My County is in the last legs of updating our subdivision regulations. The process has not been made any easier by the requirements of the Open Meetings Act. We can't just kick ideas around on the telephone, or by email, but have to keep holding posted meetings.

Should we ask the Legislature to allow bodies to discuss, but not act on, matters in a computerized public forum?

I'm thinking of a chat group, where only members of the body, and staff, could post. Interested citizens could watch what was happening in real time, and would have access to all attachments (draft subdivision regulations, for instance) sent back and forth. The usual rules for posting notice of meetings, and taking action only at meetings, would still apply.

Obviously the authorizing statute would have to be carefully written. Some topics, say personnel, and elections, proabaly would be excluded. The notice requirements would have to be carefully thought out. For equal protection reasons you would probably have to either make a computer available, or hard copies available, to those who claim they can't afford a computer.

From the point of view of the purpose behind the Open Meetings Act, I don't see a problem. Discussions between elected leaders would still take place in the open. In fact, for the 99%+ of the population that never go to Commissioners Court meetings, being able to actually follow an online forum, from home or work, would give them far more access to the decision making process.

Good idea, or not?

I won't weigh in on the pros/cons because I haven't thought about it enough, but I did want to point out that the Senate State Affairs Committee's interim charge #13 is to re-examine the Public Information Act in light of technological advances and recommend necessary changes for next session. If anyone decides to move forward on the issue, that might provide a forum for making suggestions.

The closest the Open Meetings Act comes to allowing something like what you are talking about is Section 551.125, which allows for meetings by conference call under certain, limited circumstances, such as emergencies. Maybe that section could be amended to make it more useful? (e.g. - eliminating the requirement that such a meeting be held only in emergency situations and expanding it to include video-teleconference or web forums.) I think there would need to be some restriction to keep every governmental body from conducting every meeting by chat room. But it is an interesting idea.

I like the idea.

One might also address what constitutes a Facebook quorum....

To see which Commissioners around the state would oppose such a law. Such a refusal might provide a blueprint guiding us to Open Meetings Law violations.
The Legislature has seemed willing to leave the computer illiterate out in the cold. I recall a County Clerk law allowing them to do away with physical posting of agendas if the Clerk posts them on their website. Not Commissioners Court agenda in this County because we are obstinate but other agendas from special purpose and the like.