Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMiscellaneousFrom: Jim Smith 'to: City Ha11.SKUENZEL .Date: 10/12/95 10:03am Subject: PRC - Wednesday, October 18, 1995 C-N Project Plan - Shenandoah Vet Clinic (95-814): I noticed that the elite plan does not show a container pad or sscreening.- This location could use a small 90'gallon container for service. However, I think that a pad and screening should be notated on the plan in case of .increased business, selling to another business that would requite a larger container and-more service, etc. This pad would not be used unless it was needed. This would save us from retro-fitting the location for FEL service. Conditional Use Permit - Saint Mary's Student Center (95-713): No problem. Parking Lot Plan - Budget Mini Storage Expansion (95-416): I do not see a container location notated on this site or any indication of garbage collection on the existing site. Let me know on this one. Final Plat - Edelweiss Estates Phase 3-A (95-239): No problem. Final Plat - Willow Run Phase One (95-230): No problem. Final Plat - University Park section II (95-240): No problem. ~1,~-fie ,c~~; ~h-gl4 ~5~ "~f~ • CITY OF COLLEGE STATIOI`I •• iEGAL DEPARTMENT •? - ~ P T OFFICE 80X9960 1101 TEXAS AVENUE ~. OS i COLLEGE STATION; TEXAS 77642-9960 ~ \:.. i _ (409)764.3507 `~ i'~ 1 - It I 1 MEMORANDUM ~~ TO: Natalie Thomas, Planning Technician FROM: Cameron Reynolds, Assistant City Attorney C/~ ~ RE: Open Meetings Act ~, DATE:. September; 21, 1995 ~~: BACKGROUND• .~ ' I attended a Planning and Zoning. meeting back on August 15, 1995..- You subnnitted a Request for Legal Assistance which'.developed from this meeting. Councilwoman Lynn ~, McIlhaney expressed concern over the events which transpired at this meeting. Specifically, .Councilwoman McIlhaney was concerned over discussion or consideration of an item that was not placed on the agenda for discussion at this particular Planning and Zoning meeting. Due to these events, you shave requested guidance as o he law regarding this issue and what is .permitted during the ''other business" session of governmental meetings: :QUESTION PRESENTED: Whether it is a violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act for a governmental body to ~~ '~ discuss or consider anitem-not specifically ,placed on the. agenda during the "other business" session of an open meeting? BRIEF ANSWER: Yes, it is a violation of the Texas: Open Meetings Act for a govemmental body to discuss or consider. an item of public .interest not specifically placed on the- agenda during the ~- ,~~, ":other business" session of an :open meeting. '` rnv/c../ag-sept95/openmeet I'~ i ~, Memo to Natalie Thomas September 25, 1995 ~~ Page 2 1 ., ' DISCUSSION: -.Open Meetings and Notice Requirements Section 551 of the Gov't Code contains the law on open meetings in Texas. Indeed, the intent. of the Texas Open Meetings Act is to safeguard the public's interest in knowing the workings of its governmental --bodies. Stockdaie v. Meno, 867 S.W.2d 123 (Tee. Civ. App. -Austin 1993, writ denied). For the purpose of keeping the public informed, Texas. municipalities are required to post advance notice of items to be discussed at ~ governmental meetings. Specifically, govemmental bodies of cities are required. to give written notice of the date, ~ hour, place,. and subject of each meeting held by the govemmental body. Tex. Gov't Code Sec. 551.041 (1995). Moreover, Texas caselaw has held that statutory advance entice of j a meeting held by a governmental body .should specifically disclose .the subjects to be considered at the upcoming meeting.: Cox Enterprises, Inc. v Board of Trustees of Austin Independent School District, 706. S.W.2d 956 (Tex. 1.986). •.:. The purpose of the notice requirement of .the. Texas Open.: Meetings Act is not to ensure i that specific. individuals receive notice.. of the topics of discussion: at ahe special mieeting, but rather at .the. public be given sufficient opportunity to inform. itself of the topic at the.' meeting. Rettberg v. Texas Department- of Health, 873 S.W.2d 408 (Tex. Civ. App. - Austin 1994, writ .denied). According to the Supreme Court of Texas, statutory notice is- ~ sufficient under the Texas Open Meetings-Act when it alerts a reader that some action will be taken. relative to a topic. See Cox Enterprises at 957. Moreover, as public interest in a matter increases, the Open Meeting Act. requires correspondingly more detailed. descriptions' of the subject to be discussed. What .does all this .mean to the City of College Station? It means. that the city is required to posh notice of all items to be discussed at College Station governmental meetings... Whathappens if the city does not provide the required statutory notice? It is simple, any acrion taken with regard to an item not placed on the agenda can be found null... and .void: That is, if adequate notice is not provided o the general public concerning an item to be discussed at a council meeting,'this lack of statutory.: notice can void the action. Forth v: Morgan, 622 S.W.2d 470 (Tex. 1981). In another Texas case, electric rates were set at a goveental meeting without proper notice being provided to the public. AlI of .the rates set..... at the meeting were 'subsequently voided for lack of proper notice. City of San f ,, Marcos v. Lower Colorado River Authority, 508 S.W.2d 403 (Tex. Civ. App. -Austin \' 1974, writ denied). Therefore,: the-city should make every effort' to continue to provide ~. rrw/c:/ag-sept95/openmeet ~, Memo to Natalie Thomas: .September 25,.:.1995'. Page 3 i _.~ notice to the general.. public of council meetings- and the items which will be considered. Indeed, :any: action taken on an item which has not been posted to the ..general .public can be voided. 1 Random. Issues Raised for Discussion ~' ` Another situation which could arise in a council meeting needs some discussion. What ~ happens. when an issue is raised by either a councilmember or a member of the public I~ --which has not :been placed on the ,.agenda for discussion? A particular section of the j Texas Open Meetings Act`addresses this situation. Section 551.042 reads as follows: 551.042 InquiryMade at Meeting ,, (a) If, at a meeting of a governmental. body, a member of the public or of the government body inquires about a subject for which notice has not been given as required by his subchapter, the notice provisions of ...this i subchapter do not. apply to: (1} a statement of specific factual information given in response -to the inquiry; or (2) a recitation of existing policy in response to the inquiry. (b) Any deliberation of or decision about the subject- of the inquiry shall be limited to a proposal to place the subject on the agenda for a subsequent meeting. Therefore, if an issue is raised by a member of the public. or a councilmember which has not been. placed on the agenda, the council is allowed to address the issue from a factual or policy standpoint. However, the council is not allowed to make any decision on the item. The council probably is besf served by notaddressing the-item and placing tlhe item on a later agenda for a subsequent meeting.. What about "Other Business" The analysis _ thus far brings the memo to one final :question. What can be discussed . ~~ ~ during the "other business" section of a governmental meeting? The other business :section should be used to address clerical and housekeeping matters. Perhaps members of ., the governmental board would. use this section to give. direction to city staff. Perhaps the "other .business" section of the meeting could be used to clarify matters discussed at '~ i rrw/c: /ag-sept95/openmeet i v - 4 Memo to Natalie Thomas September 25, 1995 ~; Pa e 4 g j previous meetings (although `this could be ..potentially dangerous. if used more ex _ansivel p Y)• A good rule of thumb to follow is to steer clear of'discussing items .which would require a posting on a separate agenda. Clearly, the "other business" section should not be used to circumvent the ose of the Open Meetings Act and allow.. discussion and consideration'.. pmP `ce. A ood exam le of what to avoid would of items which would. otherv~nse requue nott g p be a situation- like the following:: During the "other business" aection of a Planning and Zoning meeting, one '; of the. board members makes.. a motion to preview a request of an applicant scheduled for the next week. The applicant is not present and no notice has ~ been given for the review and consideration of this item. 'Obviously, this action would be inappropriate and any decision made would' be `subject to becomin void. g ~~ A ;good policy for governmental. boards to follow in governmental meetings is to stick to discussing-the items which have been placed on the .agenda. Discussing only issues for which proper notice, has been provided to the public is the safe and wise. policy. CONCLUSION: ~~ There has been some concern expressed over the discussion of items not specifically placed on agendas-.for governmental meetings. Under Texas law, municipalities are required to provide sufficient notice to the. public of items which will be discussed and considered at governmental meetings. Items which are of .public .interest and. not placed on the a ends should not be considered by a governmental body. Actions taken on items g ~' discussed without proper: notice can be voided. If an issue is raised at a governmental meeting without proper notice, the governmental body may respond to the question with a statement of fact or policy. "However, the governmental body is required to place the issue on the agenda for a subsequent meeting before any action can be taken. I'i CR;rrw I .~ ~~ rrw/c: /ag-sept95/openmeet