Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
or similar subjects; and nacted the TCHRA and its legislative history do not provide insight into the legislature’s intent concerning the term “state instrumentality” beyond the plain wording of subsection (8)(D). See Tex. Lab.Code Ann. § 21.002(8)(D). The Act’s former statutory provisions, and the consequences of an exclusionary construction of the term “state instrumentality,” however, weigh in favor of the conclusion that the DFW Board is a state instrumentality. As noted by the Purdin court, the Act was amended in 1997 to expressly define “state agency.” Purdin, 148 S.W.3d. at 298. The term “state agency” was given a broad definition as including (A) a board, commission, committee, council, department, institution, office, or agency i 320, 325 (Tex.App.-Waco 2000, pet. denied) . We hold that the DFW Board is a state
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding special utility district to be state instrumentality subject to claims made under tchra
B. holding that an entity majorityowned by an agency or instrumentality of a foreign state is itself an agency or instrumentality of that foreign state under the fsia
C. holding economic development corporation to be state instrumentality subject to claims made under the tchra and explaining that the employment discrimination prohibitions in chapter 21 are to be generally applied
D. holding school district  in claim made pri or to amendment defining state agency to be state instrumentality subject to claims made under tchra
E. holding that utility boards are subject to state ethics laws
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.