The Attorney General of Texas 

April 14, 1978 

JOHN L. HILL 

Attorney General 

723 Man. sulo $10 

+4olJsDn. TX. 770x 

7w2zsmol 

Honorable John Wtlson 

Chairman 

House Committee on Health 

and Welfare 

State Capitol 

Austin, Texas 701ll 

Opinion No. H-1154 

Re: Meetings of a county child 

welfare board. 

Dear Mr. Wilson: 

You have requested our opinion concerning the legality of certain closed 

meetings of the Montgomery County Child Welfare Board. You ask whether 

the Board may review case files of recipients of or applicants for public 

assistance without violating article 695c, section 33, V.T.C.S. -You also ask 

whether the Board may meet in closed session to discuss such a case file. 

Article 695a, section 4, V.T.C.S., provides for the creation of a child 

welfare board by a county commissioners’ court and states that “it shall 

perform such duties as may be required of it by the said Commissioners’ 

Court and the State Department of Public Welfare. . . .” The contract 

between the Montgomery County Commissioners’ Court and the Department 

establishes the following duties for the Board among others: 

1) To develop M estimated budget and recommend 

it to the Commissioners’ Court. 

2)To implement the policies of the Commissionem’ Court not In conflict with those of the 

Department. 

3)To review and approve expenditures on behalf 

of child welfare. 

4)To approve the expenditure of local funds by 

the staff of the Department for purposes for 

which the Commissionem’ Court has allocated 

funds. 

p. 4679 
+4 : : 

Honorable John Wilson - Page 2 (R-1154) 

. 

The contract also provides that the Board will have access to all case records 

subject to applicable state laws concerning confidentiality. 

Article 595c, section 33, pro*ides in part: 

(1) It shall be unlawful, except for purposes directly 

connected with the administration of general assistance, aid 

to dependent children, or social services programs, and in 

accordance with the rules and regulations of the State 

Department, for any person or persons to solicit, disclose, 

receive, make use of, or to authorize, knowingly permit, 

participate in, or acquiesce in the use of, any list of, or 

names of, or any information concerning, persons applying 

for or receiving such assistance, directly or indirectly 

derived from the records, papers, files, or communications 

of the State Department or subdivisions or agencies thereof, 

or acquired in the course of the performance of official 

duties. 

It would seem beyond question that the review of case files by the Board is 

“directly connected with the administration of . . . assistance.” Since the Board’s 

access to these files is provided ,by a contract with the Department of Public 

Welfare, in our opinion the review of case files by the Board would not violate 

article 695c, section 33. 

Your second question involves the application of article 6252-17, V.T.C.S., the 

Gpen Meetings Act. Section l(c) thereof defines “governmental body” to include 

“every deliberative body having rule-making or quasi-judicial power and classified 

as a department . . . of a county. . . .” Article 995a, section 4, provides that a 

Commissioners’ Court may appoint “a Child Welfare Board for the county.” The 

members “hold office during the pleasure of the Commissioners’ Court.” The size 

of the Board is determined by the Commissionem’ Court. These provisions, in 

conjunction with those of the contract reproduced above, indicate that the Board is 

a department of the County, notwithstanding the fact that it is also “an entity of 

the State Department of Public Welfare for the purposes of providing coordinated 

state and local public welfare services for children and their families . . .I’ Thus 

whether the Board is a “governmental body” within the Open Meetings Act depends 

upon whether it is a “deliberative body having rule-making or quasi-judicial 

~. power. . . .” 

ln Attorney General Opinion H-467 (1974) we stated: 

Rule-making authority is legislative in nature and involves 

broad policy considerations. (CitatiOtE omitted). An 

p. 4690 
* . 

. 

a 

. . I. , * 

* . 

Honorable John Wilson - Page 3 (II-1154) 

administrative agency determining the rights of one or more 

parties under a general rule, regulation, ordinance, or 

statute is exercising a quasi-judicial power. (citations 

omitted). 

We need not decide whether the approval of expenditures would be an exercise of a 

quasi-judicial power, for in our view the implementation of policies of the 

nCommissionem’ Court not in conflict with the State Department of Public 

Welfare’s policies” involves the exerciae of rule-making authority. Thus in our 

opinion the Board is a governmental body under the Open Meetings Act. 

Nevertheless, we believe the Board may meet in executive session for the 

limited purpose of discussing case files where an open meeting would result in a 

violation of section 33 of article 695~. A Colorado appellate court was faced with 

a similar question jnvolving meetings of the Denver Inter-Agency Committee on 

Child Abuse. The Committee was subject to the provisions of The Colorado Public 

Meetings Law, but another statute prohibited disclosure of the contents of child 

abuse reports. The court concluded that the committee could meet in executive 

session to discuss child abuse reports. Gillies v. Schmidt, 556 P.2d 82 (Cola. Ct. 

App. 1976). 

It is our view that Texas law compels the conclusion that such limited closed 

sessions are not “meetings” within article 6252-17, section l, for the consideration 

of information made confidential by law does not constitute the discussion of 

‘public business.” Attorney General Opinions H-780 (19761, H-464 (1974). 

SUMMARY 

The Montgomery County Child Welfare Board is a governmental body within the meaning of the Open Meetings Act 

but may meet in closed session for the limited purpose of 

discussing particular case files of persons receiving or 

applying for public assistance. 

Attorney General of Texas 

p. 4681 
- . 

Honorable John Wilson - Page 4 (R-1154) 

Opinion Committee 

p. 4682