In City of LaPorte v. Barfield, 898 S.W.2d 288, 291 (Tex.1995), the supreme court considered whether the legislature's incorporation of the Anti-Retaliation Law by the Political Subdivisions Law constituted a waiver of immunity for anti-retaliation claims. See Barfield, 898 S.W.2d at 295. In making its determination, the court was guided by the principle that, even if the legislature was not perfectly clear, it could still waive immunity by drafting a statute that could have no other possible purpose. See Barfield, 898 S.W.2d at 292. The Barfield court considered whether the legislature waived immunity by: (1) adopting the Anti-Retaliation Law itself; (2) incorporating that Law into the Political Subdivisions Law, or; (3) providing for an election of remedies between the Law and the Whistleblower Act. See Barfield, 898 S.W.2d at 293-98. The court held that neither adoption of the Anti-Retaliation Law nor its incorporation into the Political Subdivisions Law waived immunity but ultimately held that the legislature must have intended to waive immunity when it provided that plaintiffs had to elect as between the Anti-Retaliation Law and the Whistleblower Act, for which immunity had clearly been waived. See Barfield, 898 S.W.2d at 298.