The 85th Legislative Session is over, and school districts and colleges statewide are working to revise policies and procedures to conform to new Texas laws. In March, we reported on three bills that showed promise of becoming law. One, HB 1669, was unfortunately left pending in committee. This bill would have limited a student or parent’s opportunity to bring grievances related to extracurricular activities, and would have enabled districts to recover attorneys’ fees spent defending frivolous appeals. Two other bills passed:

HB 53

HB 53 went into effect on September 1, 2017. The law prohibits a governmental entity from entering into a settlement agreement with a confidentiality provision if the amount of the settlement is greater than $30,000. The $30,000 figure applies even if the settlement agreement is paid for from insurance proceeds, so long as the insurance premium was paid for by the school. Governmental entities considering settlement agreements exceeding the $30,000 mark should consult with legal counsel to ensure the agreement is structured to be enforceable.

SB 2141

Senate Bill 2141 relates to non-attorney advocates in due processing hearings.  The bill went into effect on June 12, 2017, and became applicable beginning with the 2017-18 school year.

This bill amends and adds to the existing qualifications in T.E.C. § 29.0162 enabling non-attorney advocates with special knowledge or training to represent parents in due process cases.  The bill requires the following:

  • The non-attorney advocate will abide by a voluntary code of ethics and professional conduct during the representation ;
  • The representative must enter into a written representation agreement (including a process for resolving disputes) with the person/parties;
  • The written agreement between the representative and the parties is confidential and may not be disclosed;
  • The hearing officer has the authority to determine whether the representative meets the standards of E.C § 29.0162.

The law requires the Commissioner to adopt regulations specifying the qualifications necessary to work as a lay advocate in a due process case. However, the law does not require these rules to apply to representation in ARD meetings or other special education meetings. Therefore, the majority of work performed by lay advocates may remain unregulated. While the bill falls short of the reforms requested by many districts in Texas, it is nonetheless a step in the right direction toward standardizing the quality of representation received by parents of special education students.

 

This article should not be construed as legal advice related to any specific facts or circumstances. Although this article covers legal subjects, it is intended to educate readers about school law topics and not to provide advice that will be the basis for action or inaction in any specific circumstance. Viewing these materials does not create an attorney-client relationship between Abernathy, Roeder, Boyd & Hullett, P.C. and the reader or the reader’s institution. For circumstance-specific legal advice, please directly contact a licensed attorney.