- 

Hon. J. W. Edgar 

Commissioner of Education 

201 East 11th Street 

Austin, Texas 

Dear Dr. Edgar: 

Opinion No, M-649 

Re: Are transfers of students, 

VIZ., students whose grades 

are not taught in their home 

resident district, controlled 

by Article 2696a, V.C.S., 

or Section 21.067, et seq., 

Texas Education Code? 

In your letter requesting an opinion from this office, 

you submit the following facts: 

I, 

e . D the County Superintendent has administratfve responsibilities relative to common 

and rural high school districts of the county. 

"Palo Pinto Rural High School distrfct 

teaches only the first seven grades. Children 

of that distrfct who attafn above-grade 7 status 

must therefore transfer elsewhere to continue 

their public school education. The adJoining 

Mineral Wells Independent School Dfstrict operates 

a twelve-grade school system. Parents of the 

Palo Pfnto district above-grade scholastfcs made 

application for their 1969-1970 transfer to the 

Mineral Wells school district and such were 

received as formally transferred. 

"The Mineral Wells district, assuming to 

apply the provlsfons of the new transfer lawp Artfcle 

2696a, V.C,S, (S.B, 435, Acts 61st Leg., R.S., 1969, 

p. 510) adopted a tuition policy requiring payment 

by the parent of $233,24 (the difference between 

State funds realized OQ transfer-scholastics and 

the M.W.1,S.D. average coat per student) as tuition 

for any student transferred to Mineral Wells from 

Palo Pinto d%strfct, Parents are protesting such 

policy tuition charge by the Mineral Wells Dfstrfct," 

-3109- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, Page 2(M-649) 

With regard to these facts you ask the following 

question: 

'Are transfers of students, viz., students 

whose grades are not taught In their home-resident 

district, controlled by Article 2696a or under 

Section 21.067, et seq., Texas Education Code,' 

Both Article 2696(a), Vernon's Civil Statutes, and 

Sections 21.067-21.072, Texas Education Code, were enacted by 

the 61st Legislature in 1969. Article 2696(a) was enacted as 

Senate Bill 435 (Acts 61st Leg., R.S., 1969, ch. 175, p. 510) 

and became effective May 9, 1969. Sections 1, 2 and 3 of Senate 

Bill 435 authorize the annual transfer of any child, other than 

high school graduate, who Is over 6 and under 21 years of age, 

from his resldent school district to another Texas district, 

when the parent or person having lawful control of the child 

and the receiving district jointly and timely agree In writing 

to the transfer. These sections also provide that the State 

Board of Education shall issue rules and regulations necessary 

for the administration of the Act; further, they provide for the 

transfer of State per-capita apportionment and other State aid 

funds to follow the child. In addition, the receiving district 

is permitted to charge a tuition fee. 

Section 4 of the Bill expressly repeals several statutes 

governing pupil transfers, Including Article 2922L(l), Vernon's 

Civil Statutes. The provisions of repealed Article 29221(l), most 

pertinent to our discussion, read as follows: 

#I 

. . . 

"Any pupil between the age of six (6) and 

twenty-one (21) residing in a- rural district or 

other district, which levies a lo'cal maintenance 

tax, who has been promoted to a high school grade 

not taught in his home district, shall have the 

right to attend a standardized, classified, or 

affiliated high school In his home county or in 

any other county at the expense of his home school 

district, If such district as determined by Its 

budgeted expenditures according to the General 

Budget Law Is financially able to provide tuition, 

or otherwise at the expense of the State of Texas. 

II II 

. . . 

-3110- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, Page 3 (M-649) 

Finally, Section 5 of Senate Bill 435 provides, In 

part, as follows: 

“Sec. 5. The fact that there Is little 

unlfotiity In administration of the statutes 

governing pupil transfers among counties; . . . 

and the fact that provisions In current laws 

governing transfers to an adjoining county are 

particularly restrictive to prohibit transfers 

of convenience on pupils who must transfer when 

eligible from a non-twelve grade system to a 

twelve-grade system . . . and the further fact 

that a system permitting pupil transfers under 

joint approval and agreement of the parent and 

a receiving district could have the effect to 

encourage school districts to Improve their 

course offerings or consolidate with trelvegrade systems operating enrlched programs, 

create an emerg$ncy and Imperative public 

necessity . . . 

This is the last expression of the Legislature on this subject. 

The Texas Education Code (H.B. 534, 61st Leg., RiS., 

1969, ch. 889, 

Its Section 2(a P’ 

2735) became effective September 1, 1969. 

expressly repeals Article 29221(l), supra. 

The subject matter of Article 29221(l) was carried forward 

Into the Texas Education Code as its Sections 21.067-21.072. 

Section 21.067, Texas Education Code, provides as follows: 

“Any pupil not mere than twenty-one (21) 

years of age who has been promoted to a high 

school grade not taught in his home district 

shall have the right to transfer to and to 

attend a standardized, classified, or affiliated 

high school either In his home county or in any 

other county in the State. Transfers of funds 

under such conditions shall be regulated by 

Sections 21.068-21.072 of this code.” 

Sections 21.068-21.072, Texas Education Code, provide for a high school tultlon fee to be paid by the sending 

school district to the rece,lvlng district for each pupil 

transferred. 

In comparing the provisions of Article 2696(a), 

Vernon’s Civil Statutes, with those aontained In Seotlona 

-3111- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 4 (M-649) 

21.067-21.072, Texas Education Code, it is obvious that some 

of the respective provisions controlling the transfer of 

students from their resident districtsto other districts are 

In conflict. In this regard, Section 5 of the Texas Education 

Code provides as follows: 

"Section 5. If any act passed at the same 

session of the legislature conflltits with any 

provlslon,,of the Texas Education Code, the act 

prevails. 

In view of this Section 5 our opinion Is that where conflict 

exists between'the provisions of Article 2696(a) and those 

of Sections 21.067-21.072 of the Education Code that the provisions of the Article prevail over those of the Code. 

Article 2696(a) is silent regarding who pays tuition 

fees to receiving districts for the transfer of eligible pupils 

promoted to a high school grade not taught in their resident 

districts and who desire to transfer to a twelve-grade system. 

Sections 21.068-21.072 of the Code specifically place this 

responsibility on the sending school district. Statutes 

relating to the same subject matter should be construed toCity of Houston v. 

tiiEherk29 S W 26 b79 

Rmmanuel United Pentecostal Church, 

In&tlcul&: 

(Tex.Cl v.App. 19b9, error ref. n.r.e.). 

statutes enacted by the same Legislature relating 

to the same subject should be Interpreted, If possible, so as to 

harmonize their provisions, Slater v. Ellis Count Levee Improvement District No. 9, 120 Tex. 272, 3b s.W.2d 1014 9311 . 

Applying these principles of construction of statutes 

it is our opinion that Article 2696(a) and Sections 21.067- 

21.072 of the Code must be read together so as to require sending 

school districts to pay tuition fees to receiving school districts 

for the transfer of eligible pupils promoted to a high school 

grade not taught in the sending district and who desire to transfer to a twelve-grade system. 

SUMMARY 

Where conflict exists between the provisions 

of Article 2696(a) and those of Sections 21.067- 

21.072 of the Texas Education Code, relating to 

transfer of pupils from their resident school 

district to other school districts, the provisions of Article 2696(a) control. 

-3112- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 5 (M-649) 

Article 2696 a), Vernon's Civil Statutes, 

and Sections 21.0 A T-21.072, Texas Education Code, 

must be construed together; they require sending 

school districts to pay tuition fees to receiving 

school districts for the transfer of eligible 

pupils promoted to a high school grade not taught 

in the sending districts and who desire to transfer 

to a twelve-grade system. 

eneral of Texas 

Prepared by Ivan R. Williams, Jr. 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Kerns Taylor, Chairman 

W. E. Allen, Co-Chairman 

Llnward Shivers 

Richard Chote 

Ray McGregor 

Bob Lattimore 

MEADE F. GRIFFIN 

Staff Legal Assistant 

ALFRED WALKER 

Executive Assistant 

NOLA WHITE 

First Assistant 

-3113-