Case Information

*1 Dr. Charles Lemaistre Opinion Wo. B- 994 Chancellor

The University of Texam System Re: Whether committee appointed 201 West 7th Street, by chairxan of Board of Regents Aumtin, Texas to study procemm for selecting

chief administrative officers is mubject to the Open Meeting8 Dear Dr. Lexafmtrer

You have amked our opinion on the applicability of the Texas Open Meetings article 6252-ll,~'V.T.C.S., to a corn- mittee appointed by the Chairman of the Board of Regents. The committee, designated the 'Committee to Study the Selection Process of Chief Adxinimtrative Officers of the Component In- mtitutionm of The University of Texan Symtem," is campomed of three regents, the premidents of three institutions in the Uni- vermity of Texas system, one reprementative from the Ex-Students' Amsociation, four faculty memberm, and four mtudentm. The Board of Regent0 authorimed the Commmittee to make an extenmive mtudy of the process of selecting a chief adminimtrative officer and to m&nit itm recommendations to the Board. You advime urn that this im an example of numerous comnmitfees emtablimhed in the University Symtex.,

The Open Meetings Act applier to every *meeting" of a 'governmental body" thome term6 are defined in Section l(c) of the Act provides in parts

"Governmental body" meana any board, com- mimmion, department, committee, or. agency within the executive or legimlative de- partment the state, which is unaer the . . direc,tion one or more elected ap- pointed mmmberm. . . .

section l(a) provides in part1

“Meeting’ means any deliberation between a quorum of menberm of a governmental p. 4125

. . .- . . #I - P

Dr. Charles Lemaimtre - page 2 (R-994)

body at which any public buminemm or public policy over which the governmental body ham muPervimion or control is discuamed or con- sidered, or at which any formal action is taken.

The Committee is an entity within the executive branch com- POSed of appointed memberm. See Attorney General Opinions H-772 (1976)r R-436 (1974)t Mm6 (1967). It therefore meets the statutory definition of governmental body.

If the Committee meets to discuss "any public business or public policy over which [it] ham supervision or control," itm meetings will be covered by the Act. In Attorney General Opinion R-772 (1976), we determined that the Open Meetings Act did not apply to a purely advisory body which had no power to mupervime or control public business. In determining whether a governmental body ham such power we have looked to the resolutions that define itm'powerm , and we have indicated that the evidence may show that it exercises additional authority am a matter of practice. See Attorney General Opinion R-430 (1974). The resolution crxing the Committee mtates that it ir to make an extensive study of the selection proces8 and submit its recommendations to the Board Regents. ~Thim rem- olution appears to make the Committee an advisor body only, without power to supervise or control public bum nemm. We have been supplied no facts as to how the Board looks upon 'the.committee'm recommendations -- whether it accepts them am final decisions, or merely consider6 them along with other information and opinions. In the absence facts showing . that the Committee is more than an advisory body, we cannot

may that its meetings are required to be open by the open Meetings Act.

We think~that the presence of three Regents on the fifteen- member committee does not bring it within the provisionm,of the open Meetings Act as a committee of the board. Bee Attorney General Opinions R-238 (1974); R-3 (1973). Cf. Gn Records mcigfon No. 02 (1975) (report by committee rfour Regentm). We have determined that committees of boards 8ubject to the Act are themselves subject to it , noting the danger that the full'board might become the rubber stamp of its committees.

we think that this danger is diminished in the present came by &e appointment twelve other memberm who might repre- gent different viewpoint6 within the university system. We mtrongly caution, however, that should the council actually a committee Board or aa something more than function

p. 4126

I

, 1

Dr. Charles Lemaimtre - page 3 (H-994) an advisory body, and in fact rupervire or control public bumi- nem8 or policy, it will have to comply withthe Act’8 provirionm on notice and public meetings. In that instance, it8 mambmrm MY be subject to sanctions imposed for failure to comply with V.T.C.S. art. 6 4s Attorney General Opinion 6252-17, H-772 (1976). .SUMMARY

The'Committee to Study the Selection Procerm of Chief Adminimtrative Officer8 of Component Inmtitution8 of.The Univer- 8ity Texam~System" appointed by the Chairman the Board Regents 18 not required to comply with the Open Meetings ad long as it has no rup,ervision control over public burine8r or policy, however, the factr may be much that the Committee will be brought within the coverage

Opinion Commnittee

hall

‘I’

p. 4127, "