c
THE A~TORNET GEMIEE-CAI.
OFTEXAS
The Honorable Ron Jackson Opinion No. H- 160
Acting Executive Director
Texas Youth Council Re: Whether students may
201 E. 14th Street be assigned to Training
Austin, Texas 78701 Schools of the Texas
Youth Council on a
Dear Mr. Jackson: coeducational basis
By your letter of October 15, 1973, you indicate that “the Texas Youth
Council is contemplating the assignment of students who have been adjudged
delinquent to its training schools on a coeducational basis. ” You request
the opinion of this office as to whether any legal prohibition to such practice
exists.
We are of the opinion that this question should be answered that there
is no prohibition. The Texas Youth Council was created by the 55th Legis-
lature in 1957. Article 5143d, V. T. C. S. The title of the Act (Acts 1957,
55th Leg., ch. 281, p. 660) provides:
“An Act creating a Texas Youth Council for the
protection, care, training and supervision of
certain classes of children and youth of the state,
and, among other things, defining its powers,
duties and functions. . . .I’
Section 2 of the Article 5L43d provides that:
“This Act shall be liberally construed to accomplish
the purpose herein sought. ”
Section 5, in which the powers and responsibilities of the Texas Youth
Council are set forth, states in part that:
p. 742
..
The Honorable Ron Jackson, page 2 (H-160)
“(b) The Texas Youth Council shall be responsible
for the adoption of all policies and shall make e
rules appropriate tohe proper accomplishment of
its functions. ” (emphasis added)
The major duties and functions of the Texas Youth Council are declared
in $6, which provides in part that the Texas Youth Council shall:
“(d) Administer the diagnostic treatmentand trainingand
stipervisbryfacilities and s&vices of the state for delinquent
children committed to the state. Manage and direct
state training school facilities and provide for the coor-
dination and combination of such facilities,as deemed
advisable by the Texas Youth Council, and for the crea-
tion of new facilities within the total appropriation pro-
vided by the Legislature; exercise administrative con-
trol over all other institutions and facilities under its
jurisdiction. ” (emphasis added)
By virtue of the foregoing sections to Article 5143d, we are of the
opinion that the Legislature intended to vest in the Youth Council as much
authority as possible in determining the policies and rules for treatment
and disposition of juveniles committed to the Council. We conclude that
Article 5143d provides the Youth Council with the power to authorize the
assignment of students to state training schools on a coeducational basis if,
in the opinion of the Council, it will help facilitate the accomplishment of
the purpose of such institutions.
We are of the opinion that the Legislature did not intend to require
sexually segregated training institutions.
Sections of Article 5143d, in addition to those quoted heretofore, support
our opinion by implication. Section 20, for example, relates to the appoint-
ment of superintendents for the schools and institutions. It provides in part
that:
“The superintendent of any school or other facility
for the care of girls exclusively shall be a woman.”
(emphasis added)
p. 743
.
The Honorable Ron Jackson, page 3 (H-160)
By use of the word “exclusively, ” we believe that the Legislature anticipated
that males and females might be assigned to state training schools on a
coeducational basis.
Section 26(b) states in part:
“When funds are available for the purpose, the Youth
Council may: . . .
“(b) Establish and operate additional treatment
and training facilities, including forestry or parks-
maintenance camps and boys’ ranches, necessary to
classify and segregate and handle iuvenile delinquents
of different ages, habits and mental and physical con-
dition according to their needs. ” (emphasis added)
Despite the reference to the establishment of boys’ ranches, we conclude
that $26(b) does not require classification and segregation of juvenile delinquents
on the basis of the sex of said juveniles alone.
We have found nothing in legislation enacted prior to the passage of
Article 5143d concerning the treatment and custody of children judicially
declared to be juvenile delinquents expressly prohibiting the assignment of
children to state training schools on a coeducational basis. Some earlier
statutory provisions have, however, reflected the traditional separate treat-
ment and custody of males and females. In view of our opinion that Article
5143d vests in the Youth Council the authority and power to determine all
policies and rules of the state training institutions, and hence to assign
students to said institutions on a coeducational basis, we conclude that any
inferences possibly drawn from such earlier statutes detracting from that
power and authority are rendered inapplicable to the Youth Council by 5 39
of Acts 1957, 55>th Legis., p; 660, ch. 281 (Article 5143d) which provides that:
“All laws and parts of laws in conflict with the
provisions of this Act are hereby repealed to the
extent of such conflict only. ”
p. 744
.
‘.
The Honorable Ron Jackson, page 4 (H-160)
SUMMARY
Article 5143d, creating the Texas Youth Council,
vests in the Council the authority to promulgate all
policies and rules appropriate to the rehabilitation of
juvenile delinquents committed to the Council, including
the assignment of juveniles to state training schools on
a coeducational basis.
Very truly yours,
DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman
Opinion Committee
p. 745
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Combined Opinion