TL'.R AITOMNEY GENERAL 

OFTEXAS 

. 

CRAWFORD C. MARTIN 

Ausrrmu. TExAn 78711 

*-RNISY OL+I6RAs. 

July 24, 1972 

Honorable J. W. Edgar 

Commissioner of Education 

Texas Education Agency 

201 East 11th Street 

Austin, Texas 78701 

Dear Dr. Edgar: 

Opinion No. M-1177 

Re: Validity, pursuant to Subsection (d) of Section 

21.904, Texas Education 

Code, of proposed regulation 

of independent school district forbidding its employees from holding any 

other position of honor, 

trust or profit under the 

State of Texas or any subdivision thereof. 

Your recent letter requesting the opinion of this office concerning the referenced matter states, in part, as follows: 

"A board of trustees of an independent school 

district of this State (Goliad) has proposed to 

adopt a school district policy to read, in substance as follows: 

"'An employee of the school district shall 

not hold another office or position of honor, 

trust or profit under the State of Texas or any 

subdivision thereof. The Board of Trustees 

expects and requires each employee of the school 

district to devote his (her) full working time, 

except as otherwise provided in school policies, 

to the school district without interference from 

any other political subdivision of the State of 

Texas. ' 

"The Board of trustees of the school district, 

‘7 acting formally as a board, has moved that I request an opinion from the Office of the Attorney 

General concerning the legality or propriety of 

such proposed policy." 

Section 40 of Article XVI of the Constitution of Texas 

is not relevant to your request, inasmuch as an employee of a 

-5752- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 2 (M-1177) 

school district does not hold an "office of emolument" within 

the meaning of that Section. Attorney General's Opinion No. 

C-386 (1965). 

Nor is Section 33 of Article XVI of the Constitution 

of Texas applicable to your request, inasmuch as we hold that 

employees of an independent school district (Section l(c) of 

Article 695h, Vernon's Civil Statutes; Attorney General's Opin 

NO. o-74 

329, 330 

Louisvil 

employee 

467 S.W. 

,91 (1946); Muse v. Prescott School District, 349 S.W.2 

1-32 (Ark.Sup. 1961); contra, Board of Education v. Cit 

le, 157 S.W.Zd 337, 345(Ky.Sup. 1941)), as opposed to 

$of a state-supported university (Boyett v. Calvert, 

,2d 205 (Tex.Civ.App. 1971, error ref. n.r.e.1; Talbott 

.c Service Commission, 163 s.W.Zd 33, 36-37 (Xy.sup. 

State "officers" or "employees" within the purview of 

v. Publi 

are not 

.ion 

:d 

.y 

k2,,, 

that Section. 

Subsection (d) of Section 21.904, Texas Education 

Code, is the identical wording as that portion of Article 

2922-21a, Vernon's Civil Statutes, its predecessor; it reads 

as follows: 

"No school district, board of education, superintendent, assistant superintendent, principal, or 

other administrator shall directly or indirectly 

coerce any teacher to refrain from participating in 

political affairs in his community, state or nation." 

Therefore, you are advised that the proposed policy 

set forth in your letter, insofar as it attempts to proscribe 

school district employees' participation in political activities, 

is violative of Subsection (d) of Section 21.904, Texas Education 

Code, and of no force or effect. 

SUMMARY 

A school district policy which prohibits a 

teacher from participating in political affairs 

is in contravention of Subsection (d) of Section 

21.904, Texas Education Code, and is of no force 

or effect. 

/7 

-5753- 
Dr. J. W. Edgar, page 3 (M-1177) 

Prepared by Austin C. Bray, Jr. 

Assistant Attorney General 

APPROVED: 

OPINION COMMITTEE 

Kerns Taylor, Chairman 

W. E. Allen, Co-Chairman 

Malcolm Quick 

Sig Aronson 

James Hackney 

Wardlow Lane 

SAMUEL D. MCDANIEL 

Staff Legal Assistant 

ALFRED WALKER 

Executive Assistant 

NOLA WHITE 

First Assistant 

-5754-