THE ~SITORXEY GESERAL
OF TEXAS
Ausrrxx. TSEXA~ 78711
May 9, 1973
The I$onorable Oscar Mausy Opinion No. H- 37
Chairman, Education Committee
Room G-21, State Capitol Rc: Whether there exista
Austin, Texas 78711 a conflict between
Article 54.203 and 55.17,
Texas Education Code,
aa to feer that MY be
Dear Senator Mauzy: charged veterans.
As Chairman of the Senate Education Committee, you have cited
to us Articles 54.203 and 55.17 of the Education Code, Vernon’s Texas
Civil Statutes, asking us to advise whether there is a conflict between
the two and, if so, which of them in controlling.
Section 54.203 is part of Chapter 54 entitled “Tuition and Fees”,
and more specifically of sub-chapter D entitled “Exemptions from
Tuition”. It reads, in part:
“(a) The governing board of each institution of
higher education shall exempt the following perrons
from the payment of all duer, fees and charges, in-
cluding fees for correspondence courses but excluding
property deposit fees, student service fees, and any
fees or charges for lodging, board, or clothing, pro-
vided the person seeking the exemptions were citizens
of Texas at the time they entered the services indicated
and have resided in Texas for at least the period of
twelve months before the date of registration: [and there
are then listed several categories of veterans] . . . .‘I
Other provisions of Chapter 54 of the Education Code provide for
tuition and various fees.
Section 54.203 is a codification of Article 2654b-1. Vernon’s Texas
Civil Statutes, which originally was enacted in 1933 (Acts 1933, 43rd Leg.,
Ch. 6, p. 10) and remained substantially unchanged until codified in 1971
as part of the Education Code.
p. 149
The Honorable Oscar Mauzy, page 2 (H-37)
Section 55.17 of the EducationCode, on the other hand, is in
Chapter 55 entitled “Financing Permanent Improvements” and in
sub-chapter B entitled “Revenue Bonds and Facilities”. It provides,
in applicable part:
” . . . (c) Fees for the use by or availability to the
students of all or any property, buildings, structures,
activities, services, operations, or other facilities, may
be pledged to the payment of the bonds, and shall be fixed
and collected from all or any designated part of the
students enrolled in the institution or institutions, or any
branch or branches thereof, in the amounts and in the
manner as determined and provided by the board in the
resolution authorizing the issuance of the bonds; and
said fees may be collected in the full amounts required
or permitted herein, without regard to actual use, avail?
ability, or existence of any facility, commencing at any
time designated by the board. Said fees may be fixed
and collected for the use or availability of the institution
or institutions, or any branch or branches thereof. Such
specific and/or general fees may be fixed and collected,
and pledged to the payment of any issue or series of bonds
issued by the board, in the full amounts required or per-
mitted herein, in addition to, and regardless of the exist-
ence of, any other specific or general fees at the institution
or institutions, or any branch or branches thereof; pro-
vided that each board may restrict its power to pledge
such additional specific or general fees in any manner
that may be provided in any resolution authorizing the
issuance of bonds, and provided that no such additional
specific fees shall be pledged if prohibited by any reso-
lution which authorized the issuance of any then out-
standing bonds. ”
Section 55.17 in turn is based largely on Article 2909C-3, Vernon’s
Texas Civil Statutes, which was first enacted in 1969 (Acts 1969, 6lst
Leg.. Ch. 763, p. 2264) and amended in 1971 (Acts 1971, 62nd Leg.,
Ch. 30, p. 54).
The caption to the 1969 Act describes it as a bill, generally, to
authorize revenue bonds and fees to retire them. Neither the Act nor
its caption mentions anything about exceptions from those liable for the
fees.
p. 150
_^ ’
The Honorable Oscar Mausy, page 3 (H-37)
Attorney General Opinion M-306 (1968) construed an exemption from
payment of student fees allowed by Article 2654b-1, V. T. C. S. , (now
5 54.203) against a general enactment (Art. 2654a, now 0 54.503), and said:
“The fee exemption granted in Section 1 of
Article 2654B-1, quoted supra, is #toted in clear
and unequivocal language, and has continued un-
changed since the original enactment of the ltatute
in 1933. Where the Legislature has expressed it-
self so clearly, and has carefully delineated those
persons who are to qualify for the exemptions
granted, it is artificial logic to conclude that the
plain, unqualified words do not mean what they
say . . . . I’
In our opinion, the two sections do not conflict. Section 55.17 deals
with bonds and their retirement with funds raised by fees. It does not
specify, in any detail, those who will pay the fees. Section 54. 203 has
nothing to do with the use of fees. It deals specifically with the question
of who will, or more precisely, will not, have to pay those fees. The
two are easily reconciled.
Were there a conflict, it would be our opinion that the exemptions
created by $ 54.203 would prevail despite any contrary language in
5 55.17. Our conclusion is based upon the fact that S 54.203 is directly ’
addressed to the question of those who will be exempted from the pay-
ment of student fees, whereas § 55.17 is addressed to the financing
of improvements and only incidentally, if at all, to the question of who
will pay fees; that $ 55.17 can be read as applying only to fees paid
by non-exempt persons; that in the enactment of 5 55.17 and its prede-
cessors, there was no indication of any intention to repeal or overrule
$ 54.203 or to abolish exemptions which had existed under that statute;
and that the Legislature, in adopting the Education Code, had before
it for its consideration Attorney General Opinion M-306 (1968). Code
Construction Act, Article 5429b-2, V. T. C. S.
It is our conclusion, therefore, that the provisions of § 55.17 of
the Education Code authorizing the governing boards of institutions
of higher education to set fees for the use of buildings and to pledge
those fees to the payment of its bonds is subject to the provisions of
p. 151
The Honorable Oscar Mausy, page 4 (H-37)
$ 54.203 exempting certain classes of perronr from the payment of all
fees and charges. You have not asked and WC do not answer questions
concerning the validity of exemptions where prior to the creation of the
exemption& fees had Bern pledged dir security for the bonds.
SUMMARY
Those specified in 5 54.203. Texas Education
Code, as being exempt from the payment of fees and
charges, are exempt from the payment of fees and
charges created pursuant to 5 55.17 having to do. with. *
the pledging of student fees to secure the payment
of improvement bonds.
Very truly yours,
Attorney General of Texas
APPR V&D:
.
JIIksi&~~y
DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman
Opinion Committee
p. 152