Dr. Charles Lemaistre

Chancellor Opinion Wo. B-994 The Universityof Texam System 201 West 7th Street, Re: Whether committeeappointed Aumtin, Texas 70701 by chairxan of Board of Regents to study procemm for selecting chief administrative officersis mubject to the Open Meeting8Act. Dear Dr. Lexafmtrer You have amked our opinion on the applicability of the Texas Open Meetings Act, article 6252-ll,~'V.T.C.S., to a cornmittee appointedby the Chairman of the Board of Regents. The committee,

designated the 'Committeeto Study the Selection Process of Chief Adxinimtrative Officers of the Component Inmtitutionmof The Universityof Texan Symtem," is campomed of three regents, the premidentsof three institutions in the Univermity of Texas system, one reprementative from the Ex-Students' Amsociation,four faculty memberm, and four mtudentm. The Board of Regent0 authorimedthe Commmittee to make an extenmive mtudy of the process of selectinga chief adminimtrative officer and to m&nit itm recommendations to the Board. You advime urn that this im an example of numerous comnmitfees emtablimhedin the UniversitySymtex., The Open Meetings Act applier to every *meeting"of a 'governmental

body" am thome term6 are defined in the Act. Section l(c) of the Act provides in parts

"Governmental

body" meana any board, commimmion, department,committee,or. agency within the executive or legimlativedepartment of the state, which is unaer the

. . direc,tion of one or more elected or appointed 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 muPervimionor control is discuamedor **con** sidered,**or** at which any formal action is taken. The Committee is an entity within the executivebranch com**POSed** of appointedmemberm. See Attorney General Opinions H-772 (1976)rR-436 (1974)t Mm6 (1967). It thereforemeets the statutorydefinitionof governmental body. If the Committeemeets to discuss "any public businessor public policy over which [it] ham supervision or control," itm meetingswill be covered by the Act. In Attorney General Opinion R-772 (1976), we determined that the Open MeetingsAct did not apply to a purely advisorybody which had no power to mupervime**or** control public business. In determining whether a governmental **body** ham such power we have looked to the resolutionsthat define itm'powerm , and we have indicatedthat the evidencemay show that it exercises additionalauthority am a matter of practice. See Attorney General Opinion R-430 (1974). The resolutioncrxing the Committeemtates that it ir to make an extensive study of the selectionproces8 and submit its recommendations to the Board **of** Regents. ~Thimremolution appears to make the Committeean advisor 1 body only, without power to superviseor control public bum nemm. We have been suppliedno facts as to how the Board looks upon 'the.committee'm

recommendations -- whether it accepts them am final decisions,or merely consider6them along with other information

and opinions. In the absence of 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** MeetingsAct. We think~thatthe presence of three Regents on the fifteenmember committeedoes not bring it within the provisionm,ofthe open MeetingsAct as a committeeof the board. Bee Attorney General OpinionsR-238 (1974);R-3 (1973). Cf. Gn Records **mcigfon No.**  **02** (1975) **(report** by committee**rfour** Regentm). We have determinedthat committees of boards 8ubject to the **Act** are themselvessubject 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 of twelve other memberm who might repregent different viewpoint6within the universitysystem. We mtronglycaution,however, that should the council actually function am a committeeof the Board or aa somethingmore than

p. 4126I

, 1 Dr. Charles Lemaimtre - page 3 (H-994)

an advisory body, and in fact rupervire or control public buminem8 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 the Act. V.T.C.S. art. 6252-17, 6 4s Attorney General Opinion H-772 (1976). .SUMMARY

The'Committee to Study the Selection Procerm of Chief Adminimtrative Officer8 of Component Inmtitution8 of.The Univer8ity of Texam~System" appointed by the Chairman of the Board of Regents 18 not required to comply with the Open Meetings Act, ad long as it has no rup,ervision or control over public burine8r or policy, however, the factr may be much that the Committeewill be brought within the coverage of the Act. .

Opinion Commnittee hall

‘I’ p. 4127, "