Coordinating Board reviews proposed residency rules; advocates warn of privacy and access harms

The Higher Education Coordinating Board’s Committee on Innovation, Data, and Educational Analytics heard public testimony and staff presentation on proposed new rules governing determination of resident status for in-state tuition.

The rules under consideration (proposed relocation from chapter 21 to chapter 13, subchapter K, sections 13.191–13.203) would clarify domicile and dependency rules, apply a clear-and-convincing evidentiary standard to residency classifications, list acceptable documentation, and give institutions flexibility to request additional documents, according to staff presentation.

Why it matters: The proposed rules respond to a recent federal court order limiting in-state tuition eligibility to students lawfully present in the United States, and they would shape how Texas colleges determine who qualifies for in-state tuition rates.

In testimony before the committee, Trudy Taylor Smith of Children’s Defense Fund Texas urged the board to adopt uniform, clear definitions of “lawful presence” and to expand the list of acceptable documents students may use to demonstrate eligibility. “We believe that the rules concerning determination of resident status perpetuate an incomplete, inaccurate understanding of lawful presence that wrongfully excludes many lawfully present students from in-state tuition,” Smith said.

Smith warned that the draft rules could encourage institutions to share sensitive student information with U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) for verification. She said such exchanges “could result in FERPA violations or situations in which students are coerced into authorizing the disclosure of confidential information as part of the resident status determination process.”

Denise Molina, humanitarian outreach coordinator at the Texas Civil Rights Project and a beneficiary of Texas tuition assistance programs, told the committee that changing the rules would close doors for students who already planned their college careers around in-state tuition and grants. “You hold in your hands the power to open doors or quickly close them for students like me,” Molina said, recounting that state aid enabled her to attend the University of Texas Rio Grande Valley and later law school.

Committee staff member Charles Contaro, assistant commissioner for student financial aid programs, presented the proposed rule text and said the changes are intended to comply with the federal court decision and to make the rules more user-friendly. Contaro noted the board received public comments on data-privacy concerns and requests for a single definition of “lawfully present,” and that institutions should consult legal counsel on federal definitions and FERPA obligations.

Contaro also said the board received implementation suggestions from The University of Texas at Austin and that some suggested textual edits were incorporated into the draft rules.

Discussion and status: Committee members asked questions but the transcript does not record a final roll-call vote on adoption. At the end of the record provided, the chair asked for a motion to adopt the rules and a committee member was called on to speak; the final outcome is not recorded in the available transcript.

The committee materials indicate the specific sections proposed for adoption: chapter 13, subchapter K, sections 13.191–13.203. Staff emphasized that because “lawful presence” is governed by federal law and subject to change by court rulings, institutions must rely on current federal guidance and their legal counsel when applying the rules.

Next steps: The transcript shows the item was presented for adoption; the available record ends before the final vote is recorded. Committee materials and public comments will remain part of the board’s rulemaking file.