Opinion

Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion

Court
Texas Attorney General Reports
Filed
Jul 2, 1974
Status
Published
On the bench
John Hill
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

TWEATI'ORNEYGENERAL

OF TEXAS

AURTIN. ‘J%XAS 78711

November 8, 1974

The Honorable M. L. Brockette Opinion No. H- 446

Commissioner of Education

Texas Education Agency Re: Validity of contrac,t

between State Board of

The Honorable Bevington Reed Education and Coordinating

Commissioner of Higher Education Board for coordination of

Coordinating Board post-secondary technical-

Texas College and University System vocational education and

Austin, Texas related questions.

You have requested our opinion concerning the authority of the State

Board of Education and the Coordinattng Board, Texas College and

University System, to enter into an interagency agreement regarding the

administration of technical-vocational programs in post-secondary insti-

tutions.

Section 61,067, Texas Education Code, specifically allows the Coor-

dinating Board to “contract with any other state governmental agency

~ to reduce duplication and a~ehieve better use of personnel and

facilities. ” However the Coordinating Board “shall perform only the

functions which are enumerated 0 0 D [by statute].” See, 61. 021,, Texas

Education Code.

General authority fey interagency agreements is granted by Art. 4413(32),

V. T. C. S. s the Interagency Cooperation Act, Section 4 of this act requires

advance approval,of the agreement or contract by the Board of Control. The

considerations to be passed on by the BoaPd of Control are set out i.n Section

5, which provides:

No agreement or contract may be entered into or

performed which wiP1 requi.re or permit an agency of

the State to exceed its constitutional or statutory duties

and responsibilities, or the Iimitations of its appropri-

ated funds. In reviewing proposed agreements or

po 2056

The Honorable MiI. L. Brockette

The Honorable Bevington Reed, page 2 (H-446)

contracts of the character described in this Act,

the Board of Control is authorized and directed

to consider the foll.owing factors, which shall

not be construed to be excl.usive:

(a) Whether the services specified are

necessary and essential for activities and work

that are properly within the statutory f-unctions

and programs of the affected agencies of the

State Government:

It is our opinion that since review of the validity of a proposed inter-

agency agreement or contract is withi,n the statutory responsibility of

the Board of Control, your questions concerning a particular proposal

should be addressed initially to that office. -See Attorney General Opinion

H-407 (1974).

SUM~MARY

Questions concerning the validity of a proposed

interagency agreement should be submitted initially

to the Board of Control for its determination.

Very truly yours,

JOHN L. HILL

Attorney General of Texas

h%aLM

DAVID M. KENDALL, Chairman

Opinion Committee

pe 2057

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.