Going Beyond the Call of Duty on Transparency This evening, I attended my first Library Board meeting. This meeting was run under the rules as described by the Texas Open Meetings Act: The agenda is posted in advance both at City Hall and on the City's website The meeting is open to the public The meeting location is convenient to the residents of Richardson (i.e., in our Library) The public is invited to make comments in the "Visitors" section All Board members had taken the Open Meetings training as provided by the Attorney General's Office During the meeting, Chair Carol Adams correctly directed that a conversation about a topic not on the agenda be deferred to the next meeting (because no notice of the topic was given on the agenda per the Act) All other discussions of items not on the agenda were confined to setting a future date to discuss them All in all, this was a meeting run perfectly by the rules of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Why do I remark on this? Because meetings of the Library Board are NOT subject to the Act. The Texas Open Meetings Act specifically exempts boards and commissions from the rules of the Act if the board or commission is "advisory" in nature. To quote the Open Meetings Handbook from the Attorney General's office: "E. Advisory Bodies An advisory committee that does not control or supervise public business or policy is not subject to the Act, even though its membership includes some members, but less than a quorum, of a governmental body. For example, the multidisciplinary team established to review offenders' records under the Commitment of Sexually Violent Predators Act was not subject to the Act. The team made an initial assessment of certain offenders to determine whether they should be subject to further evaluation for civil commitment. Subsequent assessments by other persons determined whether commitment proceedings should be filed. Thus, the team lacked ultimate supervision or control over public business or policy. However, if a governmental body that has established an advisory committee routinely adopts or "rubber stamps" the advisory committee's recommendations, the committee probably will be considered to be a governmental body subject to the Act. Thus, the fact that a committee is called an advisory committee does not necessarily mean it is excepted from the Act. The Legislature has, moreover, adopted statutes providing that particular advisory committees are subject to the Act, including a board or commission established by a municipality to assist it in developing a zoning plan or zoning regulations and the nursing advisory committee established by the statewide health coordinating council." See page 13 at https://www.oag.state.tx.us/AG_Publications/pdfs/openmeeting_hb.pdf The Library Board is, in fact, simply an advisory board – anyone who believes that the Council "rubberstamps" its decisions needs to have some very compelling proof to the contrary. Nor is the Library Board one of those boards specifically mentioned elsewhere in State law as being subject to the Act (like the Plan Commission). So if, in fact, the Library Board is not subject to the Open Meetings Act, why does the Board follow the Act anyway? Because it has been a deliberate decision by the City of Richardson to go above and beyond the call of duty as described in the Act and to make all boards and commissions meetings operate under the Act even when it's not required.   There are those who labor under the delusion that the City goes out of its way to hide its activities as much as possible, in violation of the Open Meetings Act. It's too bad that these same people don't instead give the City credit when it voluntarily exceeds the requirements of the Act. William J. 'Bill' McCalpin Richardson, Texas