Exceptions to Disclosure
2024 Public Information Handbook • Office of the Attorney General
119
interpreted section 552.111 to incorporate both the deliberative process privilege and the work
product privilege.
601
1. Deliberative Process Privilege
Section 552.111 has been read to incorporate the deliberative process privilege into the Public
Information Act for intraagency and interagency communications.
602
The deliberative process
privilege, as incorporated into the Public Information Act, protects from disclosure intraagency
and interagency communications consisting of advice, opinion, or recommendations on
policymaking matters of the governmental body at issue.
603
The purpose of withholding advice,
opinion, or recommendations under section 552.111 is “to encourage frank and open discussion
within the agency in connection with its decision-making processes” pertaining to policy
matters.
604
“An agency’s policymaking functions do not encompass routine internal
administrative and personnel matters; disclosure of information relating to such matters will not
inhibit free discussion among agency personnel as to policy issues.”
605
An agency’s policymaking
functions do include, however, administrative and personnel matters of broad scope that affect the
governmental body’s policy mission.
606
For example, because the information at issue in Open
Records Decision No. 615 (1993) concerned the evaluation of a university professor’s job
performance, the statutory predecessor to section 552.111 did not except this information from
required public disclosure. On the other hand, the information at issue in Open Records Decision
No. 631 (1995) was a report addressing allegations of systematic discrimination against
African-American and Hispanic faculty members in the retention, tenure, and promotion process
at a university. Rather than pertaining solely to the internal administration of the university, the
scope of the report was much broader and involved the university’s educational mission.
Accordingly, section 552.111 excepted from required public disclosure the portions of the report
that constituted advice, recommendations, or opinions.
607
Even when an internal memorandum relates to a governmental body’s policy functions, the
deliberative process privilege excepts from disclosure only the advice, recommendations, and
opinions found in that memorandum. The deliberative process privilege does not except from
601
Open Records Decision Nos. 647 at 5-6 (1996), 615 at 5 (1993); see City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22
S.W.3d 351, 360 (Tex. 2000).
602
City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 351, 360 (Tex. 2000); Lett v. Klein Indep. Sch. Dist., 917
S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, writ denied); Tex. Dep’t of Pub. Safety v. Gilbreath, 842
S.W.2d 408, 412-13 (Tex. App.—Austin 1992, no writ); Open Records Decision No. 615 at 5 (1993).
603
City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 351, 361, 364 (Tex. 2000); Arlington Indep. Sch. Dist. v. Tex.
Attorney Gen., 37 S.W.3d 152, 158 (Tex. App.—Austin 2001, no pet.); Open Records Decision No. 615 at 5 (1993).
604
Austin v. City of San Antonio, 630 S.W.2d 391, 394 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1982, writ ref’d n.r.e.); see also City
of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 351, 361 (Tex. 2000); Lett v. Klein Indep. Sch. Dist., 917 S.W.2d
455, 456, 457 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, writ denied); Tex. Dep’t of Pub. Safety v. Gilbreath, 842
S.W.2d 408, 412 (Tex. App.—Austin 1992, no writ).
605
Open Records Decision No. 615 at 5 (1993); see City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 22 S.W.3d 364 (Tex.
2000); Lett v. Klein Indep. Sch. Dist., 917 S.W.2d 455, 456 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1996, writ denied).
606
Open Records Decision No. 631 at 3 (1995); City of Garland v. Dallas Morning News, 969 S.W.2d 548, 557 (Tex.
App.—Dallas 1998), aff’d, 22 S.W.3d 351 (Tex. 2000).
607
Open Records Decision No. 631 at 3 (1995).