Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
KP-0096
| Tex. Att'y Gen. | Jul 2, 2016Background
- The TEA Commissioner appointed a board of managers for Beaumont ISD on July 14, 2014, to replace the district board of trustees and oversee corrective actions.
- Before June 19, 2015, Education Code § 39.112(e) required a board of managers to order an election of trustees no later than the second anniversary of its appointment; once trustees qualified they assumed the powers of the trustees.
- During the 2015 legislative session two bills amended § 39.112: House Bill 1842 substantially revised subsection (e) to (1) require the commissioner to notify managers/trustees of the expiration date within two years and (2) provide a phased replacement mechanism over the last three years of the managers’ appointment; House Bill 3106 reenacted prior language and added subsection (f) permitting a commissioner to extend a managers’ appointment up to two additional years.
- The Attorney General was asked whether (a) the two 2015 amendments can be harmonized under the Code Construction Act, and (b) which version governs an already-appointed board of managers (Beaumont) in place when the bills took effect.
- The opinion concludes the two acts can be harmonized: HB1842’s substantive changes govern § 39.112(e), and HB3106’s new subsection (f) operates as an exception permitting a two-year extension.
- Applying the Government Code savings/repeal rules, the opinion holds Beaumont’s board of managers (which had not called an election before June 19, 2015) is governed by the amended provisions (HB1842 and HB3106), absent evidence of prior accrued rights under the old statute.
Issues
| Issue | Petitioner (Commissioner/TEA) Argument | Opposing Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether HB1842 and HB3106 can be harmonized under the Code Construction Act | Both acts should be read together so each can have effect | The reenactment in HB3106 might override HB1842’s changes | The acts are harmonizable: apply HB1842’s substantive changes and give HB3106’s subsection (f) effect as an exception |
| Whether subsection (f) of HB3106 permits deferral/extension of managers’ replacement procedures | Subsection (f) creates an exception allowing the commissioner to extend managers’ authority up to two years, delaying subsection (e) procedures | The reenacted language of HB3106 might preclude HB1842’s replacement scheme | Held that § 39.112(f) operates as an exception to (e), allowing up to a two-year extension |
| Whether the amended § 39.112 applies to a board of managers appointed before June 19, 2015 (Beaumont) | The amendments apply to existing managers unless a prior right accrued under the old statute | The general savings clause might preserve the pre-amendment replacement scheme for existing boards | Held that, absent evidence of any prior validation/rights accrued under the pre-2015 statute (and noting Beaumont had not ordered an election before June 19, 2015), the amended § 39.112 governs Beaumont’s board of managers |
Key Cases Cited
- Thiel v. Harris Cty. Democratic Exec. Comm., 534 S.W.2d 891 (Tex. 1976) (discusses purpose and application of Code Construction Act)
- Knight v. Int'l Harvester Credit Corp., 627 S.W.2d 382 (Tex. 1982) (limits application of Code Construction Act to codes enacted under the statutory revision program)
- Quick v. City of Austin, 7 S.W.3d 109 (Tex. 1998) (savings clauses preserve prior rights unless contrary intent is clear)
- Zachry Constr. Corp. v. Port of Houston Auth., 449 S.W.3d 98 (Tex. 2014) (legislative history statements by individuals or committees are not binding evidence of the collective legislature’s intent)
- Texas Mut. Ins. Co. v. Ruttiger, 381 S.W.3d 430 (Tex. 2012) (legislative intent is derived from enacted statutory language)