-

Hon. J. W. Edgar Commissionerof Education 201 East 11th Street Austin, Texas

Dear Dr. Edgar: Opinion No, M-649
Re: Are transfersof students,

VIZ., studentswhose 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 requestingan opinion from this office, you submit the following facts:

I, e . D the County Superintendent has administratfveresponsibilities 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-grade7 status must thereforetransfer elsewhereto continue their public school education. The adJoining Mineral Wells IndependentSchool Dfstrict operates a twelve-gradeschool system. Parents of the Palo Pfnto district above-gradescholastfcs made applicationfor their 1969-1970transfer to the Mineral Wells school district and such were received as formally transferred. "The Mineral Wells district,assuming to apply the provlsfonsof the new transfer lawp Artfcle 2696a,V.C,S, (S.B, 435, Acts 61st Leg., R.S., 1969, p. 510) adopted a tuition policy requiringpayment by the parent of $233,24 (the differencebetween State funds realized OQ transfer-scholastics and the M.W.1,S.D.average coat per student)as tuition for any student transferredto 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 transfersof students,viz., students whose grades are not taught In their home-resident district, controlledby Article 2696a or under Section 21.067, et seq., Texas EducationCode,' Both Article 2696(a),Vernon's Civil Statutes,and Sections 21.067-21.072, Texas EducationCode, were enactedby 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 effectiveMay 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 receivingdistrict jointly and timely agree In writing to the transfer. These sectionsalso provide that the State Board of Education shall issue rules and regulationsnecessary for the administration of the Act; further, they provide for the transfer of State per-capitaapportionment and other State aid funds to follow the child. In addition, the receivingdistrict is permitted to charge a tuition fee.

Section 4 of the Bill expresslyrepeals several statutes governingpupil transfers, IncludingArticle 2922L(l), Vernon's Civil Statutes. The provisionsof repealedArticle 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 affiliatedhigh school In his home county or in any other county at the expense of his home school district, If such district as determinedby Its budgeted expendituresaccording to the General Budget Law Is financiallyable to provide tuition, or otherwiseat 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 administrationof the statutes governingpupil transfersamong counties;

. . . and the fact that provisions In current laws governing transfersto an adjoining county are particularlyrestrictiveto prohibit transfers of convenienceon pupils who must transferwhen eligible from a non-twelvegrade system to a twelve-gradesystem

. . . and the further fact that a system permittingpupil transfersunder joint approval and agreementof the parent and a receivingdistrict could have the effect to encourage school districts to Improve their course offerings or consolidate with trelvegrade systems operatingenrlchedprograms, create an emerg$ncyand Imperativepublic necessity

. . . This is the last expressionof the Legislatureon this subject.

The Texas Education Code (H.B. 534, 61st Leg., RiS., 1969, ch. 889, Its Section 2(a

P’ 2735) became effectiveSeptember 1, 1969. expresslyrepeals Article 29221(l), supra. The subjectmatter 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 regulatedby 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 provisionsof 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 respectiveprovisionscontrollingthe transfer of students from their resident districtsto other districtsare 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 legislatureconflltits 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'theprovisions of Article 2696(a)and those of Sections 21.067-21.072of the Education Code that the provisions of the Article prevail over those of the Code.

Article 2696(a) is silent regardingwho pays tuition fees to receivingdistricts for the transfer of eligiblepupils promoted to a high school grade not taught in their resident districtsand who desire to transfer to a twelve-gradesystem. Sections 21.068-21.072of the Code specifically place this responsibility

on the sending school district. Statutes relating to the same subjectmatter should be construedtoCity of Houston v. tiiEherk29

S W 26 b79 RmmanuelUnited PentecostalChurch, In&tlcul&: (Tex.Cl v.App. 19b9, error ref. n.r.e.). statutes enacted by the same Legislaturerelating 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 principlesof constructionof 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 eligiblepupils promoted to a high school grade not taught in the sending district and who desire to transfer to a twelve-gradesystem.
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 A

21.0 T-21.072,Texas Education Code, must be construedtogether;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-gradesystem.

eneral of Texas Preparedby Ivan R. Williams, Jr. AssistantAttorney 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 ExecutiveAssistant
NOLA WHITE First Assistant

-3113-