Civic Insights with David Billings
It has been more than 50 years since both the Texas Public Information Act (TPIA) and the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA) were born out of the same moment a push to restore public trust following the Sharpstown Stock-Fraud Scandal in 1972.
The scandal, at its core, involved Texas officials participating in insider stock deals. The result was predictable: public confidence in government eroded, and a demand for transparency and accountability surged across the state.
In 1973, the Texas Legislature responded decisively. It passed the Open Records Act (now TPIA), establishing a simple but powerful presumption: government records belong to the people. At the same time, the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA) required public notice of meetings, open deliberation of government business, and strict limits on executive sessions.
Together, these laws formed the foundation of “open government” in Texas. They were not simply legislative reforms they represented a reset of the relationship between citizens and their government.
The Core Principles Still Hold
At their core, these laws are straightforward.
The TPIA is built on the principle that all government information is public unless specifically exempted by state law not by local elected officials or city attorneys.
TOMA reinforces that government decisions must be made in public view, not behind closed doors, through private discussions, private social media groups, or via “walking quorums.”
These are not just statutory requirements. They are foundational to Texas freedom and represent constitutional-level public policy values that continue to shape how government operates across the state.
While these principles remain unchanged, the environment in which they operate has evolved dramatically.
A New Challenge: Social Media Era
Fifty years later, transparency is no longer confined to council chambers and public notices it now plays out in real time across digital platforms.
Texas courts and the Legislature are grappling with how transparency laws apply in the age of social media. Platforms that did not exist when TPIA and TOMA were written now sit at the center of public discourse.
New challenges have emerged:
- Elected officials posting in restricted or private social media groups
- Deleting unfavorable comments
- Limiting or disabling public engagement on posts related to official business
- Using encrypted applications, such as Signal, to conduct public business
These developments raise a fundamental question:
What does “public business in public view” mean in a digital world?
Strengthening Enforcement
In response, policymakers and advocates have worked to strengthen enforcement mechanisms.
Organizations like the Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas have been at the forefront of protecting the free flow of information and holding government accountable.
As recently highlighted in a Dallas Morning News opinion article by Kelley Shannon¹, legislative efforts during the 89th Session focused on improving compliance and accountability, including:
- Stricter requirements for responding to public information requests
- Extending public meeting notice requirements to three business days (instead of 72 hours)
- Expanding the ability of citizens to recover attorneys’ fees when forced to sue for public information¹
These efforts reflect meaningful progress, but they also underscore a broader reality: enforcement alone cannot resolve every challenge.
Balancing Transparency and Confidentiality
At the heart of the issue is a fundamental policy tension.
Over time, the Legislature has added exemptions to protect sensitive information, including law enforcement investigations, personnel and privacy matters, and attorney-client privilege. These exemptions, rooted in Chapters 551 and 552 of the Texas Government Code, have evolved through decades of legislative updates and court interpretation.
This is not a conflict between right and wrong, but between two legitimate public interests.
For example, private businesses negotiating with cities often expect confidentiality around contract terms, intellectual property, financial information, and business strategy. That expectation is reasonable and often necessary to facilitate economic development.
At the same time, the public, equally reasonable, expects transparency, particularly when significant agreements appear on a local government agenda with limited notice. In many cases, these agreements are complex and lengthy, leaving little time for meaningful public review.
Balancing these competing interests remains one of the most difficult challenges in modern local governance.
Legal Barriers and Cost Challenges
Unfortunately, the Texas Attorney General’s Office serves as the primary referee in disputes between citizens and local governments.
When information is withheld, local governments often seek an opinion from the Attorney General’s Open Records Division. While this process provides legal guidance, it can also function as a mechanism to justify withholding information under statutory exemptions.
At the same time, state law allows governments to charge requestors for the cost of producing records. In practice, this can create a significant barrier, with some requests costing hundreds or even thousands of dollars.
The challenge is even greater in the digital space. When public business is conducted through social media particularly in restricted groups managed by private individuals, accessing those records becomes far more difficult.
In some cases, digital platforms require a court order to release information, making the process both costly and time-consuming. For many citizens, this creates a system where access to public information exists in theory, but not always in practice.
What Happens Next
Looking ahead, the 90th Legislative Session is expected to introduce a new wave of proposals aimed at improving public access to government information.
The Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas will likely continue to play a leading role, alongside policymakers such as State Senator Paul Bettencourt.
The next phase of the transparency debate will likely focus on:
- Social media and digital communications
- Enforcement mechanisms and penalties
- Cost barriers to accessing public information
- Balancing confidentiality with public accountability
These proposals are not theoretical, they build directly on legislation that advanced, but ultimately did not pass, during the 89th Session.
Figure 1 highlights the bills most likely to be reintroduced in the upcoming session.
| Bill | Topic | Last Action (89th Session) | 90th Session Outlook | |
| HB 2248 | TPIA compliance / attorney fees | Senate committee, no final vote | High | |
| HB 4990 | Open records hotline | House calendar | High | |
| HB 4991 | Training requirements | Sent to Senate | High | |
| SB 986 | TPIA process changes | Referred to House committee | High | |
| SB 2680 | Public information procedures | Senate committee report | High | |
Figure 1
As shown above, many of the most viable proposals either passed one chamber or reached advanced committee stages before time expired. This suggests that the 90th Session will focus less on introducing new concepts and more on refining and advancing existing transparency reforms.
Final Thought
Fifty years after Sharpstown, the core question remains unchanged: Does the public truly have access to the workings of its government?
As William Shakespeare reminds us, “Truth will out.”
The responsibility now lies with local government, elected officials, and citizens to ensure that truth is not only revealed, but accessible.
Without transparency, public trust is not sustainable, and government cannot function as intended unless it operates in the open.
Footnote:
- Kelley Shannon, “Protect transparency laws that help Texans fight corruption: An eye on government can track taxpayer money, expose wrongdoing,” Dallas Morning News, March 17, 2026
🎙️ Continue the Conversation
Listen to my podcast, “As Fate Would Have It.” My co-host Dave Martin, host of The Good Government Show, joins me as we talk with government and local leaders about what’s happening in Fate and across Rockwall County.
New episodes drop monthly. Give it a listen and let me know what topics you’d like us to cover.
About the Author
David Billings, former Mayor of Fate, has served the community for over a decade. A longtime business leader in the telecommunication industry, Navy veteran, and resident of Rockwall County, he brings both professional and civic experience to his writing on government, budgeting, and local economics. He is a graduate of Leadership Rockwall, North Texas Commission Leadership Program, active in several Rockwall County non-profits boards, and the American Legion.
He is passionate about civic involvement in local government, maintaining transparent governance and thoughtful strategic planning to preserve a bright future for the regions.
