C.S.H.B. 2004 78(R)    BILL ANALYSIS


C.S.H.B. 2004
By: Marchant
State Affairs
Committee Report (Substituted)



BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE 

The Open Meetings Act provides that meetings of governmental bodies must
be open to the public, except for expressly authorized executive sessions.
These express authorizations include, for example, deliberations on real
property and contracts for prospective gifts or donations; and
consultation with a governmental body attorney to seek advice on pending
or contemplated litigation or settlement offers.  Currently, executive
sessions are not expressly authorized to deliberate business and financial
considerations relating to a contract being negotiated.  Conducting such
deliberations in an open meeting can undermine the negotiating posture of
a governmental entity, thereby resulting in a greater expenditure of
public funds than may be necessary.  The purpose of C.S.H.B. 2004 is to
authorize the commissioners courts of counties with a population of
400,000 or more to conduct a closed meeting to deliberate business and
financial considerations relating to a contract being negotiated. 

RULEMAKING AUTHORITY

It is the opinion of the committee that this bill does not expressly grant
any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department,
institution, or agency. 

ANALYSIS

C.S.H.B. 2004 amends Subchapter D, Chapter 551, of the Government Code to
authorize the commissioners courts of counties with a population of
400,000 or more to conduct a closed meeting to deliberate business and
financial considerations relating to a contract being negotiated, if,
before conducting the closed meeting: 

_the commissioners court votes unanimously that deliberation in an open
meeting would have a detrimental effect on the position of the
commissioners court in negotiations with a third person; and 

_the attorney advising the commissioners court issues a written
determination that deliberation in an open meeting would have a
detrimental effect on the position of the commissioners court in
negotiations with a third person. 

EFFECTIVE DATE

Upon passage, or, if the Act does not receive the necessary vote, the Act
takes effect September 1, 2003. 


COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL TO SUBSTITUTE

The original bill applied to all governmental bodies, whereas the
substitute applies only to commissioners courts of counties with a
population of 400,000 or more. 

The original bill applied to any proposed contract, whereas the substitute
applies only to a contract being negotiated. 

The substitute authorizes a closed meeting only if, before conducting the
closed meeting: 
 
_the commissioners court votes unanimously that deliberation in an open
meeting would have a detrimental effect on the position of the
commissioners court in negotiations with a third person; and 

_the attorney advising the commissioners court issues a written
determination that deliberation in an open meeting would have a
detrimental effect on the position of the commissioners court in
negotiations with a third person. 

The original bill included no analogous provision.