Does a nonprofit that serves senior citizens have to follow the Open Meetings Act?

Texas AG Opinion DM-0007: A Private Senior-Services Nonprofit Is Not a "Governmental Body"

Plain-English summary

The Parker County Committee on Aging was a nonprofit corporation that ran a senior center, served meals, provided transportation, delivered meals to homes, and helped with some medical needs. It was funded by private donations plus government grants and loans, and its board was not selected by city or county officials. The district attorney asked the Attorney General whether the committee had to comply with the Open Meetings Act.

The Attorney General concluded it did not. The Open Meetings Act applied only to a "governmental body" as defined in section 1(c) of the act: bodies within the state's executive or legislative department, commissioners courts and city councils, deliberative bodies with rule-making or quasi-judicial power classified as a department or political subdivision, school boards, and the governing boards of special districts created by law. The committee fit none of those. It was an ordinary nonprofit under the Texas Non-Profit Corporation Act, not created "by law," with no power to supervise public business, no rule-making or quasi-judicial authority, and no delegated governmental powers. The opinion compared earlier rulings that nonprofit water-supply corporations are not governmental bodies absent a specific statute pulling them in, and found no statute outside the Open Meetings Act requiring the committee to comply. So the committee was free of the act's open-meeting requirements.

Currency note

This opinion was issued in 1991. Subsequent statutory amendments, court decisions, or later AG opinions may have changed the analysis. Treat this page as historical context, not current legal advice. The Open Meetings Act has since been recodified into chapter 551 of the Government Code, and the definition of "governmental body" and the case law on private entities have developed since 1991. Verify current law before relying on any specific rule mentioned here.

Common questions

Did the Parker County Committee on Aging have to hold open meetings?
No. The opinion concluded it was not a "governmental body" under section 1(c) of the Open Meetings Act, so the act did not apply to it.

Why didn't taking government grants make it a governmental body?
The opinion focused on structure and power, not funding. The committee was an ordinary nonprofit corporation, not created by law, with no rule-making, quasi-judicial, or delegated governmental power, and its board was not chosen by city or county officials.

When is a private nonprofit covered by the Open Meetings Act?
Under this opinion, when it fits one of the statutory categories of "governmental body," for example by being created by law as a special district or by exercising delegated governmental power. A nonprofit that merely provides services does not qualify on that basis alone.

Background and statutory framework

Section 1(c) of the Open Meetings Act (article 6252-17, V.T.C.S.) defined "governmental body" to include boards and agencies within the state's executive or legislative department under the direction of elected or appointed members, every commissioners court and city council, deliberative bodies with rule-making or quasi-judicial power classified as a department, agency, or political subdivision of a county or city, school boards, and the governing board of every special district created by law. The Parker County Committee on Aging, formed under the Texas Non-Profit Corporation Act (article 1396-1.01 et seq., V.T.C.S.), fit none of these. The opinion relied on prior Attorney General Opinions (JM-596 (1986) on nonprofit water-supply corporations; JM-1185 (1990); JM-340 (1985); JM-794 (1987) on delegated governmental power) and on Putter v. Anderson, 601 S.W.2d 73, 76 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.), regarding official investigative authority, plus a 1988 Austin court of appeals discussion of the meaning of "special district." It found no statute outside the Open Meetings Act bringing the committee within the act's coverage.

Citations

Statutory provisions:

• TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17, § 1(c) (Open Meetings Act)
• TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 1396-1.01 (Texas Non-Profit Corporation Act)

Cases:

• Putter v. Anderson, 601 S.W.2d 73, 76 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.)

Prior Attorney General opinions cited: JM-596 (1986); JM-1185 (1990); JM-340 (1985); JM-794 (1987).

Source

• Landing page: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/opinions/dan-morales/dm-0007
• Original PDF: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/sites/default/files/opinion-files/opinion/1991/dm0007.pdf

Original opinion text

Best-effort transcription from a scanned PDF. Minor errors may remain — the linked PDF is authoritative.

Office of the Attorney General
State of Texas

February 27, 1991

Honorable Amy Ayers Adams
District Attorney
Parker County
One Courthouse Square
Weatherford, Texas 76086

Opinion No. DM-7

Re: Whether the Parker County Committee on Aging is a governmental body under the Open Meetings Act, article 6252-17, V.T.C.S. (RQ-6)

Dear Ms. Adams:

You ask whether the Parker County Committee on Aging (hereinafter referred to as the "PCCOA") is a governmental body subject to the Open Meetings Act, article 6252-17, V.T.C.S.

You state that the PCCOA is a nonprofit corporation created under the Texas Non-Profit Corporation Act, article 1396-1.01, et seq., V.T.C.S. Its purpose, as set forth in its by-laws, is to

serve the special needs of residents of Parker County, Texas who are sixty (60) years of age or older by assisting them in obtaining help through existing community resources and by providing additional services and facilities to meet needs which are not being adequately served by existing resources.

You further advise that the PCCOA provides services to senior citizens. These services include maintaining a center where meals are served and social activities occur, providing transportation, providing home-delivered meals, and providing for certain medical needs. You state that the activities of the PCCOA are financed by private donations and by loans and grants from state and federal government sources. The affairs of the PCCOA are conducted by a board of directors chosen in accordance with its bylaws. Members of the board are not selected by city or county officials. You advise that the PCCOA does not exist for the benefit or on behalf of any county or city government. Nothing in the facts that you have presented to us suggests that the PCCOA has any official status beyond that of an ordinary nonprofit corporation.

In Attorney General Opinion JM-596 (1986), we concluded that nonprofit water supply corporations are not governmental bodies within the meaning of the Open Meetings Act, and are not subject to its requirements unless subject to certain specific provisions of the Water Code which require some nonprofit water supply corporations to comply with the Open Meetings Act. We find no statute outside the Open Meetings Act that would require the PCCOA to comply with the Open Meetings Act.

The Open Meetings Act applies to a "governmental body" as that term is defined in section 1(c) of the act. That definition reads as follows:

'Governmental body' means any board, commission, department, committee, or agency within the executive or legislative department of the state, which is under the direction of one or more elected or appointed members; and every Commissioners Court and city council in the state, and every deliberative body having rule-making or quasi-judicial power and classified as a department, agency, or political subdivision of a county or city; and the board of trustees of every school district, and every county board of school trustees and county board of education; and the governing board of every special district heretofore or hereafter created by law.

The PCCOA is clearly not "within the executive or legislative department of the state." See Attorney General Opinions JM-1185 (1990); JM-596 (1986); JM-340 (1985). Nor is it the governing body of a city or county. It is obviously not the board of trustees of a school district, a county board of school trustees or a county board of education. It has no rule-making or quasi-judicial power. It has no authority to exercise delegated governmental powers. See Attorney General Opinion JM-794 (1987). It has no duty or authority to conduct investigations and draw conclusions in any official capacity. See Putter v. Anderson, 601 S.W.2d 73, 76 (Tex. App.-Dallas 1980, writ ref'd n.r.e.).

In Sierra Club v. Austin Transportation Study Policy Advisory Committee, 746 S.W.2d 298 (Tex. App.-Austin 1988, writ denied), the court considered the term "special district." It quoted the following dictionary definition of special district:

A limited governmental structure created to bypass normal borrowing limitations, to insulate certain activities from traditional political influence, to allocate functions to entities reflecting particular expertise, to provide services in otherwise unincorporated areas, or to accomplish a primarily local benefit or improvement, e.g. parks and planning, mosquito control, sewage removal.

Black's Law Dictionary 1253 (5th ed. 1986).

The PCCOA was created pursuant to the Texas Non-Profit Corporation Act, but was not specifically created "by law." While it is designed to accomplish a primarily local benefit, it cannot be said to be a governmental structure. It has no power to supervise or control public business or to deliberate or act on a matter of public policy. See Attorney General Opinion JM-1185 (1990) and authorities cited therein. Accordingly, the PCCOA is not a "governmental body" as defined in section 1(c) of the Open Meetings Act, and is not subject to the requirements of that act.

SUMMARY

The Parker County Committee on Aging is not a "governmental body" as defined in section 1(c) of the Open Meetings Act, and is not subject to the requirements of that act.

DAN MORALES
Attorney General of Texas

WILL PRYOR
First Assistant Attorney General

MARY KELLER
Executive Assistant Attorney General

JUDGE ZOLLIE STEAKLEY (Ret.)
Special Assistant Attorney General

RENEA HICKS
Special Assistant Attorney General

SUSAN GARRISON
Acting Chairman, Opinion Committee

Prepared by John Steiner
Assistant Attorney General