Texas Senate Bill SB1826

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Out of Senate Committee: 5/6/11
• Introduced: 3/11/11
• Voted on by Senate: 5/13/11
• Refer: 3/24/11
• Report Pass: 5/6/11
• Engrossed: 5/13/11
• Refer: 5/16/11

Caption

Relating to the definition in the open meetings law of the term "deliberation."

Impact

If enacted, SB1826 would significantly impact how governmental bodies in Texas conduct their meetings and discussions. The expanded definition of deliberation would necessitate that more types of communication among members be disclosed to the public. This would likely encourage greater scrutiny of governmental processes and enhance public oversight. Additionally, this change could affect how governmental bodies prepare and engage in discussions, potentially leading to a more cautious approach in their exchanges regarding public business.

Summary

Senate Bill 1826 seeks to clarify and amend the definition of 'deliberation' in the context of Texas open meetings law. By redefining what constitutes deliberation, the bill aims to ensure that any verbal or written exchange regarding public business, which occurs between a quorum of a governmental body or between a quorum and another party, falls under the open meetings law. This includes any form of written communication such as emails or letters that circulate among members of a governmental body concerning jurisdictional matters. The intention behind this clarification is to enhance the transparency and accountability of government operations.

Conclusion

Ultimately, SB1826 presents a legislative move to advance open governance in Texas by refining the meaning of deliberation within the existing framework of open meetings laws. How stakeholders navigate the implications of this redefinition will play a pivotal role in determining whether the bill achieves its goal of enhancing transparency without hampering the effectiveness of governmental operations.

Contention

The discussions surrounding the bill point to potential points of contention. While proponents laud the bill's intent to increase transparency and public participation in government decision-making, critics may raise concerns about the feasibility and implications of broadening the scope of what is considered deliberation. Fears that this could lead to overregulation of governmental communications, or that it might create barriers for governmental bodies in conducting their business efficiently, could bolster opposition to the bill. Balancing the open exchange of ideas while maintaining operational effectiveness will be a key challenge.