspm El conlain. provisions gowning the composition of advkory canmissions, as well 

asthcirselcctionofpmsidingof6cers,rcimbursementdthcirmembcrr’~ and the commiaaiolls’ 

cvahmtionanddma&n. Educ. Code $8 11.951, ,952, ,953, .955, and ,957. 

p. 1545 
Honorable Big Ratliff - Page 4 (DM-290) 

SUMMARY 

The Code of Ethics and Standard Practices for Texas Educators 

continues to exist following the abolition of the Teachers’ 

Professional Practices Commission by the Seventy-third Legislature. 

See Acts 1993, 73d Leg., ch. 771, 4 19(29) at 3025. The code of 

ethics may be revised or amended by the Texas Education Agency 

pursuant to its rulemaking procedures. The authority to hear 

complaints regarding violations of the ethics code is now vested with 

the wnunissioner of education. Any wmplaints that were pending 

before the commission at the time of its abolition are now pending 

before the commissioner. If the commission were reestablished, its 

authority and jurisdiction would depend upon the rules adopted by 

the wmmissioner pursuant to newly enacted section 11.954 of the 

Education Code. 

DAN MORALES 

Attorney General of Texas 

JORGE VEGA 

Fii Assistant Attorney General 

DREW DURHAM 

Deputy Attorney General for Criminal Justice 

WILL PRYOR 

special Counsel 

RBNBA HICKS 

State Solicitor 

SARAH J. SHIRLEY 

Chair, Opiion Committee 

Prepared by Mary R Crouta 

Assistant Attorney General 

p. 1546