Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 1981-04-27 Agendas APRIL 27, 1981 "D.l\TE: Apri 1 27, 1981 .. .~.. '"" 1.1 SUBJECT: e - North Texas Commi 5S i on Dues DEPART~1ENT : BACKGROUND: City Manager Membership with North Texas Commission. We were advised during budget session to pay for this membership from Hotel/Motel Tax. If this still stands then we will do so. Originally, in October we were unsure as to the membership fees. ,e CITY COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED: BUDGETED ITEfvt: YES NO x ACCOUNT NU~18ER: Hotel/Motel Tax -- Balance in account $35,069.86 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- e ~ ,- THE STATE OF TE~~S e KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: COUNTY OF TARRANT This Contract and Agreement made and entered into on the 1st day of May, A.D., 1981, by and between the City of North Richland Hills acting by and through Charles W. Williams, its duly authorized City Manager, hereinafter referred to as the "City" and the North Texas Commission acting by and through its duly authorized President, Worth M. Blake, hereinafter referred to as the "Commission", WIT N E SSE T H: e WHEREAS, the Commission is an independent, non-profit cðrporation estab- lished under the laws of the State of Texas for the purpose of developing and implementing a comprehensive and effective economic marketing and promotional program for the North Texas Region which Region includes Tarrant County and the City of North Richland Hills, Texas; and WHEREAS, the City is charged with the responsibility of promoting and preserving, among other things, the economic welfare and quality of life of its citizens; and WHEREAS, the success or failure of the Commission's purposes and objec- tives has a direct impact upon the economic welfare and quality of life of the citizens of the City; NOW THEREFORE, In consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, the parties do hereby covenant and agree as follows: ARTICLE 1 The Commission shall commence the services contemplated to be furnished and performed hereunder on the 1st day of May, 1981. e ARTICLE 2 The term of this contract and agreement shall be for a period of one (1) year from the 1st day of May, 1981. ARTICLE 3 City agrees to pay to the Commission as compensation for services render- ed hereunder the sum of Two Thousand and nO/100 Dollars ($2,000.00) per annum, payable as follows: In a lump sum on annual basis. e e e AR1'ICLE 4 a) The Co~nission covenants and agrees to: Design, develop and implement a regional marketing (advertising) campaign that will position the Region, and as such the City, positively in the minds of a carefully selected audience of national and international bus- iness and governmental executives. As the marketing program is totally regional in nature, the City's name mayor may not be listed in related marketing literature. Design, develop and impleruent a routine, regionally-oriented procedure for responding to advertising inquiries. This procedure would provide for, but not be limited to, inclusion of a city developed and produced (Commission approved) response piece. Design, develop and implement an aggressive regional AViation Marketing and Development Program targeted to foster the continued development of D/FW Airport and its aviation product. Assist, as may be requested, by the City's Chief Administrative Officer, in the preparation of regional economic and aviation statistics, studies, charts, graphs and other materials reflecting actual or projected regional economic development, which may impact the City. Make available to the citizens and residents of the City such materials, including economic research, as it has and may develop, gather or produce for enhancing the economic health and well-being of the North Texas Region. Develop and implement a marketing strategy to increase the area's inter- national image. Furnish regular economic-type reports to the City's Chief Administrative Officer with the understanding that such reports will also be furnished to the local news media for dissemination to the general public. Continue its current successful programs and implement such new and innovative programs as will further its corporate objectives and common City's interests and activities. b) c) d) e) f) g) h) ARTICLE 5 It is covenanted and agreed that the Mayor of the City shall bean ex- officio member of the Board of Directors of the Commission and, as such, is the City's designated representative to vote the City's membership shares at all official elections of the Commission. If the Mayor is unable to serve, his position on the Board will be filled by the City's Manager. ARTICLE 6 The Commission agrees to assume and does hereby assume all responsibil- ity and liability for damages sustained by persons or property, whether real e or asserted, by or from the carrying on of work or in the performance of services performed and to be performed hereunder. The Commission covenants and agrees to, and does hereby indemnify and save harmless the City and all of its officers, agents, and employees from all suits, actions or claims of any character brought for or on account of any injuries or damages, whether real or asserted, sustained by any person or property by or in consequence of any neglect, omission, act or conduct of Commission, its agents, servants or employees. ARTICLE 7 e Notwithstanding the provisions of Paragraph 2 above, it is agreed this contract may be cancelled and terminated by either party upon giving thirty (30) days written notice so to cancel or terminate to the other party hereto. The terminal 30 days shall commence upon receipt of such noti~e by the ad- dressee and shall conclude at midnight on the 30th day thereafter. In the event this contract terminates under the provisions of this paragraph either unilaterally or by agreement of the parties, if not otherwise stipulated, it is agreed only the pro-rata portion of the terminal monthly installment for service shall be paid on the 1st of such terminal month. Upon payment o~ tender of such amount, all of the Cityts obligations hereunder shall be dis- charged and terminated and no action shall lie or accrue for additional benefit, consideration or value for or based upon the services performed under or pursuant to this agreement. ARTICLE 8 Commission shall pay all taxes, royalties, and expenses incurred in connection with services under this agreement, except as provided in Article 3 herein. ARTICLE 9 e Commission shall observe and abide by all applicable federal laws, state statutes and the Charter and Ordinances of the City of North Richland Hills, and all rules and regulations of any lawful regulatory body acting thereunder in connection with the services performed hereunder. ARTICLE 10 No member of or delegate to the Congress of the United States or the Legislature of the State of Texas shall be admitted to any share or part of this contract or to any benefit arising therefrom. ARTICLE 11 No member, officer or employee of the City or of any local public body, during his tenure or one (1) year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in this contract or the proceeds thereof. This prohibition is not intended and should not be construed to preclude payment of expenses legitimately incurred by city officials in the conduct of Commission business. , .t . . ' ARTICLE 12 e Venue of any action brought on or under this agreement shall lie exclu- sively in Tarrant County, Texas. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this agreement to be . . signed by their proper corporate officers as first above specified, and have caused their proper corporate seal to be hereto affixed the day and year first above written. CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS BY: City Manager ATTEST: e City Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: City Attorney NORTH TEXAS COMMISSION BY: President e ATTEST: Secretary APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY: General Counsel - pltBI'·~'~~..E_llBa',.. ~ ~ It ((it!, of ~ortb l\ícblanb j!}íllg .11ortb l\ícblanb ~íU5, t!l:txas CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE To PAT HUGHES e In recognition of ·6ive. years of faithful service to the City in '¡'he FVLe pepartment. Dated at North Richland Hills, Texas, this ?(}:th day of AYJJcil~ -'-21_1 Department H~d - ! " , - e e TO: Chuck Williams, City Manager DATE April 21, 1981 FROM: Wanda Calvert, Planning & Zoning Coordinator SUBJECT: Zoning Cases to be heard by the City Council .April 27, 1981 PZ 81-5 APPROVED by P & Z (3 were contacted) Request of KEM Advertising for Bank of North Texas and Hudiburg Chevrolet to rezone a portion of Lot 1, Block 2, Carder Addition, from the present classification of Commercial-Specific Use-Sale of Alcoholic Beverages to a proposed classification of Commercial-Specific Use-Billboard. This property is located south of Airport Freeway and next to the store IIWallpaper to GO.II PZ 81-6 APPROVED by P & Z (15 were contacted) Request of Dean Nelson for William M. Kerch to rezone Lot 7, Block 6, Clearview Addition, from the present classification of 2F-9-with the stipulation that a certain floor plan be used to a proposed classification of 2F-9. This property is located at the northwest corner of Maplewood Drive and Joreen Drive. e e -DATE: April 21, 1981 SUBJECT: PZ· 81-5 Zoning Request for a portion of Lot 1, Blk. 2, Carder Addition, from Commercial-Specific Use-Sale of Alcoholic Beverage to Commercial- Speclflc Use-Blllboard. DEPARTMENT: Planning and Zoning BACKGROUND: This proposed sign is to be located south of Airport Freeway and next to the store IIvlallpaper to GOII. The sign will be advertising Bank of _~~·_~~_T.~xas and Hudiburg Che~y. It will be a flag type sigh with the flag over the bu'ild:'ìng so it~/on't interfere with the - _. .... ......--... ,,-~ ---...... '~.'-' .'... . -- ...__.~..-...,,~- tr:affic~ ------~....._,.<,..-.'.... ._.....--~.......,'"'" .<,~... ,~........-__....- ,................... __.~;t."........_........._ ---...-__.._.""-............... ,. __.___ ;....'.........,r..·_~·-.. ..........,......... ------...'--.~....~'..._... ~_.... ;p..,,-_.......,.."'-_....~,....-... . ,........-_..... ,.... "'·,.·.,....,.._.,,~·.....,..._......_..,..~r."'·- .-..... ~_-..._. Thet'e \vas no opposition of this request. 'Tht>t'C' ""ere 3 property owners contacted,. ~~.... ..._~..._.....,.,_...... --~\...._- .-.-......----....".-...-,..,,--- ---, ...".,......-.,.....-,,-.-..."- ....... . ,.__..~~_.1"..,., .....__..~.....,-,_........._.."":.. '.-'" "'....-,'~.. -~_...,..' -.... .. .' - ...-. -,.......-:...~.."..--.,,...-~-,,...-....,~_._~ The Planning & Zoning Commission recornrnended pproval of this zoning request~ -------~ ~-_.' --~--_...................._..._-"'--- .,--..., ....-...... _._~ --,~_._.__. ~_.'_.._..._.....__._,..-.-.....~F-'...__.,__..._....-_..___.... ......'......._......,..-......"'~._- ..___ ....... 4 '._, ....~.......__.,...,_~:.-......_,..' ....".'._,:,....'.._.-. H _...._ ....._.......,. ~..--..,.._..~. ...---....~_...:-~,--,..-_._-....._._-,.. ._.... _.~·.....__...._..'.'·.·h__ --.... --.. ~........._...,._-,..,.--..-...._-_..-, CIT'Y COUNCIL J\C'fION REQUIRED: .8QQr.Q.Yst'L, .3J.f.. .d_Ç~,(t,l.il.L.Qf z on i n 9 r P fll J P. S t '__._...'t~_''''_'''''''_''¡''''''''''_''.''"''''N'"'' '-..-'(õ."'- ..~---'_..----...... _ 'r-" ,...,..... .....__"".,......... ..·.,_c··_..--·,__ '---......_~_.....~......,~~_..-.-._..'\I'I'I'_.-.. --------...._----~---.............~.._~.......--.... .~._.---..-- ,. "--'.~..._,,-- -..... ...-....._...,~.., -~.~....~~._----,...._.'-?,..',........-.-....~--- BUDGE"TED IT Er·t1; YES NO x ACCOUNT NUMBER: N/A - - .... - -- --- -- ... ... ...,. -. ..... ....... ... _ ... - ... _ ~ __ _ -. __ -.- _ __ __ _ __ _ ... _ _ .... _ ..... ~ c.... '10~'" ...... ... ..... ..~'. .... .... ...... _ __ -. ... _ ___ _ __ _ __ .... _ _ .... .... .... _ __ _ _ ... .... -.' __... ..... .,. ~.... ....... ... ....,.....-~" ( e ( - . Page 13 p ~t. Z r-linutes r1arch 26, 1981 ( PS 81-9 POSTPONED PZ 81-5 (. .<-> engineer's comments and Elk.. 42ß2 in pr~sent form and that it \'10~ e resubmitted im~ediately ~~A:^iiat it l;.-lould be for slngle s t.r.)?\:~y rOVT bOllses. The r·f.r t, N e~.¡rna n. carried 4-·0,. Request of Charles BeanE:. fOT: replat of Lots 33R-43R, Block 42Rl~ and Lots 67R-77R, Block 42B2~ Richland Terrace Addition. tlr. N etvrnan moved 7 secon,r1'.~d b)T 1wlr.. B O\.¡ en ~ to postpone PS 81-9~ The motion carried 1+,..(': '. I{equest of KE~l Ad·vert..ic? for Bank of North Texas and Hudih T, h.evrolet to rezone a portion of 1\(, ..r Block. 2, Carder Addition, frow. esent classification of Co{Un<:~;:(.:i.¿\.l···~Specifíc Use- Sale of Alcoholic ReV0 to a pro- posed classificatJ.on CC¡5.TllllercJ/al- Specific Use-Bil1.boéi.L~·'. 'rrL~..~:~ property is located south of Ai.rpc~:~. ~Fr F'.F:\..Jay next to the store '~~~allpape:t Gr)L' .. Kerry E. Moseley carn'··. n" He said he owns the ground éJ.Ltd in. con-- junction with Bank of UòrtT}. rfexas and Hudiburg Chevrolet., he \·;=L~Jbes to install a sign. "t-lr. Tucker asked abo;J!..~. tJJ.e tlQ.ight.. Mr. Moseley said -the IH;.¡}(~i.l1)Unï \.¡ould be 60'. It would not obstruct anyone's view. He said it would be a 14' x 48' flag type sign. Mr. Greenfield asked what direction it "tv-ould face.' Mr. Moseley said it would face the traffic on Airport Freeway" ~lr... },Ioseley showed the artist f s drawings of the sign. .,-.-_·...--~-..,....~·....,......"'"=-ttë:réfCí-e SL ... öf -rt)"?dTt--?;r~:?~}":· ;~cnf"~f~j,:--\\fTi-r±ëmr-M-:--:· Kerch to rezone 7 Block. 6 ~ CIearview Add.-¡ ~.on.); classification ot 2F~9 with e stipulation that: ::'1 certaJ . IIoor plan be used to a pr:oposerl ,7.. a.ssification ,... of 2F-9. ..,/ This property j;;~l.OCZ-I L.e.d <It the north- ./ 'Jest corn~0 Hapl(,:[¡lUod Drive and Joreen Drive. ,/ / D" Nelson came forvlard to represent lr. Kerch. He said the present plans are oversized al1d it. is a Spanish structure. He said. ·tle·.\~ants to build a duplex but llse his O~<Tn plans. Page 14 P Ei Z :t-[inutes 1·1a r C [1 26, 1981 ( e PZ 81-5 APPROVED . ~Pl ßl 6 /. / e L ( .:.>- tlr. }[oseley said it \'lould flag over the building so it wouldni be over the parking area. He said t would not interfere with traffic l-Ir. Greenfield asked \',/b.'2re the pole \·¡ill be located. t·1r. rloseley said it\\lould be next to \vrlere the "~~n is in ftlJallpaper to Go". He said they have an exclusive lease of all of the property and the permission of the landownec. Mr. Moseley said they have stipulations no t to interf ere lli t.l', t}¡;::. tenants. }lr. Greenfield c>¿111 to speak in f ¿(\j':,.~ 0:- to this request to There being no CH.ï.e the Chairman sed fJnyone \.¡ishing in opposition r~ e. corne f or\.¡ard. to speak, public hearing. :rlr. N e'tvman ruo \/ to approve PZ ¿: ~~CC():ì,';2d by ~lr. Tucker The motion CaT(' !:.··o. Helen Butler, 7913 Maplewood~ carne fonvard. She said her property line connects the property in question. She wanted to know the size) etc. Mr. Nelson said there would be 1041 sq. f r p P 1"': ~; (l.f\..,-.b.a..c~.,.,f.) 11 t Pill P 0 1:';S¡ r}" p ~ P1{ ~ r; 0 n , Ie j t i ~' ,~ e e KNO\lVLTON- ENGLlSH-FLO\lVER CONSUL TI N(~ ENC: IN EERS / Fort \Vorth-r)~111é1s March 19, 1981 Planning & Zoning Commission city of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E. Loop 820 North Richland H111s, Texas 76118 Subject: \\!(' . 1, -.... 3-002, CITY OF ("fORTH RICHLAND HILLS, ZON I NG PLj\·~t;-~·f~T~\¡;IT~f~~·'-~pZ 81- 5 , C. s. U. ALCrfÕI~.~-·':fOC"~~S. U. BILLBOARD ._-,- ........---~-_.,.- We have received the subject zoning case \'Ie caul d adequa t·~.':! ,)I 1 Dca te th is prope rt,y be passed b,y bot,¡": the Planning & Zoning lJ /~., ./' ¡:() / ~-¿:<...--t...t:;;\~--1.L' · RICHARD w. ~LBIN, P.E. RWA/l jc cc: Mr. Denn-is Horvath, Assistant City rf1anag;~t "-. .--' our review and find that 2 zoning map should it 'i on and the Ci ty Counc i 1 ~ 550 FIRST STATE E)i-\Ï'n~<~ I-]L,DG. · BEDFORD. TEXAS 76C);::;· ;']/;-!.t33-6211. METRO/267-3367 ,../ pz- S> 1-5' SK~/ch PROPOJ'ED .fhðWI/ß SIGN LOCLlT/ON on LOT i 1 BL.O{'r- 2 CARDER AOOl710N 2nd f,/inq NORTH R/CJlLANO /IlLS, TARRANT {'t){)A/TY, TemJ (~$ retort/eel in 16/ .1&!-//5, fj. 4/ I ORTt.T.) DES CHI r T ION A pro po sed s i g n to bel <.) C [1 t e d n n Lot l, B L () c k 2, Car de r i\ d d i t i () n , No r t 11 :~j (' h 1 ¡ 1 n d HilI s , Tar ran ten un t y, T c X él S as r e cor d e din \' 0 1 U 1:1 C J g ð - 1 1 ), p ¿] !~ c 4 1, n pc d I ~ e cor d s, Tar r ;1 n t County, Texas, \·11 th its location bcinr; dc"scr i hl)cl ;is fnl.1 O\vS: BEe I NN IN Gat the Nor t 11 e a s t c () r n c r 0 f sa i ù 1__ () t 1, B 1 0 C k 2· TH ENe E Sou t 11 0 des r e e s 0 7 ill i nut e s 11 est, I 1 ~ . S f (! e t \\' j t I ) t 11 c E a s t 1 i n e 0 f s n i d Lot 1, Block 2 to a point; I'll EN C E N (1 r t h 8 9 degrees 4 1 m i n II t (> s 5 5 s l~ C (ì n d s 1,T V s t" S 1 . 1 fee t t n t 11l: center point of a 3.5 foot dianH?ter circle for the base of s<lid ;)ropos(·d si~~n. TYPE 3 ~ ~ ,~ ~~ ~~ ~ c::i \n ~ ~ ~ ~\ ()\ Q 0" q,Oþ. ()ç t~ ~\" {~~ ~O Y\ )f, ,b'o' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . . 21' ~ ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ 9: ,~" ~~ ~ t ~ ~, ~ ~ ~ " ~ ~ ~ ~ . ;' all. 3- /~-¿/ f)4lMt e. ~ llEGISTEIlED PUBLIC SURVEYOR. P.o. BOX 1034 268-22" HURST. TEXAS &/- /j'ß e i :'i :,;.- ~ ~1 '" --~-~_. ...-.-..... -0 p.j ,) '-' ~ 'i- ~ '" . -,-~~~..~..__.".. ....- - ...----.---....-....---...-. - .----wp-Z--g i-¡;-------------- æ ¢ ~-t4 1 t 'r ~ s~ It~~", ~ ¡.~ . -- r! · . .... _.. "1f - ;! r- r- - t( ..J \tOok _ r-...;. £..2 ! .f\.§) ! Jf- l¡;j ~! ~ j~.- ~.1 ~". "âJi --..... i --; I -, JQJJ-h ~ c::JD I: ITa] , -: flifl C] ~ ! =ii § ~·n I I .'i ---LU. ~ I-i ~ .. : I.!I ~ ==11', --t ~ ~ cmr: t _. '¡f"0 ._ ..__ - --._~ _. ...:r................,.,. . ·--'....'1.......,..··',' ....... ~~ [Ç ß\§J. ~ @ ~ ~ ~ ~ c I l~:æ ~ 11 ~ ~ ~ ~~ I II 11 '"'f I J OJ '- ~-- -- I : ....' ,- ~ '" ,. ..~- ..... -., ~-........,.-............ - ~- -....,.-.'.... -- .... a: c:: 10 ¡o ~I- Z W :æ ia. ~9 ~ . .~ . ~ , ,.... ~:¡ :::Ji -'6 Q..! '-' ~I~ +' . \J It ~I "fie '-~ ~. Œ.: '" ... . e e e ORDINANCE NO. 1<61 lJj :ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY I~\¡ f~Ct<JRDi\.NCE !iI'lli 1~~~TIClE XXIX CHANGES AND ¿~þit}'iCì;~E¡rrS J . SECTION 1 OF ORDINA.~CE #179, ZONING OHDIN~-;CE OF '~rHE ·CITY· Of NORTH RtCliLANO H:CLL5.~J' TE:t~S. . Pi\SSED. ¡\PPROVED ~ AND ADOPTED ilt ~r{1t:· ~'tj~NNING J~}iD ZON!NGCO~ISSION AND TH£ CITY COUNCIL OF ¡HE CITY OF NORTti. RIC:-JLAND HILL:5.<~ i\10'lS):BER 13. 1957) AS AMENDED' JANUARY 27. 1915 AFTER APPROPRIATE i'~~OTICE Ä4\1D PUBLIC HEJ1rRING "THE FOLLOWING. RECO~£NDATIOM IS SUBMITTED Tf.) ~rHE CITY COUNCIL· OF THE CITY OF nOj~~Tri :{rCHb\ND HILLS BY TI1E PLANHING AND ZDNINGCCMMISSION: .' RESOLVED ·that on CasJ! No.· PZ 81-5 the i)t)~¡ fJ'c¥4-ì.ng described prope.rty shð·~~l· be . _ re:zòneø from" Commerçi al-SP"eCillc Use"-Sa"le 'of Alcol'Ùi]"1"c "6eyerages to commerc-1al,,·Speclflc US·é-B1Îlböard'. ,. ..... .......:.'. . .' ....," .'... .....,. ,.. ~; I ~~,.....~»rI-....,..,_' 1V'-'Þ,......" .......",....~....;-.' ..............~~(~-~..... :-r~ "t A p.rop(v~, ((: be 1 ocated on Lot 1, B'lo<:'« ',J (.: trier' Addi ti on, North Rich'" Hi 11 s, 'fa )"Y'Enr!.·, Coun t:y, T.exas as recorded in \'.; t Ufnc~ ~~~H8-115, Pa ge 14, Deed Recor'd~, ~ Tarrant Coun, Texas.. \vith its location bein~J desc b'ed as follows: BEGINNING at. the Nor'theast corner of said Lot 1, Block 2; THENCE SC)U¡ () L t 1 PI . ¡ .., o , ¡j 0 C ¡( . r ~ ) 07 minutes West, 11?~5 to d point; th the East line of sa dC~~Jrées 41 minutes 55 second~~ t d-iameter circle for the 51.1 feet to the center sald proposed sign. THENCE point of ! ~ · ~ '" Prase 2 e e e \ . This Droperty is located .south of Airport Freeway, next to the store J J ~~ a 1 Þrp a per to' Go II .' .' ' ," f\PPROVED BY THE PLANNING j~ND ZONING GCj'4}iISSION ïHIS 26th ._..,--__,~:~:.JJÃy (JF MARCH, 1981 . (k' it,f· ~. ~þ /)tl ". r· I 1 . . /' . J¿. ~.lj I__c...) . CR~ÜRi\¡fAN. ÞLAN~ING AND ð~Hfiš~(;C~:Mf5$ION . BE IT ORDAINED BY. THE cIrt COUNCIL ,)F -fHE CIT'Y OF NORTH RI iN REGtIL¡\R SESSION THAT THE ~.: GE3C~tI 3£0 PROPERTY IN CASE r!ERE8Y HE ZONED 11i15 . . 5Mi!tLS ACTING IS DAY OF '_"-".A.~·___~'_·___·' .' 1979. ~____-,....~"" '.·~·'..·....."1"l"..~_''"'.··.-.' .-....-..-.............~_...~-~..._-I'........:-~ . "'¥"'-'·'#_'>·""'.~<".,.!iIo:_"·"".",""'·,,,,\'~":"_·~o"'·~·'·-....:.,.";......~~ ATTEST: . CITY SECRETARY JEANETTE MOORE . . CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS . APP!{OYED AS TO FORM AND LEGAlI1'Y C¡¡Y ATTORNEY CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS I FW¡ 0 R-- DICK F A RAM . .._~'~."~.,~x.~"._.._"._~~.,__ CITY OF NORTH RICHlAND·HILLS· e e e -D,qTE: Apr i. 21, 1 ....--.... ~- ._- SUBJECT: ~.!_._~?~~=~___Zoning request on Lot 7~~ B_}__~.~._...§.~f_.~.~,_~arview Addition, from 2F vrith the stipulation that (~ certa"jn ;"loor plan be used to 2F-9. _.."._....._._.... _._..-.____ ..__._", ·z·._ ,.,_. DEPART~1ENT = Piann·îng & Zoning .. --~..._.........~ "-"'. ._-... BACKGROUND: i'1r\. Kerch wi shes to bui 1 d ~_~).~P~1._~~~...~E5_.__~_h -j s proper.ty & 1 i ve in one side and rent out the other. He wants to u~e his own. p1an instead of the one attached t~__t~~.__~.~'d-inance for this piece o~_..l?~oP_~~~Y.:_..... _.~~__~.........._ ,_,_' ...~" _ _...·__.·._w.~~_ -..._ - -.--' ~ ..-..'--~~.....-~......- -'._- .,...-.. .--.....-.-..........-... This pro petty ~is ~located at the northwest cor'ner" of ~·1aplewood Drive & Joreen Drive ._..-..'---'..~'"-.-..-'~......... ~.:_.-.'._..-....._---- .,.......·.~~.____..........·~I·.._ .... ._....~~.,__-;'+.--.._..__.or ".' u·· ,., _.,...... .....'- ~ .'-.....-....,'.-.,- ..... . ..' -~"'''''.~''' .........- ......_...'_..~. .......... . There was no tion to this request~ 1/J.:::y (t 1 ~.) property owners contacted.. The Pl ann i r.i.9-_?~_,.Z.ç~o~LrLLConlmi S5 i on reCOmrlli~Jlds~.çL._j·-~_¡).).c.Q:~( ::·:~L__oj·:· th is zon i ng reques t. .-.- _'.'." ._____...r..-..__._~_ -~..'-'+.--.._.,.__.._.. .._.. '- ~.+...._.,---- C 1TY COU~'JC L. I\C r JON P.EQU I REO: Approva 1 c~~__._._.___._:.:._____~:~L~~th is zon i ng req ues t. -- '-"-~---'""---"-~--- . --.....-.--.-....--..-.,.-----.........-......-.. ...- .-.-..--.- -"'.'. ..._.--~.--- "-"'- ---...,.-... ...._---..,.......~....,.,. --.,..-.......----... BUDGETED 1 NO X E~S -- ACCOUNT NUMBER: N/A -"........ .. . . ...._-.._ ,",__0' ._..~"__.,,,.._.._.....·..-·,.~_.·.L ....·a. __ __ .-..... _ -. _ -.. _ _ _ _.. ~ .:..... ......_.. ..·.n.. ........ _ ~... _ _ .....-. _ ... __ _ __ _ ....... _ _ ... _ -. _. _,_. ......_ M'. ~,;, .. ~r ",..-,..._ .'--.. ..~... .~~ ,-..... "t.. ".~. ....,; ..-c. ..... ..... _...... _ _ ~..... ~_..,. __ _ __ _ --. ~ _ __.... ......~ _ð ,.. f.- .. I \ - / \ - , ' e }1 age l!~ p é~ Z l:linu tes ì~larch 26 ~ 1981 ~_._-",. -, -". __7/ PZ 8];;/5 AP"P/l<'OVED /' / PZ 81-,",6 ( .--:::', ~;:.,. /:/ /.::f7 .4:--- -",."-,.,"' .--:/;/,/ ....ý' ~~/ .;;7 ./,ý :/. c r-lr. ~'l"Jseley said it \~ould flag ove'c the building so it wouldn't be over the p(1 ckin~~ area. He said it \.Jould i n l~ c~.c f c. r e VI i t h t r a f fie. r-lr. Greenfield asked \"her,eo- the pole \.¡ill be located. ~..j' tlr. t·loseley sai~¿/,í-t \.Jould be next to \'¡}lere the tJ\'l:.~.r..i·s in rt\vallpaper to Go".. He said theý have an exclusive lease of :!.Jl ,of" the property a'ncl the permLss~t_On of tJlê landowner. ......;..1 ,,;...-r /ç:/}lr" Hoseley said they have stipulations ,}".-:P' not to interfere \vith the tenants. // ·t-Lr" G rr-=~(~nfield called f or anyonE; \vis h:~.ng 1:0 ~~-pr\ak in favor of or in opposi. j'.o i.'hi~.) request to please come f:CYC\'/':'L T1H~·ì:"r·~ l)(~~ing no one \vishing to spea!~~;p î'.h,{,\. ct\.~;ltrman closed the public h è-tt'. N e\ifman moved, seconded by }Ir. Tuc ker tu :J p provE-~ PZ 81-5. "'~""_""""'~"-~~."'__""'"':. ,"',..'~;,.....,-..~._.~-_...._.._. ..,.."-....-.......--,.-.- ....... _..____..-.-.~..._.'II!IIoJo-~~~.....~.....~~......~:~_ ILlIte: !f1nLion carried 4-0. Requc\~t of Dean Nelson for \Jilliam. [,1.. Kerc:'I1, to rezone Lot 7, Block 6, Clc.,-·lcvl~e~J Addition, from the pr(~~·~(;~n;_· classification of 2F-9 with the stipulation that a certain floor plan be used to a proposed classification of 2F-9. T11is property is located at the nOTtll~ \Ves t corner of lv1aplewood Drive and Jo'reen .Dr .1.-ve 0 Dean Nelson came forward to represent Mr. Kerch. He said the present plans are oversized and it is a Spanish s trncture. He said . he· .'tvants to b'uild .a duplex but use his own plans f- He1ell Butler, 7913 1v!aple'tvood, carne forward. She said her property line connec ts the property in ques tion.> She wanted to know the size, etc. Mr. Nelson said there would be 1041 sq. ft~ per side, basic contemporary elevation .. . ...' e e - \ Page 15 p & Z 1·1inutes rlarch 26, 1981 I. PZ 81-6 APPROVED : ( , . - _.;:/ brick structure with composition roof. He said both fénnili(~s \,.Jould ente-r on one common drive off Joreen.. Welton Butler asked ~bout the distance between the houses~ Mr. Greenfield said the minimum side ya-rd is 6 ft. }lr. Nelson said the dc~~~ign- ""ill increase the value. A Síualle-.r: structure \vould look less expensi~eN He said the elevation makes it look larger than it is. Mr. Nelson sllo~¡E~d tlle plal1s to the Commission and ,t1.nd r'lrs.. Butler. Mr. Tucker showed the present plans. ~lr. Butler asked y.'fho ",¡as to live in it.. }lr. Nelson sa:L(~ l~'L{ ,. t~(::I:·c.h plans to live there, but he d:Jç::~)1:l1 t: know \Jhich side he ,.¡ill occupy ~ 1[e sn.ið }lr.. Kerch travels a lot and· \.¡allt:~·; LL,·~ tection of a neighbor. The ChaÍrman c.1..o,'3(:;<1 public hearing. }1r. Bo~.¡en moved, seconded by 1,lr. '"fucker:t to approve PZ 81~6. The I!lotion~ carried L~--~O. Rey Uè~ L vL "tV il1.icl.Trr--t~pd.i.u lù L ~¿vu,:= d. portion of Lot 83 Block 33, Nor'East Addition from the present classification of IF-9 to a proposed classification of ___ Local Retail-Specific Use-Snowcone Building. ~___ This property is located on the west side ~f Davis Blvd.." approximately 414 feet tt~h of Lola Drive~ This property will - ~....... .. .. t be kno~s I,ot 8R, l)lock 33, Nor East '~~ Addition. - ~~->_':>~~,~~__ ." -~~- The Chairman stated t11a-t~1t~pain requested this be postponed unt~~xt month. .~ e e e I<r,·¡ VVLTON- ENGLlSH-FLO\¡VERS, ; NC. CON 5 U L T Ii'\,) C~ ENe I NEE R S / Fort VV 0 r t h -[) a II a 5 ~1arch 18, 1981 Planning ~~ Zon-ing Commission City of North Richland Hills 7301 N.E" Loop 820 North Richland Hills, Texas 76118 Subject: 3-002, CITY OF NORTH RICH LAND HILLS, ZONING PLÃT-'-REVIEH, PZ 81-6, 2F-9 (RES~f{ICJ~IQNS) TO 2F-9 We have received the subject zoning case for our review and find that we could adequately locate this property on the zoning map should it be passed b~j both the Pl ann; ng & Zoni ng Commi 55 i on and the Ci ty Counci 1 . ~f / , / /) 7 r---~W~ ~ RICHARD W. ALBIN, P.E. Rt"JAj 1 j c cc: Mr. Dennis Horvath, Assistant City Manager 550 FIRST ST p..TF·. E3AbJr\. BLDG. · BEDFORD, TEXAS 7E:<)?í <-3, /203-6211· METRO/267-3367 .j ·t- (" ~ ----_.-..~. ......\. -~~-- . (- \ ,,---) /, ¿-~~~-_. ,C~~\ ..) I ;' l ~.-~ () (¡ 'J ö "( (:~,(J¿--, \.- ) \ \. ..' {--- "-. e ê~:~:,~\ .'/-) '.( --..1_ ( l. c':-G vll. ,/-lL 'I)) _~</Q_()~~~~~i H·CL~,'J (.) r\l E- S" ",;{ G \ -f (-- ." , ..( ~~·v..,,-- ~ -~ '-~ ---I ..L', __~______ \..." ",,-' ,~ /:::> to ¡ /~ _./"":'---<._,~Q-_....--- <:"-L.'/C .-1 (-) /~~ " L /' .-L~\)",~___ .' J~J /~ C~~_,-ß /~ ,j ¡) ~../.'./.. ...~----- .\~ ~-\~ ~j/L~ (J CLQ~) / ;.t~ /'S..... ,^-.---------t~_ /'L.----2 ---<.:~ .\..--1'.-/~ /fr- -/~ :>~-j ~IyL~ -~ó ~~\... -/-- /·.....Á-/ <,\ (.J.. _.~ ",-0.:::/~~----- . ~..--r______ \\ -::L ('1 /'L~R_____ /'t/C,~ .. /'_/~ .., /,(~'--(..-A'~------~-Z-.- '~6 --fl n /\'-.\.(-_.......~ e tC.--ó--J~ . ~ ,~ () } -'---~ ~------~--<--{ .. ~ .. ....A ., .r.J /t~ '-_'-' <J .A.-~ .~~ --^-~ ,j . "I /(,-~)- ~-------t_: '.\ ,:,.·7_ ,.v'--~_'-_'--"-....'--.......7~ f¿î / ,'"\ / ...-;, _,,..<,. "J ,.. - " ~ "-....--------=-- '- \ ,¡ .~ -_./: f) ~ . ~~ /'7__·"'''--~::l-_______(,,-~___ /==-.., ~ "~ /1À./~4 _ ¿--;\--<- /, \ \ \ \ '~ ".~ {;~~ . .... ~ -~ " i~&i1~~-z It pz. ; I -l, ~ T () AIL PAR 'I 1 F. \, I\.I~· R ~. S 1" ~ () I' P R F \U S E S S t I R \' F \ r [) -_......__.~-'..__._. -'- * -- ---.-. -- - -- ---- _... -- '-'- .-- Ih¡, I' 10 (~(ttÌ\ th.tt \tt~ h.l\r. th.~ d..(f>. rn~d(" 4 (curfu¡ .And .((Uf;.&t(' "UI\t" 011 (ht· ~1f 'Jnd of rh(' prUJÞ(·rtv 1(.)( dted ~! 791'7 yj),plewoud. .1\v\.:nut: _ __ tn thf' Ci1.~ of_ N .Hichland -1lills.Tarrant (:()( "'I" . -rrXAS d~''''t t d)#'~ .." {q:ìp,,",,~ Lot 1. .Block C. Cl\.:arview Addition, )rd. Filing. ___. __ ._._, _____i" " '" I 'I)J I 'f , \ I (. 1 H f ._ ç i ~ 0 f. ~. !'~ i~_ hI a ~d H ~ 11 ß, }_~_r~!:l t.___.. _. (: (H · '\ 1 Y. I. \. A ~, a.. ( .. I din ~ t () I h (- . Pl.' of ~4ntt" rf"(old(·d In \01 __~bÖ-?4._, PítKr ___l_ºº_. M~'R~(o(ds of ___'r~_~!!.~_._________ t.()C\'IY 'IEXA'S -. ~ o~ -- /oo~ ¡::t1*17 ce 7 5" ~ . 5' U. E. -- -- -- -- .-- --- ï . ® x (]) 1 ~ ~, ç:J , " ~ "- ~ '~ Qj ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ," ~ I ~ 50 ..~ ~ '- t ~ ; , J " 'J . ì ·1 'I ! at ~ " VACANT LOT ~ ~ ~. -.', õ' ,I "" . ....... J , \ j ., ~ - - -~ o~_ 25"· _è. .... ....V'-;'.."'~., -' 1 "I ~ ~ ~ '\)1 ~ ~ t~ 100 Jl MAPLéWOOO AVENUE ,/60' R00/ - -~o , As,P. ,tbv) Th~ PI~r hc.t"on IS ;¡ truf'. (orl~(t~nd ac(ural~ r~p(~st'n(~tlon of th~ pro~rt~ as dt't~rmlnt'd b,- SUIVf". Ih~ hn~s and dlm~nslons of siud propert)' bt-lng ~s Indlc~tf'd b~ the Plat, the S)l~. location and (y~ of buddlngs and 1m- pro\r~nt~ ate a~ ~ho\\.n. all Impro\'~lM'n(s ~Jng ~'Ithln the bound~rlt's of Ih~ propert' , ~x(ept as sho"·n. s~t ha( k from Ih~ P(OJ>("'!~ Itn~~ Iht' dJstantes Jndl(at~dt and that the dlstanCf" from th~ nt'arf&st lnterS~(tJnK str~et or ro~d 15 ~~ sho~'n on s~ld PIal. l-h. t"rt" ;irf' n~t"nnoo&{hmf'nts. conflu t~. protrusions. or o&ppo&[tnl f'astmf'nls. tXCtpt ;as shown. , ~ /z-: ~~ '. LEGEND . . FOUND STEEL ROD 4 0 SET STEEL ROD ..<). FOUND PIPE . . FOUND 80lS O'ARC ST A~E --. ,-- PO\VER OP TELEPHONf L ¡~'\fE -- x- FE~>JCE P. o. BOX 1034 268-5229 HURST, TEXAS SCALE / "=20' P/o/J~~r ~QI/'c/7"/' 7;-I/t:: t)~ e. ~ REGISTERED PUBLIC SURVEYOR Date ~-17-77 !"-~J '-:-'..' _.- ~ ,~,-----~- "" :It ~ ~ ~ ~ z ~ ;. .._~ ~() c -0 ~ ~ ~ o ------~ " \. .... , -¡ , , ../ ( --- ',----- .........." --- -- ..... --- ) :TI 3: ..... --. , , ,-...., :-c." " " / ...._-------.. ' ~ ~ " ,,1' ~/ " .."",-' ¿¡' , ~~ , ~ I " , , , \ , I , I I \ ,--- ~ '\ '."". - - - ()cn=ti o. ...!.. rCf'\) r· rr1 G") f'T1 r :tJ \ \ \ \ \~ ~tJ I j I II ~L__~ ORDINANCE NO. '1 C¡;V e AN ORDINANCE REZONING PROPERTY 1M ACCORDANCE '~1IT'H ARTICLE XXIX CHANGES AND ¡\'~E:'·It.~1£NTSt. SECTION 1 OF ORDINA~¡CE #179) ZONING (JRDlr~ANCE Of 'THE ,CITY OF t~ORTH' RICHLA¡'tD HILLS·,. ~rEXA5, PASSEO .i\PPROVED ~ AND ADOPTED: BY -flit: 'PLANNING t\NO ZONING,CC~ISSION AiiD T'i1E CITY COUNCIL OF ,THE CITY OF HORin RICHL~NO HIlL~, ?¡O'JÐ~13ER 13, 1967 t AS AMENDED JA4\fUARY ,27. 1975 AFTER APPROPRIATE' NOTICE AND PUBLIC H~~RING THE FOLLCY;iING. R£COfttì£NDATI.ON IS , SUBMITTED ..CO ~rHE, CITY COUNCIL· OF THE CITY 9F Nt)}~Trf RIC~LAND HILLS BY rHE PLft~HING ft~D ZDNrNGCOMMISSION~ . . RESOLVED that on Case No. PZ '81-'6 the fo1ìow-t,ng described prope.rty shal'!, be rezòned front.2F-9-wi'th 'stfpYl~ti.on: :'~h:a:~":~~ ',r~Ä~~~~i:": ~fttj0~ .~l.an, .~o 2F - 9 . . .,. . , . - ..": ' J. ._,'" ,< TO .WIT: Lot 7, Block 6, Clearview Addition, 3rd Filing, City of North Richland Hills Tarrant County, Texas) as recorded in Vo,l ume 388-24, Page 100 , Deed Records, Tarrant Count,)", Texas. This propert~y is located at the northwest cotner of t~aplewood Drive a,nd Jareen Dri ve. . e . , APPROVED' BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMr~ISSION THIS 26th DAY OF r~ARCH 1981. (1' () '[!J n_ ß"/)/J 1 \ íj ( J. /~ {) I) ";./t./.. ~.V!--cù . l;V v'\~ I'~ _CY I "'::" ' CHAIRMAN PLANNING AN~~ONING COMMISSION . U . -@G-J7 /J ' / .---c- '.(. - . /1 /') £~ ~1-e Î _ t/ c. ~£a-t:~ ING AND ZONING COMMISSION BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS'ACTING IN . REGULAR SESSION THAT THE ABOVE DESCRIBED PROPERTY IN CASE NO.: PZ 81-6 IS HEREBY REZONED THIS DAY OF ,1981. MAYOR[)ICK- FARAM CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS ...........r-_.~~.,,........,.,.,"'-_._ ATTEST: / e CITY SECRETARY JEANETTE MOORE CITY OF NORTH RICHLAND HILLS APPROVED AS TO FORM AND 'LEGALITY CITY ATTORNEY:> CITY OF NORTH R·rCHLAND HILLS - - - ORDIN,A.NCE NO. AN ORDIN~~CE fu~~~ING AND C~~GING A FRfu~CHISE ORDINANCE ENACTED BY THE CITY OF NORTH RICHL.~\T}) RI'LLS TARR.Óu\IT COùNT~i ~ TEXAS ~ ON APRI'L 10 , 19 ~ ..~.l'ID BEING PÞ...RTLY STYLED) "A.~ ORDIN~~CE G~~TING TO LONE STAR GAS COMP~~, A CORPO~~TION, ITS SUCCESSORS ~~D ASSIGNS, A FRANCHISE TO FU~~ISH k~D SL~PLY GAS TO THE GE~EPAL PUBLIC IN THE CITY OF NORTH RICHLA1'ID HILLS ~ TAlLT\ANT COUNTY, TEX-L\S"; lL\D PRO\7IDING FOR A !vfODIFIC.-\TIO~ Or THE DEFI1~ITION OF TIlE TERMS "SERVICE LThESn k~D "YA.."PJ) LINES" REFERENCED IN SECTION 7 THEREOF., BE IT ORDAINED BY L~E CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NORTH RICHL~~ HILLS, TEXAS: SECTION 1. As of the effective date of 'this amendatory ordinance, and upon acceptance by Lone Star Gas Company of the provisions hereof, Section 7 of the aforesaid captioned franchise ordinance enacted on April 10 , 19~, shall be stricken, cancelled and nullified and there shall be substituted in lieu thereof a new provision reading as follows: "SECTION 7 In addition to the rates charged for gas supplied) Company may make and enforce reasonable charges, rules and regulations for service rendered, in the conduct_ of its business. Company shall have the right to contract with each customer with reference to the installation of any and all of the gas piping from the connection thereof with the Company's main in the streets or alleys to and throughout the'consumer's premises. Company shall install, own, operate and maintain all service lines, which are defined as the supply lines extending from the Company's main to the customer's meter where gas is measured by Company. The consumer shall own, operate, and maintain all yard lines and house piping. Yard lines are defined as the underground supply lines extending from the point of connection with Company's customer meter to the point of co.nnection with consumer's house piping." SECTION 2. Enactment of this amendatory ordi~ance shall in no way ever be construed s·o as' to diminish or impair any consumer's ownership inter- est in service lines (or portions thereof) installed prior to the effective date of this amendatory ordinance. e e - SECTION 3. The terms and provlslons of this amendatory ordinance shall be deemed to be severable, and if the validity of any section, sen- tence, clause or phrase of this amendatory ordinance should be declared to be invalid, the same shall not affect the validity of any other section, sentence, clause or phrase of this amendatory ordinance. SECTION 4. Except as heretofore and hereinabove changed and amended, the terms, provisions, conditions and requirements of the aforesaid franchise ordinance shall remain in full force and effect. SECTION 5. This amendatory ordinance shall become effective as of , 1981 if the Company files its WTitten aCfeptance of the provlslons of this ordinance within sixty (60) days after its final passage and approval by this City and upon acceptance, the provisions hereof shall be binding upon City and Company, their successors and assigns. PASSED AND APPROVED ON THIS THE DAY OF 1981. ATTEST: City Secretary Mayor City of North Richland Hills , Texas - - e c~ STATE OF TEXAS 1 I I COL~TY OF T~~T I, '. City Secretary of the Cityof North Richland Hills Tarrant County~ Texas, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of an amendatory ordinance passed by the City Council of the City of North Richland Hills , Texas, at a session, held on the day of 1981, as it appears of record in the minutes of the City Council in Book page WITNESS MY FJŒrn AND SEAL OF SAID CITY, THIS THE , A.D. 1981. day of City of City Secretary North Richland Hills , Texas , '.. .' e e e DATE: 4-16-81 SUBJECT: Payment for Park Lighting DEPARTMENT: Parks/Recreation BACKGROUND: Request authorization to pay Tarrant Electric Co. in the amount of $37,060~IOO as full pa.yment for lighting ,work at .Richfield. tIork is . completed and has been inspected by city inspectors. l·.Jhen the -s i x 60 I po 1 es were removed and rep 1 aced they \^lere j nspected ·for wear and general condition. All were found to be extremely corroded. One of the poles was found to have a crack completely around the base of the pole. CITY COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED: Approve payment to ,Ta'rr.dDt_ E1 ectri~· BUDGETED ITEM: YES X NO AÇCOUNT NUMBER: Park and. Library Fundi (Balance $42,000) ----~---~-~~~-~-~-~~-~-~~~~~----~---~~-~-~-~~~~~~-~~~-~-~~-~~--~~~~--~~~~--~~~~ ,. w ~ í](¡JŒŒLOŒíJ ŒßŒŒìlŒU!BQ{1 (BŒŒílŒaJŒv[!Jill0 1525 W. Ripy Fort Worth, Texas 76110 e 5 H I P T o ~ City of North Richland Hills L 7301 Northeast Loop 820 ~ North Richland Hills, Texas 76108 T o []I INVOICE D PURCHASE ORDER D QUOTE CUSTOMER REFERENCE Ballfield Lighting Richfield Park TERMS DATE 30 days Net 4/14/81 QUANTITY MODEL NO. DESCRIPTION UNIT TOTAL. Total Due $37,060.00 . ],706.00 33,354.00 Contract Amount Less Retainage A Finance charge of 11/2% per month will be charged after )0 days .MO: "DATE: 4-27-81 SUBJECT: . Council meetjng datp change e DEPARTMENT: City Manager BACKGROUND: The Council meeting of May 25, 1981, falls on Memorial Day. Since this is a holiday and most business close in observance of same, we have re-scheduled the Planning and Zoning cases as well as other it~s originally scheduled for May 25th to May 18th if the Council has no objections. e CITY COUNCIL ACTION REQUIRED: Open Council c~ncplling May ?5th Council meeting and establishing May 18th as speçial CO\JnciJ mpptiog BUDGETED ITEM: YES NO ACCOUNT NUMBER: ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - '. --: .,-~. -__-.7' '. J:HE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT c. ROBERT HEATH Attorney at Law Chairman, Opinion Committee Attorney General of Texas Supreme Court Building Austin, Texas 78711 © 1980 C. ROBERT HEATH - ..~.. ... .--- ./ . Table of Contents I. MEETINGS COVERED BY THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ............................. 1 A. GOVEH.Nrv1ENT AL BODIES SUBJECT TO THE ACT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 1 B. ADVISOI<Y BOAI\DS . . # . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :--. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 .. C. MEET IN G S 0 F CO:V1 rv1 I TT E E S . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . .. 2 D. EXTENT OF I<IGHTS GUAI{ANTEED BY TI-IE ACT. . . . . . . . . . . . .J. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 2 II. EXCEPTIONS AUTHORIZING CLOSED MEETINGS. . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . " . . . . . . . . " . .. 3 ~\ - A. PERSONNEL................................................"... " " . . . . . . . .. 3 B. CONSULTATION \VITH AN A TTOR.NEY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 C. PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY AND ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 D. OTHER EXCEPTIONS ......................,............................... 4 E. CLOSED MEETINGS PERMITTED WHEN NO SPECIFIC EXCEPTION IS APPLICABLE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ", . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 5 F. ALL VOTES AND FINAL ACTION MUST BE CONDUCTED IN OPEN SESSION. . .. 5, ,'. --~..::-\ III. NOTICE.... ~ . . . . . . . . ',. . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 6 A. TIME............"......................................................... 9 B. PLA C E , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :. 6 C. CONTENTS........................................................ . . . . . .. 6 D. EMERGENCY NOTICE. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 E. SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE ............................................... 7 I V . EN FOR C E MEN T . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '.' . . . . . . . . . . . . . . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 . ~~ ~. A. CRIMINALPENAL TIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 B. INJUNCTION OR MANDAMUS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 C: VOIDABILITY............................................................. 8 'D. RATIFICATION............................................................. 9 . . ~\ . e. -......... " THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT by C. Rober! Hetlflz I. MEETINGS COVERED BY THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT A. Governmental Bodies Subject to the Ac~ The Tex.as Open !'v1eetings Act, TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 (Vernon Súpp:1980), covers both state and local governmental bodies. The state governmental bodies covered are defined as being any board, commission, department, committee or agency within the executive or legislative department of the state. Thus, the Act does not exteI)d to the judicial branch of government. For example, a meeting of the Texas Supreme Court or the courts of civil appeals would not be covered. Neither would a meeting of the Commission on Judicial Conduct. The State Bar of Texas, TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 320a-l, §9 (Vernon 1960), and the Board of Law Examiners, TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 304(f) (Vernon 1960), would normally be exempted from the operation of the Act as part of the judicial branch of government; however, the legislature has specifically provided that their meetings are covered by the Act. Boards in the executive or legislative departments are covered. Attorney General opin- ions have been written 'specifically indicating that a state textbook committee, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OPe NO. M-136 (1967), and the Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Af- fairs, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. LA-84 (1974), ar'e required to hold open meetings under the Act. * In listing the local governmental bodies to which the Open Meetings Act applies, the Act specifically lists commissioners courts, city councils, school boards, county boards of school tr:ustees, county boards of education and t~e governing boards of any special district. Additionally, it covers deliberative bodies having rule-making and quasi- judicial power which are classified as a department, agency or political subdivision of a county or city. . It has been held that the Act applies to a cOllnty commissioners court w·hen it is sitting as a board of equalization. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OPe NO. H-IOOO (1977). Also, Attorney General Opinion H-785 (197ó) indicated that breakfast meetings of the commissioners court were required to be open and preced~d by notiçe. In that opinion, Harris County raised a question about meetings of the commissioners court at which the commis- sioners \vould meet for breakfast. The meeting would be informal in nature and other elected ç>fficials or the heads of county departments would often be asked to attend. The Attorney General held that so long as any public business over which the county com- missioners court had supervision or control was discussed, the meetings were required to be open. . Workshop meetings are required to be handled in the same way. Some city councils and commissioners courts schedule workshop meetings at which the topics to be discussed .fat a later formal meeting are presented informally. Even though no action is contemplated or scheduled, these meetings are required to be open. Among the bodies that have been found to be subdivisions or departments of a county or city having rule- making or quasi-judicial authority, and thus covered by the Act, are boards of firemen's relief and retirement fund trustees, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OPe NO. MW-174 (1980); hospital authorities. TEX. ATT')' GEN. OPe NO. H-544 (1975), and salary grievance committees organized under article 3912k, TEX. REV. CIV . STAT. ANN., to consider salary grievances filed by elected county officials, TEX. A TT'Y GEN. or. NO. H-1281 (1978). * EDITORS NOTE: Texas courts have h~ld that Attorney General opinions are entitled to careful consideration by the courts and are generally regarded as hiKhly persuasive. They are not, however, binding on the judiciary. }tmt5 v. W¡IIÙmb, 121 Tex. 94, 98. 45 5. \tV .2d 130, 131 (1931); "',"ri~ C{JW/~I (.'m", ":ò C.JII' t ~'. .tvlt"Jf(, 420 U.S. 77. 87 (1975). -1- · ...~ · · Additionally, some governmental bodies may be required to hold open meetings by statutes other than the Open Meetings Act. The best exa~p]e involves negotiatiñg ses- sions between mun icipali ties and firenlen's or policer·nen's collecti ve ba rgaini ng tea rns under the Fire and Police Employees Relation Act, 1'EX. REV. CIV . STAT. ANN. art. 5154c-1. See E,zlt'rprise Co. v. Ci~1 of E3ralOHOIlI, 574 S.\'V.2d 786 (Tex. Civ. App. - Beaun10nt '1978, no writ); TEX. A TTfY GEN. OP. NO. I-1-816 (1976). B. Advisory Boards Under the definition set out in the Act, a governn1ental body must have supervision or control over public business or policy before it is covered by the Act. Thus, a board \'vhich is purely advisory in nature is not covered. If a board is to be found to be outside the scope of the Act under this theory, however, its na·ture should be clearly expressed in the' statute or rule creating it. Additionally, it must actually operate in that manner. If a board is created as an advisory body, but in fact has·been delegated authority to make decisions either formally or informally', it will be covered by the Open Meetings Act. The Attorney General has found that the library board of a city, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-467 (1974), a COffilnittee to study the selection process of pres.idents of in- stitutions in the University of Texas System, TEX. A TT'Y GEN. or. NO. H-994 (1977) and the athletic council at Texas Tech University, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-772 (1976), were advisory bodies only and thus were not covered bÿ the Act. In each in- stance, however, the Attorney General cautioned that even thoug~ the bodies were limited by ordinance or rule to purely advisory functions, the facts must be examined and if, in fact, these bodies exercised supervision or control over public business or policy, they ~ould be covered by the Act. In Attorney General Opinion H-438 (1974), the Attorney General foun9 that the athletic council of the University of Texas at Austin was covered by the Act. Even though its actions \vere subject to review and approval by th~ University Board of Regents, it was admitted that the council exercised day to day supervision over the athletic department of the University of Texas at Austin. Thus, it came within the requirements of the Open Meetings Act, even though it was arguable that the regents' rule creating the council was intended to make it an advisory body. The fact that it did exercise supervision or control over public business or public policy was determinative. ') (~. ' V - . c. Meetings of Committees A governmental body is not covered by the Act unless a quorum of its members is present; however,' the Attorney General has ruled that there are some circumstances in which comm.ittees of a governmental body will be required to comply with the Act even though they do not constitute a quorum of the parent body. When the Act was amend- ed in 1973, committees were listed as types of governmental bodies covered. Thus, where a committee is formally established and where a quorum of the committee is pre- sent, its meetings may be covered by the Act. See TEX. A TT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-238 (1974) (committees of the Harris County Hospital District are required to comply with the Act); TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-3 (1973) (committees of the Texas Board of Mental Health and Mental Retardation are covered by the Act). Where, however, committees are not formally organized, and members or a govermental body c.onstituting less than a quorum of that body meet together, the Act may not apply. For example, when two members of a commissioners court met with two members of the city council to discuss and negotiate concerning the possibility of combining the city and county tax office, the Open Meetings Act was not applicable. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. MW-28 (1979). In that case formal committees were not appointed and the informal group had no rule-making or quasi-judicial authority as re- quired by section l(c) of the Open Meetings Act. D. Extent of Rights Guaranteed by the Act The Open Meetings Act guarantees citizens the right to attend meetings and to observe the proceedings. It does not provide any right t~ participate in the meeting by securing a spot on the agenda or by addressing the governrnental body. Athough there are many public policy and political reasons to permit citizens to address governmental bodies, these rights are ·not guaranteed or addre'ssed by the Open Meetings Act. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. 01). NO. H-188 (1973). -2- "") :.. ~ ~ .... ~.~..,~-"",.- . - _...- -.. . ---~.... .. .-----~._.-- r I 'e ...~ ...~~'. ,. . ~ e' . . The Act does not provide any specific right to broadcast public rneetings over radio or television, and the Attorney GenercJl has held that a governmental body may enact rules prohibiting the broadcasting of public Ineetings. TEX. A TT'Y GEN. OPe NO.. M-180 (1968). The legislature has, however, indicated th~t an individual has a right to (ecord any portion of a public meeting by means of a tape recorder or other means of sonic reproduction. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 §2(i) (Vernon Supp. 1980). There is no right, ho\vever, for a member of a governmental body or any other person to nlake a tape recording of an executive session. ZtLlHOrtl l'. Edst'l('oud hltlcpt'Il¿lcllf School Dis/., 592 S.VV.2d 649 (Tex. Civ. App. - Beaumont 1979, writ refd n.r.e.). The intent of the Act may not be circumvented by the use of \vritten secret ballots. In Attorney General Opinion H-1163 (1978), the Attorney General addressed a proposi- tion that a board elect officers or determine sinlUar business bymeans of a secret ballot. The Attorney General indicated that the use of a secret ballot in an open meeting was prohibited. J II. EXCEPTIONS AUTHORIZING CLOSED MEETINGS' If a governmental body is covered by the Open Meetings Act, its meetings are presumed to be open unless there is some exception w·hich \'vill permit it to hold an executive session. The exceptions are generally found in section 2 of the Act. The personnel exception, the excep- tion for consultation with an attorney and the exception concerning the acquisition of real property are the most commonly utilized means of closing the meeting. Additionally, there are several other procedures set out in the statute by which a meeting 'can be closed, and there have been additional exceptions discussed" in attorney general opinions. A. Personnel Section 2(g) of the Act permits a governmental body to hold a closed meeting in cases involving "the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer or employee or to hear complaints or charges against such officer or employee unless such officer or employee requests a public hearing." TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 §2(g) (Vernon Supp. 1980). Thus, if a governmental body is deciding whether to hire an individual or discussing an in- dividual's job performance, it may close a meeting. The individual being discussed does, however, have the option to have an open hearing. Perhaps the most significant opinion under this exception is Attorney General Opin- ion H-496 (1975). That opinion indicated that a school board could discuss whether to give a teacher a raise in closed session since the adjustment of an individual's salary would necessarily involve an evaluation of the employee's job performance. Most significantly, however, the opinion indicated that the exception was designed to protect discussion relating. to ¡'ltli~'ÙiltC'¡ employees. If the school district discussed salaries or salary scales without reference to a specified individual, it could not conduct a closed session. Thus, the board could determine whether to give a specified teacher a raise in closed session, but it could not discuss an across-the-board raise for a~l employees in a closed session. However, it should be noted that section 2(m) of the Act permits closed sessions by boards operating under consultation agreements pursuant to section 13.901 of the Education Code, when the boards are deliberating regarding the standards, guidelines, terms or conditions they will foIl ow, or instruct their representatives to follow, in consultation with representatives of teacher groups. Set TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OPe NO. H-651 (1975). Although the exception discussed above is generally referred to as the "personnel ex- ception,'· it is broader than that term would suggest. It refers to "officers and employees.'· Thus, a governmental body is authorized to meet in closed session to elect its own officers or to elect persons to fiB a vacancy in public office. TEX. A TT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-1047 (1977). Just because individuals are being discussed, however, does not mean the session can be closed. For example, the Attorney General ruled that a col- lege board of regents could not meet in executive session when considering whether to grant an honorary degree to an individual since the meeting would not relate to the ap- pointment or employment of an officer or employee of the university. TEX. AIT'Y GEN. OPe NO. H-246 (1974). -3- . ... ~ .- """ . of . . . . Nor can a governmental body meet in closed session to di~cuss the selection öf àn in- depenJent contractor. In :-\ttorney General Opinion No. MW-129 (1980), a county ask- ed if it \vas perm issible to rneet in closed session to discllss the selection of an engineer- ing. architectural or consultant firm whose professional services \vere to be provided to the county by specific, \vritten contract. The Attorney General held that an independent contractor is not an officer or an employee and th~s does not fa 11 vvithin the specific re- quirements of section 2(g) of the Act. Accordingly, that selection may not be discussed in closed session. yVhether persons are independent contractors rather than employees will generally depend upon the degree of control the governmental body exercises over them. If they undertake to do a specific piece of work using their own means and methods without committing themselves to· the control of the governmental body to in- spect all det~ils of the vvork, they vviIl generally be considered independent contractors. Architects, engineers, attorneys and construction companies are only a few examples of the types of individuals and corporations which are generally independent contractors rather than employees. Even if the meeting may be properly closed to discuss an employee, the employee or offic~r who is to be the subject of the meeting may exercise his right to have the meeting opened. When the meeting is opened at the employee's request, all deliberations must be open. A board may not hear witnesses and evidence in open session and then retire to executive session to discuss and deliberate. When the employee requests that the hearing be public, an aspects of it are public. Corplb CJzržjfi Classrootl' Teudlers Ass '" v. CorpltS Christi Indepelldenl Sd,tJol Oi51., 535 S. W .2d 429 (Tex. Civ. App. - Corpus Christi 1976, no \vrit); · TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OPe NO. M-761 (1970). B. Consultation \vith an Attorney Section 2(e) of the Act permits private consultations between a governmental body and its attorney only when 'the body "seeks the attorney's advice with respect to pend- ing or contemplated litigation, settlement offers and matters where the duty of the public body's counsel to his client, pursuant to the Code of Professional Responsibility of the State ~ar of Texas, clearly conflicts" with the Act. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art." 6252-17 §2(e) (Vernon Supp. 1980). The key element of this exception is consultation with an attorney. Because the excep- tion is often referred to as the litigation exception, some governmental bodies contend that a closed meeting may be held to discuss litigation. That contention is erroneous. A board may consult with its attorney to discuss Íitigation in closed session, but it may not meet in closed session for such a discussion \vhen it does npt involve consultation with an attorney. Thus, this exception will never be applicable unless the attorney is present in the closed meeting. . I (, c. Purchase of Real Property and Acceptance of Gifts Section 2(f) of the Act permits closed meetings to discuss the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property and to discuss negotiated contracts for prospective gifts or donations to a governmental body when the discussion would have a detrimental ef- fect on the negotiating position of the governtnental"body. Thus, if real property is to be purchased or valued, an open session is not required. Additionally, an open session is not required to discuss contracts or the acceptance of gifts, but this is true only when open discussion would have a detrimental effect on the position of the governmental body. This exception would be applicable most often to universities and similar institu- tions which receive anonymous gifts. D. Other Exceptions Section 2(c) of the Act permits a governmental body to exclude a witness from a hear- ing during examination of another witness. Essentially, this is an ex.tension of Rule 267 of the Texas l~ules of Civil Procedure, which provides that in civil cases, witnesses may be moved from the courtroom so that they do not hear the testimony of other witnesses in the case. TEX. I{. CIV. P. 267 (19ï8). Section 2(d) of the Act indicates that it does not apply to the deliberation of grand juries. This section is not necessary, since the Act by its very terms does not apply to the judicial branch of state government. School boards -4- . ...~ . . ;:~.-~~ (~-) . . ~ . '. are not !equired to hold open n-le~ti ngs in cases Invo vlng tSC1p 1ne unless the parent of the child requests a public hearing. TEX. I{EV. ClV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 §2(g) ( Vernon Su pp. 1980). Medical" boards or medical committees which discuss medical or psychiatric records of an applicant for disability benefits from public retirement syslems are not required to halo open nìeetings. ¡d. §2(1). Interviews and counseling sessions between members of the Board of Pardons and Paroles and inmates of the state prisons are like\vise not required to be public. Id. §2(p). E. Closeù !v1eetings Permitted \'Vhen no Specific Exception is Applicable In three instances the Attorney General has indicated that closed meetings are per- missible even though no specific exception in the statute applies. These opinions involve fairly unique situations and must be strictly construed. They basically involve situa- tions in \vhich another statute expressly prohibits discussion of the material in public or where there is a clear implied prohibition against such discussion. Attorney General Opinion H-223 (1974) involved administrative proceedings held by the Comptroller's hearing division. This opinion determined that an open meeting 'vvas not necessary since the hearing \-vas conducted by a single representative of the Comp- troller and could not involve "deliberation between a quorum Qf members of a govern- mental body" as required by section 1 of the Open· Meetings Act. However, it also cited articles 1.031 and 20.1(G)(1) of Title 122A which expressly prohibit the Comptroller from making information about a taxpayer's affairs public in any manner whatever. TEX. TAX. GEN. ANN. arts. 1.031, 20.1(G)(1) (Vernon 1960). Thus, even if the hear- ing were conducted by a group covered by the Open Meetings Act, it is probable that the meeting could be he~d behind closed doors since another statute expressly prohibits "revelation of the material. The question arose more directly in Attorney General Opinion H-1l54 (1978). A county's child welfare board· was found to be covered by the Open Meetings Act; however, another statute, TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 69Sc §33 (Vernon 1960), made it unlawful for anyone to disclose the names of persons applying for or receiving assistance or to disclose any information about such persons. Since another statute ex- pressly pronibited disclosure of such material, the Attorney General ruled that meetings discussing particular case files of persons receiving or applying for public assistance were not required to be open. The Attorney General was careful to note, however, that the exception applied only to the portions 'of the meeting discussing such confidential material. '. Attorney General Opinion H-484 (1974) involved an implied prohibition against revealing information. The Board of Basic Science Examiners was required to examine individuals to determine their knowledge, ability and skill in the basic sciences. Impar- tial examinations were required to be given. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 4590 §6 (Vernon 1960). The board asked if it was required to hold an open meeting \",hen it drafted ,and approved questions to be asked. The Attorney General indicated that any examin~tion would be rendered unfair and ineffective if questions to be asked were re- quired to be made known in advance. He held that the statutory directive to conduct ex- aminations necessarily carried with it the authority to maintain the confidentiality of the questions to be asked. Thus, the board was not required to discuss examination questions in an open meeting when the discussion would reveal ttte nature of the ques- tions and compromise the security of any examination. F. All Votes and Final Action.Must be Conducted in Open Session Section 2(1) of the Act states that when any portion of a meeting is properly closed, no final action, decision or vote with regard to a matter discussed in closed session may be taken except at a meeting that is open to the public and in compliance with the notice re- quirements of the statute. Thus, if an executive session is held, the final vote or action must be taken in open session. The only opinion specifically involving a situation· at which action was taken in a closed session is Attorney General Opinion H-1198 (1978). A hospital district board met in closed session to di?cuss the continued employment of the district administrator. A -5- · mutual agreement \vith regard to his tern1inatinn was reached, and a substantiJI check in settlement of salary and vacation \vas'given to the administrator. ·[he agreement was n1ade public four days later followinb a meeting of a co~mittee of the board. 1'he board contended that no final action \-vas taken until the committee rneeting. ~rhe Attorrlcy General disagreed. Since the check had been issued anJ cashed prior to that time, it was clear that some official action had been taken at closed session. III. Notice. When the Open Meetings Act was initially passed in 1967, no provision was made requir- ing notice of meetings. It irnmediately became evident that the public's right to attend meetings was largely meaningless absent a requirernent that notice of the time, place and subject of meetings be given beforehand. Accordingly, section 3A of the Act ,"vas enacted re- quiring that the date, hour, place and subject of any meeting be posted in advance. This re- quirement applies to all meetings even if it is contemplated that the entire meeting will be held in executive session. .Þ.( A. Time Notice must genera]]y be posted 72 hours in advance of the scheduled time of a meeting. State agencies, other than the Industrial Accident Board and institutions of higher education, must post notice seven days in advance of any meetings. The reason for this longer time period for state agencies is that notice of their meetings is required to be published in the Texas Register. The seven day lead time provides an opportunity for those meetings to meet t,he publication deadline of the Register and for the Register con- taining the notice to be deli vered prior to the day of the meeting. · B. Place Section 3A of the Act specifies the place at which notice must be posted. The place varies depending on the governmental body, but- as a general rule state governmental bodies are required to post notice with the Secretary of State. Most other boards post with the county clerk or in their own administrative offices. Some boards are required to 'post in more than one place. For any spe(ific governmental body, section 3A of the Act should be consu1ted. Whether notice is posted with the county clerk, Secretary of State or at the ad- ministrative offï'ces of the governing body, it must be at a place readily accessible to the public at all times. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. §3A(h) (Vernon Supp. 1980). This is a requirement of the statute that is likely to be inadvertently violated. Apparently the legislature enacted this requirement to correct the situation that arose in Lipscomb lndepm- deu! 5t:/'oo! Disfricf V. COlI11~1 5d,ool Truslees of Lipsfomb COIOl~/. 498 S.W.2d 364 (Tex. Civ. App. - Amarillo i 973, writ ref'd n.r.e.). In that case the notice was. posted near the end of the wprk day on Friday. The statute at that time required notice to be posted ill the county courthouse. The courthouse was Jocked at 5 p.m. Friday and w.as thus inaccessi- ble to public view for most of the posting period. The court ruled that the posting met the literal requirements of the statute as it existed at that time. The legislature then amended the statute to require that the posting be in a place readily accessible to the public at all times. · c.. Contents The notice must indicate the date, hour and place of any meeting. Additionally, it must indicate the su.bject of the meeting. This last requirement is the one that results in the greatest amount of litigation. Any notice must be sufficiently specific to apprise the public in general terms of each subjec.t to be discussed. TEX. A TT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-662 (1975). See LOl(ter C%nldo Riuer Altflrori~1 P. Cì~1 ol5,uI Man:05, 523 S. W .2d 641 (Tex. 1975). Any unusual matter or one in \vhich the pubJic has a particular interest should be specifically noted. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. or. NO. M-494 (1969). Notice of a meeting to discuss "new business," "old business," "regular business," "other business which may come before the court," "routine business" and other similar generalities which do not specify a particular subject will not be adequate. TEX. A TT·Y GEN. OPe NO. H-662 (1975) . -6- . A.~ ....::-: --', /<. . '\ \~0J . . J creasIng cectric r¡:¡tes in a particulJr area, or "personnel" to discuss hiring or firing of individuals, rna"y be suffi- cient in most cases. Sn' L'l('", CoI"fllii" ['¡¡'I'/" Ilullrllnl.l! 1'. Ciryl "r :J'II/ ,\ Îdl, "'. '11/'111; 11s/(i/,(I ¡'. Ct. ~I of EI £'1/,,,. 594 S. W. 2J 191 (T ex. Ci v. App. - EI Paso 1980, no wri t); ,\ II COI/I/{'lI i'. /1/"11/,, HfiSIrI, Idcl'l'II.!l'Ill SI h"111 Di'I.. 576 S. W.2c1 4 70 (Tex. Civ. App. _ Sa n Antonio 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.). However, matters of great importance ¿r matters in which the public has a special interest should be listed in a more detailed fashion. For example, a state univer- sity selected a president and a chancel/or in a meeting denominated in the notice as con- sidering "discussion of personnel changes." While such a notice would be sufficient for most hiring or firing decisions, the selection of a president and chanceIJor was deemed of such special importance and public interest that the limited notice was inadequate. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. or. NO. H-1045 0.977). D. Emergency Notice , In the case of an emergency, notice can be posted up to two hours before a meeting. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN art. 6252-17 §3A(h) (Vernon Supp. 1980). The emergen- cy or urgent public necessity that requires the quicker meeting must be expressed in the notice. No cases or attorney general opinions have been written on the type of language sufficient to meet this requirement; however, it is probably sufficient if the notice mere- ly reflects that an emergency exists without giving details. The Act does provide protec- tion for the news media, since a governmental body is required to give telephone or telegraphic notice of an emergency meeting to members of the news media who have re- quested such notice and have consented to pay for the expenses incurred by the govern- mental body in providing such special notice. Id. The governmental body has this obligation to notify the news media only in the case of emergency meetings and only when the news media has specifically requested in advance that it be notified. Any member of the news media who desires to receive such notice should make a written re- quest. - - E. Substantial CompJiance In many cases notice has been provided but has been posted at the wrong plaœor-à't' .. the wrong time. However, because the courts have uniformly held that substantial com- pliance is all that is required, even though a notice may not precisely match the re- quirements of the Act, it may be sufficient if it substantially complies with the Act. Sa Lower Colorado River AI//llOri~1 u. Cí~1 of Sal/ Marws, Sl/pru; 5al//Os v. Guerra, 570 S. W.2d 437 (Tex. Civ. App. - San Antonio 1978, writ ref'd n.r.e.); Stelzer v. HI/ddles/ol/, 526 S.W.2d 710 (Tex. Ci v. App. - Tyler 1975, writ dism'd); Toyalt II/dependen/ Sclwol Dist. v. Pecos" Barstow II/dependent 5(//(101 Dist., 466 S.W.2d 377 (Tex. Gv. App. - San Antonio 1971, no wri t) . IV. Enforcement. .a There are three methods of enforcing the Open Meetings Act _ criminal penalties, injunc- tion or mandamus, and voiding actions taken in violation of the statute. A. Criminal Penalties Section 4 of the Act provides criminal penalties for any member of a governing body who calls a meeting that is closed to the public, or who willfully closes or aids in closing a meeting to the public, or who participates in a closed meeting when it is not permitted by the Act. Additionally, the Act prohibits conspiring to circumvent its provisions by meeting in numbers less than a quorum for purpOses of secret deliberations. Violation is punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine of not less than $100 or more than $500, or im~ prisonment in the county jail for not less than one month or more than six months. or both. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 §4(a) & (b) (Vernon Supp. 1980). Although most misdemeanors are tried in a county court, the above offenses are con- sidered misdemeanors involving official misconduct and thus are tried in district court. Accordingly, the district attorney would be the proper official with whom to file a com- plaint. -7- ...... . ~ ---~-- . . . . .-.~ s " p Unless ã violation is willful and bl.)t~nt, it is generally unlikely that prosecut·ion \votdd be sought. l~he Act, ho\vever, does have a deterrent effect. B. !it junction or tvlclndarnus Section 3 of the Act provides that any interested person, "including bona fide members of the nev'Is media," may seek n1andarnus or an injunction for the purpose of stopping or preventing violations or threatened violations of the Act. This remedy ap- plies only to future violations. If, however, an injunction or vvrit of mandan1us is ob- tained and then ignored, it is possible that the violating governn1ent officials could be found in contempt of court and punished accordingly. .Most litigation involving this section of the Act has involved standing to bring suit. In C010lf~1 (l{ ~:\'tlnf P. KillS. 454 S.W.2d 239 (Tex. Civ. App. - EI Paso 1970, writ dism'd), the court held that section 3 did not provide independent 'authority {or a county attorney to seek an injunction in the nan1e of the county against the county judge and the county commissioners court. In S/tdltclfonf {I. Cif)' of Al,i/olc, 585 S. W .2d 665 (Tex. 1979), a television nevvs reporter sought an injunction to prohibit a closed meeting by the Abilene Equal Employment Opportunity Board, which had been created by the city or Abïlene. The court of civil appeals had ru1ed that the reporter had no standing to bring the action. The Texas Supreme Court held that Shackelford could bring the action and granted re1ief, although the case was decided under the provisions of the Abilene City Charter rather than the Open Meetings Act. vVhile the case was on appeal, the legislature amended the Open Meetings Act to provide that the term "interested party," as used in the portion of the Act defining who could bring suit, in"cluded any bona fide member of the news media. · The case remains an important one, however, because it points out that many city charters provide more extensive open meetings guarantees than the Act. In this case, the city charter required open meetings and provided no exceptions. Specifically, the court found that there was no exception in the city charter for personnel meetings even though a similar exception exists in section 2(g) of the Open Meetings Act. In many in- stances city charters will provide substantially greater guarantees of openness than the statute. ~ "". c. VoidabiIity Perhaps the greatest and most effective means of enforcing the Act is the doctrine that actions taken in violation of the Open Meetings Act are voidable. It is true that action taken by a governmental body vvill be presumed to be legal,. and the- governmental body will be presumed to have acted in conformity with the law. JEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. M-494 (1969). However. if it is established that the action was taken at a meeting held in violation of the Open i\,1eetings Act, the action can be voided. Toyalt I1LL{e1Jfwletlf 5f/'oo! E>ijf. L'. r(,L"(J~-B lrjt(Jlv Illdcpl'llLlcHf Sclw()/ Dist.., 466 S.W.2d 377 (Tex. Civ. App. - San Antonio 1971; no writ). In the TO~/tlJr case, one member of the school board stated "it would serve no useful purpose" to have admitted the public to the meeting, and the chairman of the þoard indicated that he Hdidn't think it was any of their business about our deliberating:' [d. at 378 fn.l. There was no exception in the statute which would have permitted a closed meeting. and it was found that the board had acted in violation of the law. The court, in a case of first in1pression in Texas, found that the action of the board was ineffectual since it was taken in violation of the statute. The Texas Supreme Cou'rt adopted a similar conclusion in LtJI(J('r Ct¡Jortldo Ripcr Aufltt}riql v. Ci~1 of 5,ul J'v1"rü)j, 523 S.W.2d ó41 (Tex. 1975). In that case the meeting was open, but the notice \vas defective. Notice \vas posted in a timely fashion and listed several objects . to be considered. The notice did not, however, include any reference to the subject of electric rates. The LCRA decided at the meeting to raise the electric rt1tes charged the ci- ty of San ~1arcos. The supreme court determined that the rate increase was invalid because the Act was not followed. The failure of adequate notice caused the action to be voided. " -8- . D . I~;I t if i c cJ t ion ----:-W~n a government;}] body fails to comply with the Open Meetings Act, it still may protect the action taken in violation of the Act by holding another rnceting to ratify the' original action. So long as the second mtcting is preceded by adequate notice and is hel(~ in compliance with the statute, ;,' may reconsider and ratify the earlier action. 'r'l:I~dl u. KillS, 470 S.W.2d 770 (Tex. Civ. f\pp. - E1 Paso 1971, no \tvrit). If such ratification is to be effective, however, aH aspects of the Act must be followed. In Attorney General 'Opinion H-419 (1974), the Governor's Cornmittee on Aging conducted a meetÏng without adequate notice. They attempted to ratify the action at a later meeting, but the notice indicated that the committee intended to "ratify action of Dec. 17, 1973 meeting." The court held that thi~ notice was ineffective s::1ce it did not inforTn the public of the type of action to be ratified. Thus, for ratificat.· "1 to be effective, the rne~ting must be held following notice specifying the actions to be considered. Any ratification is effec- tive only as of the date of ratification. A governmental body cannot make ratification effective as of the date of the original action. Lozver Colorado Rivt."r AllllIorify v. City of Sall Mllrco5, 523 S.W.2d 641 (Tex. 1975). A.. TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT* Definitions I~'-·"" .. ..~ ;~ Section 1. As used in this Act: , (a) "Meeting" means any ~eliberation between a quorum of members of a governmental body at which any public business or public policy over which the governmental body has supervision or control is discussed or considered, or at which any formal action is taken. It shaH not be construed that the intent of this definition is to prohibit the gathering of members of the governmental body in numbers of a quorum or more for social functions unrelate~ to the public business which is con- ducted by the body or for attendance of regional, state, or national conventions or workshops as long as no formal action is taken and there is no deliberation of public business which will appear on the agenda of the respective body. . (b) "Deliberation" means a verbal exchange between a quorum of members of a governmental body attempting to arrive at a decision on any public business. (c) uGovernmental body" means any board, camm'is'sion, 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 depart- ment, 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 gov- erning board of every special district heretofore or hereafter created by law. . (d) "Quorum" urlless otherwise defined by constitution, charter, rule or law applicable to such governing body, means a majority of th~ governing body. . Application of act Sec. 2. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this Act or specifically permitted in the Constitu- tion, every regular, special, or caIied meeting or session of every governmental body shall be open to the public; and no closed or executive meeting or session of any government"al body for any of the purposes for which closed or executive meetings or sessions are hereinafter authorized shall be held unless the governmental body has first been convened in open meeting or session for which notice has been given as hereinafter provided and during which open meeting or session the presiding officer has publicly announced that a clósed or executive meeting or session wHI be held and identified the section or sections und~r this Act authorizing the holding of such closed or ex- ecutive session. . . · TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 (Vernon Supp. 1980). -9- .' . . ... ~ /' (b) In this Act, the Legislature is exercising its rule-making powers to prohibit secret m~etmgs 0 the Legislature, its committees, or any other bodies associated with the Legislature, except as othen,vise specifically permitted by the Constitution. (c) A governmental body may exclude any witness or witnesses from a hearing during examina- tion of another witness in the matter being investigated. . (d) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect the deliberation of grand juries. (e) Private consultations between a governmental body and its attorney are not permitted except in those instances in vvhich the body seeks the attorney's advice with respect to pending or con- templated litigation, settlement offers, and matters where the duty of a public body's counsel to his client, pu rsuant to the Code of Professional Responsibility of the State Bar of Texas, clearly con- flicts with this Act. (f) The public may be excluded from that portion of a meeting during which a discussion is had with respect to the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of real property, n~gotiated contracts for prospective gifts or donations to the state or the governmental body, when such discussion woulà have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the governmental body as between such body and third person, firm or corporation. (g) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require governmental bodies to hold meetings open to the public in cases involving the appointment, employment, evaluation,.reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer or employee or to hear complaints or charges against such officer or employee, unless such officer or employee requests a public hearing. (h) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require school boards to hold meetings open to the public in cases involving discipline of public school children unless an open hearing is requested in writing by a parent or guardian of the child. (i) All or any part of the proceedings in any public meeting of any governmental body as defined hereinabove may be recorded by any person in attendance by means of a tape recorder or ap.y other means of sonic reproduction. (j) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require governing bodies to deliberate in open meetings regarding the deployment, or specific occasions for implementation, of security person- nel or devices. (k) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to allow a dosed meeting of a governing body where such dosed meeting is prohibited, or where open meetings are required, by charter. (1) Whenever any deliberations or any portion of a meeting are dosed to the public as permitted by this Act, no final action, decision, or vote with regard to any matter considered in the dosed meeting shall be made except in a meeting which is open to the public and in compliance with the requirements of Section 3A of this Act. (m) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require school boards operating under consultation agreements provided for the Section 13.901 of the Texas Education Code to deliberate in open meetings regarding the standards. guidelines, terms,' or conditions it will follow or instruct its representatives to follow, in consultation with representatives of employee groups. (n) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require an agency wholly financed by Federal funds to deliberate in open meetings. {o} Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require medical boards or medical committees to hold meetings open to the public in cases where the individual medical and psychiatric records of an applicant for a disabmty benefit from a public retirement'system are being considered. (p) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require that interviews or counseling sessions be- tween the members of the Board of Pardons and Paroles and inmates of any facility of the Texas Department of Corrections be open to ,the public. - . . Mandamus or injunction to prevent closed meetings Sec. 3 Any interested person, including bona fide members of the news media, may commence an action either by mandamus or injunction for the purpose of stopping or preventing violations or threatened violations of this Act by members of a governing body. Notice of meetings Sec. 3A. (a) \Vritten notice of the date, hour, place, and subject of each meeting held by a governmental body shall be given before the meeting as prescribed by this section, and any action -10- .A.~ taken by a goverQmentaI body at a meeting on a subject \vhich was not stateJ on the agenda in the notice posted for such nleeting is voidable. "[he requirement for notice prescribed by this sec~ion does not apply to matters about which specific f<3ctual information or a recitation of existing policy is furnished in response to an inquiry made at such meeting, \vhether such inquiry is nlc1de by a ~ember of the general public or by a rnember of the governmental body. Any deliberation, discussion, OT decision with respect to the subject about which inquiry \vas made shall be limited to a proposal to place such subject on the agenda for a subsequent meeting of such governmental body for \vhich notice has been provided in compliance with this Act. (b) A State governmental body shaII furnish notice to the Secretary of State, who shall then post the notice on a bulletin board to be located in the rnain office of the Secretary of State at a place . / convenient to the public. (c) A city·governmental body shall have a notice posted on a bulletin board to be located at a place convenient to the public in the city hall. ~ (d) A county governmental body shall have a notice posted on a bulletin board located at a place convenient to the public in the county courthouse. (e) A school u~~trict shall have a notice posted on a bulletin board located at a place convenient to the public in its central administrative office and, in addition, shall either furnish a notice to the county clerk in the county in which most, if not all, of the school district's pupils reside or shall give notice by telephone or telegraph to any news nledia requesting such "notice and consenting to pay any and all expenses incurred by the school district in providing special notice. (f) A governmental body of a water district or other district or political subdivision covering all or part of four or more counties shall have a notice posted at a place convenient to the public in it~ · administrative office, and shall also furnish the notice to the Secretary of State, who shaH then post the notice on a bulletin boa~d located in the main office of the Secretary of State at a place conveni~nt to the public; and it shall also furnish the notice to the county clerk of the county in which the administrative office of the district or political subdivision is located, who shall then post the notice on a bulletin board located at a place convenient to the public in the county cour- thouse. (g) The governir:tg body of å water district, other district, or other political subdivision, except a district or political subdivision described in Subsection (f) of this section, shall have a. notice posted at a place convenient to the public in its administrative office, and shall also furnish the notice to the county clerk or clerks of the county or counties in which the district or political sub- division is located. The county clerk shall then post the notice on a bulIetin board located at a place convenient to the public in the county courthouse. (h) Notice of a meeting must be posted in a place readily accessible to the general public at aU ti~es for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of the meeting, except that notice of a meeting of a state board, commission, department, or officer having statewide jurisdiction, other than the Industrial Accident Board or the governing board of an institution ~f higher education, must be posted by the Secretary of State for at least seven days· preceding the day of the meeting. In case of emergency or urgent pub1ic necessity, which shall be expressed in the notice, it shall be sufficient if the notice is posted two hours before the meeting is convened. Provided further, that where a meeting has been called with notice thereof posted in accordance with this subsection, ad- ditional subjects may be added to the agenda for such meeting by posting a supplemental notice, in whith the emergency or urgent public necessity requiring consideration of such additional subjects is expressed. In the event of an emergency meeting, or in the event any subject is added to the agenda in a supplemental notice posted for a meeting other than an emergency meeting, it shall be sufficient if the notice or supplemental notice is posted two hours before the meeting is convened, and the presiding officer or the member calling such emergency meeting or posting supplemental notice to the agenda for any other meeting shall. if request therefor containing all pertinent infor- mation has previously been filed at the headquarters of the governmental body, give notice by telephone or teJegraph to any news media requ~sting such notice and consenting to pay any and all expenses incurred by the governmental body in providing such special notice. The notice provi- sions for legislative committee meetings shall be as provided by the rules of the house and senate. . ."') --.. e.. Violations and penalties Sec. 4. (a) Any member of a. governing body who wilfully calls or aids in caning or organizing a special or called meeting or session which is closed to the public, orwhp wilfully closes or aids in -11- . À~ . . closing a regular meeting or session to the public, or \vho wilfully participates in a regular, special, or called meeting or session \vhich is closed to th~ public \vhere a closed meeting is n;t permitted by the provisions of this Act, sha IJ be guilty of a rnisderneanor and on conviction is punishable by a fine of not less than 5100 nor rnore than 5500 or in1prisonment in the county jail for not less th~ln one month nor more than six rnonths, or both. . (b) Any member or group of Inen1bers of a governing body \'vho conspire to circumvent the pro- visions of this Act by meeting in numbers less than a quorun1 for the purpose of secret delibera- tions in contravention of this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is punishable by a fine of not less than 5100 nor more than 5500 or imprisonment in the county jail for not less than one month nor more than six months or both. J (" ; ......... - ...... -12- '. ,-~ ;-. .J -~ -'. 1·:HE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT c. ROBERT HEATH Attorney at Law Chairman, Opinion Committee Attorney General of Texas Supreme Court Building Austin, Texas 78711 © 1980 C. ROBERT HEATH - ......, '" -- I . A.~ ....-:.""::õ., . (~ - - ... . Table of Contel1ts I. MEETINGS COVERED BY THE OPEN MEETINGS ACT ............................. ] II. A. GOVERNMENTAL BODIES SUBJECT TO THE ACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 1 B. ADVISORY BOARDS . . - . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . :'. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 2 - C. MEETINGS OF COMMITTEES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . " 2 D. EXTENT OF RIGHTS GUARANTEED BY THE ACT. . . . . . . . . . . . ." . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 2 EXCEPTIONS AUTHORIZING CLOSED MEETINGS. . . : . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 3 A. PERSONNEL............................................................... 3 B. CONSULTATION WITH AN ATTORNEY. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 4 C. PURCHASE OF REAL PROPERTY AND ACCEPTANCE OF GIFTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 4 D · OTHER EX C EPTI 0 N S ...................................................... 4 E. CLOSED MEETINGS PERMITTED WHEN NO SPECIFIC EXCEPTION IS APPLICABLE . . . . . · . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " . . . . . . . . . . . " 5 F. ALL VOTES AND FINAL ACTION MUST BE CONDUCTED IN OPEN SESSION. . " 5 III. N OTI CE . . . . : . . . . . . . . ',' . . . . . : . · . · . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 6 A. TIME............................... . . . · . '. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 9 B · PLA CE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .' . . . . · . . . . · . . . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 6 C. CONTENTS............................................................. " 6 D. EMERGENCY NOTICE ...................................................... 7 E. SUBSTANTIAL COMPLIANCE .............................................. 7 IV. ENF 0 R CEM ENT. . . . . . . . . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 A. CRIMINAL PENAL TIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 7 B. INJUNCTION OR MANDAMUS. . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . " 8 . ". C: VOID ABILITY.... . · · . · . . . . . · . . . . . . . . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 8 . D. RA TI FICA T ION . . . . . . . · . . . . . · . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 .' . ..\ , :".....-.~\ ~.- ...\ ~ >- .~ ,.~ .' . THE TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT by C. Robert /-J ellfJz I. MEETINGS COVERED BY THE· OPEN MEETINGS ACT -........... .. A. Governmental Bodies Subject to the f\ct The Tex.as Open l'v1eetings Act, TEX. I\EV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 (Vernon Súpp.'1980), covers both state and local governmental bodies. The state governmental bodies covered are defined as being any board, commission, department, committee or agency within the executive or legislative department of the state. Thus, the Act does not exteI)d to the judicial branch of governrnent. For example, amèeting of the Texas Supreme Court or the courts of civil appeals would not be covered. Neither would a meeting of the Commission on Judicial Conduct. The State Bar of Texas, TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 320a-1, §9 (Vernon 1960), and the Board of Law Examiners, TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 304(f) (Vernon 1960), would normally be exempted from the operation of the Act as part of the judicial branch of governn1ent; however, the legislature has specifically provided that their meetings are covered by the Act. Boards in the executive or legislative departments are covered.. Attorney General opin-' ions have been written 'specifically indicating that a state textbook committee, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OPe NO. M-136 (1967), and the Senate Subcommittee on Consumer Af- fairs, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. LA-84 (1974), are required to hold open meetings under the Act. * In listing the local governmental bodies to which the Open Meetings Act applies, the Act specifically lists commissioners courts, city councils, school boards, county boards of school tI:ustees, county boards of education and the governing boards of any special district. AdditionaIly, it covers deliberative bodies having rule-making and quasi- judicial power which are classified as a department, agency or political subdivision of a county or city. It has been held that the Act applies to a cO!,mty commissioners court when it is sitting as a board of equalization. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-1000 (1977). Also, Attorney General Opinion H-785 (197ó) indicated that breakfast meetings of the commissioners court were required to be open and preced~d by notice. In that opinion, Harris County raised a question about meetings of the commissioners court at which the commis- sioners would meet for breakfast. The meeting wo.uJd be informal in nature and other elected ~fficials or the heads of county departments would often be asked to attend. The Attorney General held that so long as any public busin£:ss over which the county com- missioners court had supervision or control was discussed, the meetings were required to be open. . Workshop meetings are required to be ha"ndJed in the same way. Some city councils and commissioners courts schedule workshop meetings at which the topics to be discussed 'at a later formal meeting are presented informally. Even though no action is contemplated or scheduled, these meetings are required to be open. Among the bodies that have been found to be subdivisions or departments of a county or city having rule- making or quasi-judicial authority, and thus covered by the Act, are boards of firemen's relief and retirement fund trustees, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. MW-174 (1980); hospital authorities. TEX. A TTY GEN. OP. NO. H-544 (1975), and salary grievance committees organized under article 3912k, TEX. I~EV. CIV. STAT. ANN., to consider salary grievances filed by elected county officials, TEX. A TT·Y GEN. or. NO. H-1281 (1978) . · EDITORS NOTE: Texas courts have held that Attorney General opinions are entitled to careful consideration by the courts and are generally regarded as highly persuasive. They are not, however, binding on the judiciary. /tJIlt5 v. ~Villltf"'s. 121 Tex. 94.98,45 S.W.2d 130,131 (1931); I-I 'rri~ C( /OI~' Cllt"",'r~ (,tll11 ~'. _^AIJ(J/'('. 420 U.S. 77, 87 (1975). -1- . A.~ -. / . Additionally, some governmental bodies may be required to hold open meetings by statutes oth~r than the Open Meetings Act. T'he best exa~p1e involves negotiatiñg ses- sions between municipalities and firemen's or policemen's collective bargaining teams under the Fire and Police Employees Rela tion Act, TEX. REV. CIV . STAT. ANN. art. 5154c-1. See EHlerpri::;e Co. v. Cif:1 of BCclt01l0H/, 574 S.\^J.2d 786 (Tex. Civ. App. - Beaun10nt 1978, no writ); TEX. ATTfY GEN. OP. NO. f-1-816 (1976). B. Advisory Board~ Under the definition set out in the Act, a governnìentaI body must have supervision or control over public business or policy before it is covered by the Act. Thus, a board which is purely advisory in nature is not covered. If a board is to be found to be outside the scope of the Act under this theory, however, its na-ture should be clearly expressed in the- statute or rule creating it. Additionally, it must actually operate in that manner. If a board is created as an advisory body, but in fact has been delegated authority to make decisions either formally or informally', it wiU be covered by the Open ·Meetings Act. The Attorney General has found that the library board of a city, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OPe NO. H-467 (1974), a committee to study the selection process of presidents of in- stitu tions in the University of Texas System, TEX. A TT'Y GEN. or. NO. H-994 (1977) and the athletic council at Texas Tech University, TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OPe NO. H-772 (1976), were advisory bodies only and thus "vere not covered bÿ the Act. In each in- stance, however, the Attorney General cautioned that even thoug~ the bodies were limited by ordinance or rule to purely advisory functions, the facts must be examined and if, in fact, these bodies exercised supervision or control over public business or policy, they would be covered by the Act. In Attorney Genera] Opinion H-438 (1974), the Attorney General foun9 that the athletic council of the University of Texas at Austin was covered by the Act. Even though its actions were subject to review and approval by the University Board of Regents, it was admitt·ed that the council exercised day to day supervision over the athletic department of the University of Texas at Austin. Thus, it came within the requirements of the Open 1v1eetings Act, even though it was arguable that the regents' rule creating the council was intended to make it an advisory body. The fact that it did exercise supervision or control over public business or pubJic policy was determinative. -, .._-) ~........;::. 'J - .. c. Meetings of Committees A governmental body is not covered by the Act unless a quorum of its members is present; however,' the Attorney General has ruled that there are some circumstances in which committees of a governmental body will be required to comply with the Act even though they do not constitute a quorum of the parent body. When the Act was amend- ed in 1973, committees were listed as types of governmental bodies covered. Thus, where a committee is formally established and where a quorum of the committee is pre- sent, its meetings may be covered by the Act. See TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-238 (1974) (committees of the Harris County Hospital District are required to comply with the Act); TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-3 (1973) (committees of the Texas Board of Mental Health and Mental Retardation are covered by the Act). Where, however, committees are not formally organized, and members or a govermental body c.onstituting less than a quorum of that body meet together, the Act may not apply. For example, when two members of a commissioners court met with two members of the city council to discuss and negotiate concerning the possibility of combining the city and county tax office, the Open ìv1eetings Act was not applicable. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. MW-28 (1979). In that case formal committees were not appointed and the informal group had no rule-making or quasi-judicial authority as re- quired by section l(c) of the Open Meetings Act. D. Extent of Rights Guaranteed by the Act The Open Meetings Act guarantees citizens the right to attend meetings and to observe the proceedings. It does not provide any right t~ participate in the meeting by securing a spot on the agenda or by addressing the governmental body. Athough there are many public policy and political reasons to permit citizens to address governmental bodies, these rights are .not guaranteed or addre·ssed by the Open Meetings Act. TEX. A TT·Y GEN. OP. NO. H-188 (1973). -2- ".'J" .' . - ~ . ...~ .~ ....\ t~j . . IT':'>- - I me£' Ings over ra to or television, and the Attorney General has held that a governmental body may enact rules prohibiting the bro..¡dcasting of public meetings. TEX. A TTY GEN. or. NO.. M-180 (1968). The legislature has, however, indica ted tha t an indi \'id ual has a right to record any portion of a public meeting by Ineans of a tape recorder or other means of sonic reproduction. TEX. REV. CIV. 5T AT. ANN. art. 6252-17 §2(i) (Vernon Stipp. 1980). There is no right, however, for a member of a governmental body or any other person to make a tape recording of an executive session. ZIIJI!prll t'. E,(\Cl('I)od brdt'l,t"IIdml 5chool DisC 592 S.W.2d 649 (Tex. Civ. App. - Beaumont 1979, writ ref'd n.r.e.), The intent of the Act may not be circumvented by the use of written secret ballots. In Attorney General Opinion H-1163 (1978), the Attorney General addressed a proposi- tion tha t a board elect officers or determine similar business by means of a secret ballot. The Attorney General indicated that the use of a secret ballot in an open meeting was prohibited. ~ II. EXCEPTIONS AUTHORIZING CLOSED lv1EETINGS If a governmental body is covered by the Open Meetings Act, its meetings are presumed to be open unless there is some exception which will permit it to hold an exècutive session. The exceptions are generally found in section 2 of the Act. The personnel exception, the excep- tion for consultation with an attorney and the exception -concerning the acquisition of real property are the most commonly utilized means of closing the meeting. Additionally, there are several other procedures set out in the statute by which a meeting can be closed, and there have been additional exceptions discussed in attorney general opinions. A. Personnel Section 2(g) of the Act permits a governmental body to hold a closed meeting in cases involving "the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer or employee or to hear complaints or charges against such officer or employee unless such officer or employee requests a public hearing." TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 §2(g) (Vernon Supp. 1980). Thus, if a governmental body is deciding whether to hire an individual or discussing an in- dividual's job performance, it may close a meeting. The individual being discussed does, however, have the option to have an open hearing. Perhaps the most significant opinion under this exception is Attorney General Opin- ion H-496 (1975). That opinion indicated that a school board could discuss whether to give a teacher a raise in closed session since the adjustment of an individual's salary would necessarily involve an evaluation of the employee's job performance. Most significantly, however, the opinion indicated that the exception was designed to protect discussion relating. to ilCdi.,itiulll employees. If the school district discussed salaries or salary scales without reference to a specified individual, it could not conduct a closed session. Thus, the board could determine whetherto give a specified teacher a raise in closed session, but it could not discuss an across-the-board raise for all employees in a closed session. However, it should be noted that section 2(m) of. the Act permits closed sessions by boards operating under consultation agreements pursuant to section 13.901 of the Education Code, when the boards are deJiberating regarding the standards, guidelines, terms or conditions they will follow, or instruct their representatives to follow, in consultation with representatives of teacher groups. 5ee TEX. AIT'Y GEN. OPe NO. H-651 (1975). . Although the exception discussed above is generally referred to as the "personnel ex- ception," it is broader than that term would suggest. It refers to "officers and employees." Thus, a governmental body is authorized to meet in closed session to elect its own officers or to elect persons to fill a vacancy in public office. TEX. A TT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-I047 (1977). Just because individuals are being discussed, however, does not mean the session can be closed. For example, the Attorney General ruled that a col- lege board of regents could not meet in executive session when considering whether to grant an honorary degree to an individual since the meeting would not relate to the ap- pointment or employment of an officer or employee of the university. TEX. AIT')' GEN. OPe NO. H-246 (1974). -3- .. - ...--..-----.. ..'~.~ ......--..- -'--- ---_.~-_.. .' At . . Nor can a governmen/al body mee/ in closed session to di~cuss the selection òf an in- dependen/ con/ractor. In Attorney General Opinion No. MW-129 (1980), a county ask- ed if it was permissible /0 meet in closed session /0 discuss the selection of an engineer- ing, architectural or consultant firm whose professional services were to be provided /0 the county by specific, written contract. The Attorney General held that an independent contractor is not an officer or an employee and tht;s does no/ fall within the specific re- quiremen/s of section 2(g) of the AcL Accordingly, /hat selection may not be discussed in closed session. Whether persons are independent contractors rather than employees will generally depend upon the degree of control the governmental body exercises over them. If they undertake to do a specific piece of work using their own means and methods without committing themselves to the control of the governmental body to in- spect all det~íls of the work, they will generally be considered independent contractors. Architects, engineers, attorneys and construction companies are only a few examples of the types of individuals and corporations which are generally independent contractors rather than employees. Even if the meeting may be properly closed to discuss an employee, the employee or . officer who is to be the subject of the meeting may exercise his right to have the meeting opened. When the meeting is opened a t the employee's request, all deliberations must be open. A board may not hear witnesses and evidence in open session and then retire to executive session to discuss and deliberate. When the employee requests that the hearing be public, all aspects of it are public. Corpus Cltrijfi Cll/ssroom Tel/tilers Assír u. Corpus CIrrisfi IlIIlepmdmf 5d/(10/ Disf., 535 S. W.2d 429 (Tex. Civ. App. - Corpus Christi 1976, no writ); TEX. ATry GEN. OP. NO. M-761 (1970). - . . B. Consultation with an Attorney Section 2(1') of the Act permits private consultations between a governmental body and its attorney only when 'the body "seeks the attorney's advice with respect to pend- ing or contemplated litigation, settlement offers and matters where the duty of the public body's counsel to his client, pursuant to the Code of Professional Responsibility of the State ~ar of Texas, clearly conflicts" with the Act. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art." 6252-17 §2(e) (Vernon Supp. 1980). The key element of this exception is consultation with an attorney. Because the excep- tion is often referred to as the litigation exception, some governmental bodies contend that a closed meeting may be held to discuss litigation. Tha t contention is erroneous. A board may consult with its attorney to discuss litigation in closed session, but it may not meet in closed session for such a discussion when it does npt involve consultation with an attorney. Thus, this exception will never be applicable unless the attorney is present in the closed meeting. . /""" ~ t ,- ~ C. Purchase of Rea! Pro~erty and Acceptance of Gifts Section 2(f) of the Act permits closed meetings to discuss the purchase, exchange, lease or value of real property and to discuss negotiated contracts for prospective gifts or donations to a governmental body when the discussion would have a detrimental ef- fect on the negótiating position of the governtnental hody. Thus, if real property is to be purchased or valued, an open session is not required. Additionally, an open session is not required to discuss contracts or the acceptance of gifts, but this is true only when open discussion would have a detrimental effect on the position of the governmental body. This exception would be applicable most often to universities and similar institu- tions which receive anonymous· gifts. D. Other Exceptions Section 2(c) of the Act permits a governmental body to exclude a witness from a hear- ing during examination of another witness. Essentially, this is an extension of Rule 267 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, which provides that in civil cases, witnesses may be moved from /he Courtroom so that they do not hear the testimony of other witnesses in the case. TEX. R. CIV. P. 267 (I9ï8). Section 2(d) of the Act indicates that it does not apply to the deliberation of grand juries. This section is not necessary, since the Act by its very terms does not apply to the judicial branch of state government. School boards :)-. l j . . ·t I -4- . .... / ~t",,'" ~~:\ \- .: ,/ ~-~ .. . are not ...required to ho1 open meetH'~:<; In cases tnv unless the parent of th? child requests a public hearing. TEX. I~E\'. CIV . STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 §2(g) (\'ernon Supp. 1980). iv1edical" boards or medical committees which discuss medical or psychiatric records of an app1icant for disability benefits from PUblic retirement syslenls are not required to hold open meetings. Ill. §2(1). Interviews and counseling sessions between members of the Board of Pardons and Paroles and inmates of the state prisons ~re like\4/ise not required to be public. Id. §2(p). \., E. Closed ìv1eetings Permitted \\'hen no Specific Exception is Applicable In three instances the Attorney General has indicated that closed meetings are per- missible even though no specific exception in the statute applies. These opinions involve fairly unique situations and must be strict1y construed. They basically involve situa- tions in which another statute expressly prohibits discussion of the material in public or where there is a clear implied prohibition against such discussion. Attorney General Opinion H-223 (1974) involved administrative proceedings held by the Comptroller's hearing division. This opinion determined that an open meeting was not necessary since the hearing was conducted by a single representative of the Comp- troller and could not involve "deliberation between a quorum of rnembers of a govern- mental body" as required by section 1 of the Open' Meetings Ãct. However, it also cited articles 1.031 and 20.1(G)(1) of Title 122A which expressly prohibit the Comptroller from making information about a taxpayer's affairs public in any manner whatever. TEX. TAX. GEN. ANN. arts. 1.031, 20.1(G)(1) (Vernon 1960). Thus, even if the hear- ing were conducted by a group covered by the Open Meetings Act, it is probable that the meeting could be he~d behind closed doors since another statute expressly prohibits ·revelation of the material. The question arose more directly in Attorney General Opinion H-1154 (1978). A county's child welfare board, was found to be covered by the Open Meetings Act; however, another statute, TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 69Sc §33 (Vernon 1960), made it unlawful for anyone to disclose the names of persons applying for or receiving assistance or to disclose any information about such persons. Since another statute ex- pressly prohibited disclosure of such material, the Attorney General ruled that meetings discussing particular case files of persons receiving or applying for public assistance were not required to be open. The Attorney General was careful to note, however, that the exception applied only to the portions of the meeting discussing such confidential material. '. Attorney General Opinion H-484 (1974) involved an implied prohibition against revealing information. The Board of Basic Science Examiners was required to examine individuals to determine their knowledge, ability and skill in the basic sciences. Impar- tial examinations were required to be given. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 4590 §6 (Vernon 1960). The board asked if it was required to hold an open meeting when it drafted ,and approved questions to be asked. The Attorney General indicated that any examin~tion would be rendered unfair and ineffective if questions to be asked were re- quired to be made known in advance. He held that the statutory directive to conduct ex- aminations necessarily carried with it the authority to maintain the confidentiality of the questions to be asked. Thus, the board was not required to discuss examination questions in an open meeting when the discussion \.vould reveal the nature of the ques- tions and compromise the security of any examination. F. All Votes and Final Action,Must be Conducted in Open Session Section 2(1) of the Act states that \vhen any portion of a meeting is properly closed, no final action, decision or vote with regard to a matter discussed in closed session may be taken except at a meeting that is open to the public and in compliance with the notice re- quirements of the statute. Thus, if an executive session is held, the final vote or action must be taken in open session. The only opinion specifically involving a situation· at which action was taken in a closed session is Attorney General Opinion H-1198 (1978). A hospital district board met in closed session to di~cuss the continued employment of the district administrator. A -5- . . . J.~ - . '. III. mutual agrcement with regard to his terminaÙün was rcached, and a substahtial check in settlement of salary and vacation was"given to the administrator. The agreement was made public four days later following a meeting of a committee of the board. The board contended that no final action was taken until the committee meeting. The Attorney General disagreed. Since the check had been issued and cashed prior to that time, it was clear that SOme official action had been taken at closed session. Notice. When the Open Meetings Act was initialJy passed in 1967, no provision was made requir- ing notice of meetings. It immediately became evident that the public's right to attend meetings was largely meaningless absent a requirement that notice of the time, place and subject of meetings be given beforehand. Accordingly, section 3A of the Act was enacted re- quiring that the date, hour, place and subject of any meeting be posted in advance. This re- quirement applies to all meetings even if it is contemplated that the~ntire meeting wiIJ be held in executive session. A. Time Notice must generally be posted 72 hours in advance of the scheduled time of a meeting. State agencies, other than the Industrial Accident Board and institutions of higher education, must post notice seven days in advance of any meetings. The reason for this longer time period for state agencies is that notice of their meetings is required to be published in the Texas Register. The seven day lead time provides an opportunity for those meetings to meet ~he publication deadline of the Register and for the Register con- taining the notice to be deli vered prior to the day of the meeting. B. ~ Section 3A of the Act specifies the place at which notice must be posted. The place varies depending on the governmental body, but as a general rule state governmental bodies are required to post notice with the Secretary of State. Most other boards post with the county clerk or in their own administrative offices. Some boards are required to 'post in more than one place. For any spedfic governmental body, section 3A of the Act should be consulted. Whether notice is posted with the county clerk, Secretary of State or at the ad- ministrative offices of the governing body, it must be at a place readily accessible to the public at all times. TEX. REV. crV. STAT. ANN. §3A(h) (Vernon SuPp. 1980). This is a requirement of the statute that is likely to be inadvertently violated. Apparently the legisla ture enacted this requirement to correct the situation that arose in Lipscomb IlldepeII. dell f Selmo I D is fric f u. C 01/11 ~I 5d/(101 T rtt sfees of Lipswm b COWl ~/, 498 S. W . 2 d 364 (T ex. Ci v. App. - AmariJJo i973, writ ref'd n.r.e.). In that case the notice was posted near the end of the ~ork day on Friday. The statute at that time required notice to be posted ill the county courthouse. The courthouse was locked at 5 p.m. Friday and was thus inaccessi_ ble to public view for most of the posting period. The court ruled that the posting met the literal requirements of the statute as it existed at that time. The legislature then amended the statute to require that the posting be in a place readily accessible to the public at all times. c. Contents The notice must indicate the date, hour and place of any meeting. AdditionaJIy, it must indicate the subject of the meeting. This last requirement is the one that results in the greatest amount of litigation. Any notice must be sufficiently specific to apprise the public in general terms of each subjec.t to be discussed. TEX. A TT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H -66 2 (I 975). 5(( L'i('e r C t! lomdo Riper It /I fit ori ~I 1'. Ci ~I of 51/11 Mum)s. 523 S. W. 2 d 641 (T ex. 1975). Any unusual matter or one in which the public has a particular interest should be specificaJJy noted. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. M-494 (1969). Notice of a meeting to discuss "new business," "old business," "regular business," "other business which may Come before the Court," "roll tine business" and other similar generalities which do not specify a particular subject wiJJ not be adequate. TEX. A TT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-662 (1975). \, . -6- ·e ~ --', (jJ e e General notice such as "electric rates" to discuss increasing electric rates in a particular area, or "personnel" to discuss hiring or firing of individuals, ma) be suffi- cien tin most cases. See L·,(,cy C,,{,'rlld,. {'i¡.(t 111t11t,lnl,tt ". Cj~1 t>{ 51/1/ A1'11"." ~ltl'll/; 11slti{'11 ¡" C¡. ~I of E{ 1'11'11, 594 S. W.2d 191 (T ex. Civ. Apr. -EI Paso 1980, no writ); ,\. 1, COl/I/dl ¡I. 11/"'1/11 Hf~\ltl, h!depmdl'lll 5t1lo,,1 OJ'I., 576 S. W.2d 4 70 (Tex. Civ. App. _ San Antonio 1978, writ refd n.r.e.). However, matters of great importance år matters in which the public has a special interest should be listed in a more detailed fashion. For example, a state univer- sity selected a president and a chancellor in a meeting denomina ted in the notice as con- sidering "discussion of personnel changes." While such a notice would be sufficient for most hiring or firing decisions, the selection of a president and chancellor was deemed of such special importance and public interest that the limited notice was inadequate. TEX. ATT'Y GEN. OP. NO. H-1045 (1.977). ).~ D. Emergency Notice J In the case of an emergency, notice can be posted up to two hours beFore a meeting. TEX. REV. crV. STAT. ANN art. 6252-17 §3A(h) (Vernon SuPp. 1980). The emergen~ cy or urgent public necessity that requires the quicker meeting mùst be expressed in the notice. No cases or attorney general opinions have been written on the type of language sufficient to meet this requirement; however, it is probably sufficient if the notice mere- ly reflects that an emergency exists without giving details. The Act does provide protec- tion for the news media, since a governmental body is required to give telephone or telegraphic notice of an emergency meeting to members of the news media who have re- quested such notice and have consented to pay for the expenses incurred by the goverQ- mental body in providing such special notice. /d. The governmental body has this obligation to notify the news media only in the case of emergency meetings and only when the news media has specificaJIy requested in advance that it be notified. Any member of the news media who desires to receive such notice should make a written re- quest. - . E. Substantial Compliance In many cases notice has been provided but has been posted at the wrong plaœor-ci't . _ . the wrong time. However, because the courts have uniformly held that substantial Com- pliance is aJI that is required, even though a notice may not precisely match the re- quirements of the Act, it may be sufficient if it substantiaJIy complies with the Act. See Lawer Colortldo RiL'er Altlllllri~1 v. Ci~1 of Silt! lv/tlrcos, SI/pra; StllltOS u. Guerrl/, 570 S. W.2d 437 (Tex. Civ. App. - San Antonio 1978, writ refd n.r.e.); Sldur u. HI/ddles to II , 526 S.W.2d 710 (Tex. Civ. App. - Tyler 1975, writ dism'd); TOJltllt I ndepmdtl/I SdlOol Oist. v. Pecos. Barslow II/dependent SdlOo{ Oi~/., 466 S. W.2d 377 (Tex. Civ. App. _ San Antonio 1971, no wri t) . IV. Enforcement. There are three methods of enforcing the Open Meetings Act _ criminal penalties, injunc- tion or mandamus, and voiding actions taken in violation of the statute. A. Crimina' Pena I ties Section 4 of the Act provides criminal penalties for any member of a governing body who calls a meeting that is closed to the public, or who willfully closes or aids in dosing a meeting to the public, or who participates in a closed meeting when it is not permitted by the Act. Additionally, the Act prohibits conspiring to circumvent its provisions by meeting in numbers less than a quorum for purposes of secret deliberations. Violation is punishable as a misdemeanor with a fine of not less than 5100 or more than $500, or im- prisonment in the county jail for not less than one month or more than six months, or both. TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 §4(a) & (b) (Vernon Supp. 1980). Although most misdemeanors are tried in a county Court, the above offenses are Con- sidered misdemeanors involving official misconduct and thus are tried in district court. Accordingly, the district attorney would be the proper official with whom to file a com- plaint. -7- -~. " ... . .. ...~ -._-~ ."..~ --- --.. ~.. As a practical matter, the criminal penalty is not likely to be invoked in many cases. Unless à violation is willful and blat¡)nt, it is generally unlikely that prosecutJon \vould be sought. '[he Act, ho\.vever, does have a deterrent effect. ...~ B. I njunction or MandJ.'21us Section 3 of the Act provides that any interested person, "including bona fide members of the news media," may seek mandamus or an injunction for the purpose of stopping or preventing violations or threatened violations of the Act. This remedy ap- plies only to future violations. If, however, an injunction or writ of mandamus is ob- tained and then ignored, it is possible that the violating government officials could be found in contempt of court and punished accordingly. Most litigation involving this section of the Act has involved standing to bring suit. In Colt/II)I (If l'V,I''! p, KÙIS, 454 S.W.2d 239 (Tex. Civ. App. - EI Paso 1970, writ dism'd), the court held that section 3 did not provide independent 'authority {or a county attorney to seek an injunction in the name of the county against the county judge and the county commissioners court. In SllIld:clf(¡rd 1'. CiI)1 0{ AbilOlC, 585 S. W. 2d 665 (T ex. 1979), a tëlevision news reporter sought an injunction to prohibit a closed meeting by the Abilene Equal Employment Opportunity Board, which had been created by the city or Abilene. The court of civil appeals had ruled that the reporter had no standing to bring the action. The Texas Supreme Court held that Shackelford could bring the action and granted relief, although the case was decided under the provisions of the Abilene City Charter rather than the Open Meetings Act. While the case was on appeal, the legislature amended the Open Meetings Act to provide that the term "interested party," as used in the portion of . the Act defining who could bring suit, inCluded any bona fide member of the news media. The case remains an important one, however, because it points out that many city charters provide more extensive open meetings guarantees than the Act. In this case, the city charter required open meetings and provided no exceptions. Specifically, the court found that there was no exception in the city charter for personnel meetings even though a similar exception exists in section 2(g) of the Open Meetings Act. In many in- stances city charters will provide substantially greater guarantees of openness than the statute. . . ... .~. c. VoidabiIity Perhaps the greatest and most effective means of enforcing the Act is the doctrine that actions taken in violation of the Open Meetings Act are voidable. It is true that action taken by a governmental body will be presumed to be legal, and the-governmental body will be presumed to have acted in conformity with the Jaw. TEX. ATTY GEN. OP. NO. M-494 (1969). However, if it is established that the action was taken at a meeting held in violation of the Open Meetings Act, the action can be voided. TO!ft/lt bll{C¡lm¡{w/ Sdwol [:) i, I. ,', P('((J';· B" r,; 100V IlId c¡'('lId m / SdwI11 0 is/., 466 S. W. 2 d 377 (T ex. Ci v. A p p. _ Sa n Antonio 1971; no writ). In the TO!lt/It case, one member of the school board stated "it would serve nù useful purpose" to have admitted the public to the meeting, and the chairman of the \:;>oard indicated that he "didn't think it was any of their business about our deliberating." J.l. at 378 fn. I. There was no exception in the statute which would have permitted a closed meeting, and it was found that the board had acted in violation of the law. The court, in a case of first impression in Texas, found that the action of the board was ineffectual since it was taken in violation of the statute. The Texas Supreme Cou'rt adopted a similar conclusion in Lower Col'Jrt/do Rip('r Altllwri~1 1J. Cif]1 of 5./11 Jvl"r((J,;, 523 S. W.2d 641 (Tex. 1975). In that case the meeting was open, but the notice was defective. Notice was posted in a timely fashion and listed several objects . to be considered. The notice did not, however, include any reference to the subject of electric rates. The LCRA decided at the meeting to raise the electric rates charged the ci- ty of San Marcos. The supreme court determined that the rate increase was invalid because the Act was not followed. The failure of adequate notice caused the action to be voided. . -8- ~._....... "'--- ,....--.. ·e D. I~a t ¡fica t ion -When a governmental body fails to comply with the Open Meetings Act, it still may protect the action taken in violation of the Act by holding another nlceting to ratify th~ origi.nal action. So long as the second meeting is preceded by adequate notice and is heI~ in compliance with the statutc, it may reconsider and ratify the earlier action. Fa:t~clf u. KinS, 470 S. W.2d 770 (Tex. Civ. App. - EI Paso 1971, no \-vrit). If such ratification is to be effective, however, aJl aspects of the Act Inust be followed. In Attorney General 'Opinion H-419 (1974), the Governor's Committee on Aging conducted a meeting without adequate notice. They attempted to ratify the action at a later meeting, but the notice indicated that the committee intended to "ratify action of Dec. 17.1973 meeting." The court held that thi~ notice was ineffective since it did not -tnforrn the public of the type of action to be ratified. Thus, for ratification to be effective, the meeting must be held following notice specifying the actions to be considered. Any ratification is effec- tive only as of the date of ratification. A governmental body cannot make ratification effective as of the date of the original action. LOlver Colorado Rivfr Allfhority u. City of StIll Marcos, 523 S.W.2d 641 (Tex. 1975). A~ TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT* Definitions .3 Section 1. As used in this Act: (a) "Meeting" means any fleliberaHon between a quorum of members of a governmental body at which any public business or public policy over which the governmental body has supervision or control is discussed or considered, or at which any formal action is taken. It shall not be construed that the intent of this definition is to prohibit the gathering of members of the governmental body in numbers of a quorum or more for social functions unrelated to the public business which is con- ducted by the body or for attendance of regional, state, or national conventions or workshops as long as no formal action is taken and there is no deliberation of public business which will appear on the agenda of the respective body. . (b) "Deliberation" means a verbal exchange between a quorum of members of a governmental body attempting to arrive at a decision on any public business. (c) "Governmental body" means any board, commis'sion, 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 depart- ment, 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 gov- erning board of every special district heretofore or hereafter created by Jaw. . (d) "Quorum" urlless otherwise defined by constitution, charter, rule or law applicable to such governing body, means a majority of th~ governing body. Application of act . Sec. 2. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this Act or specifically permitted in the Constitu- tion, every regular, special. or called meeting or session of every governmental body shall be open to the public; and no closed or executive meeting or session of any government'al body for any of the purposes for which closed or executive meetings or sessions are hereinafter authorized shaH be held unless the governmental body has first been convened in open meeting or session for which notice has been given as hereinafter provided and during which open meeting or session the presiding officer has publicly announced that a closed or executive meeting or session wi\I be held and identified the section or sections under this Act authorizing the holding of such closed or ex- ecutive session. · TEX. REV. CIV. STAT. ANN. art. 6252-17 (Vernon Supp. 1980). -9- . ....~ . . - . (b) In this Act, the Legislature is exercising its rule-making powers to prohibit secret m~etings of the Legislature, its committees, or any oth..r bodies associated with the Legislature, except as otherwise specificaHy permitted by the Constitution. (c) A governmentill body may exclude any witness or witnesses from a he,j[ing during examina- tion of another witness in the matter being investigatec/o . (d) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to affect the deliberation of grand juries. (e) Private consultations between a governmentill body and its attorney are not permitted except in those instances in which the body seeks the attorney's advice with respect to pending or con- templated litigation, settlement offers, and matters where the duty of a public body's counsel to his client, pursuant to the Code of Professional Responsibility of the State Bar of Texas, clearly con- flicts with this Act. (f) The public may be excluded from that portion of a meeting during which a discussion is had with respect to the purchase, exchange, lease, or value of rea] property, n~gotiated contracts for prospective gifts or donations to the state or the governmental body, when such discussion would have a detrimental effect on the negotiating position of the governmental body as between such body and third person, firm or corporation. (g) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require governmental bodies to hold meetings open to the public in cases involving the appointment, employment, evaluation, reassignment, duties, discipline, or dismissal of a public officer or employee or to hear complaints or charges against such officer or employee, unless such officer or employee requests a public hearing. (h) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require schoo] boards to hold meetings open to the public in cases involving discipline of public school children unless an open hearing is requested in writing by a parent or guardian of the child. (i) All or any part of the proceedings in any public meeting of any governmental body as defined hereinabove may be recorded by any person in attendance by means of a tape recorder or any other means of sonic reproduction. (j) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require governing bodies to deliberate in open meetings regarding the deployment, or specific occasions for implementation, of security person- nel or devices. (k) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to allow a closed meeting of a governing body where such closed meeting is prohibited, or where open meetings are required, by charter. ( ) Whenever any deliberations or any portion of a meeting are closed to the public as permitted by this Act, no final action, decision, or vote with regard to any matter considered in the closed meeting shall be made except in a meeting which is open to the pubJic and in compliance with the requirements of Section 3A of this Act. (m) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require school boards operating under consultation agreements provided for the Section 13.901 of the Texas Educatioñ Code to deliberate in open meetings regarding the standards, guidelines, terms,' or conditions it wiJJ follow or instruct its representatives to foHow, in consultation with representatives of employee groups. (n) Nothing in this Act shaH be construed to require an agency wholly financed by Federa] funds to deliberate in open meetings. Co) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require medical boards or medical committees to hold meetings open to the public in cases where the individual medical and psychiatric records of an applicant for a disability benefit from a public retirement· system are being considered. (p) Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require that interviews or counseling sessions be- tween the members of the Board of Pardons and Paroles and inmates of any facility of the Texas Department of Corrections be open to the public. Mandamus or injunction to prevent dosed meetings . Sec. 3 Any interested person, induding bona fide members of the news media, may commence an action either by mandamus or injunction for the purpose of stopping or preventing violations or threatened violations of this Act by members of a governing body. Notice of meetings Sec. 3A. (a) Written notice of the date, hour, place, and subject of each meeting held by a governmental body shall be given before the meeting as prescribed by this section, and any action " ¡ ~_.. -10- . .a.~ ~......... ... :\ .: . . . taken by a gover~mental body at a meeting on a subject which was not stated on the agenda in the notice posted for such meeting is voidable. The requirement for notice prescribed by this sec~ion does not apply to matters about which specific factual information or a recitation of existing policy is furnished in response to an inquiry made at such meeting, whether such inquiry is made by a !l1ember of the general public or by a member of the governmental body. Any deliberation, discussion, OT decision with respect to the subject about which inquiry was made shall be limited to a proposal to place such subject on the agenda for a subsequent meeting of such governmental body for which notice has been provided in compliance with this Act. (b) A State governmental body shall furnish notice to the Secretary of State, who shall then post the notice on a bulletin board to be located in the main office of the Secretary of State at a place ' / convenient to the public. (c) A citygovernmental body shall have a notice posted on a bulletin board to be located at a place convenient to the public in the city halJ. J (d) A county governmental body shall have a notice posted on a bulletin board located at a place convenient to the public in the county courthouse. (e) A school district shall have a notice posted on a bulletin board located at aplace convenient to the public in its central administrative office and, in addition, shall either furnish a notice to the county clerk in the county in which most, if not all, of the school district's pupils reside or shall give notice by telephone or telegraph to any news media requesting such-notice and consenting to pay any and all expenses incurred by the school district in providing special notice. (f) A governmental body of a water district or other district or political subdivision covering all or part of four or more counties shall have a notice posted at a place convenient to the public in its administrative office, and shall also furnish the notice to the Secretary of State, who shall then post the notice on a bulletin boa~d located in the main office of the Secretary of State at a place convenient to the public; and it shall also furnish the notice to the county clerk of the county in which the administrative office of the district or political subdivision is located, who shall then post the notice on a bulletin board located at a place convenient to the public in the county cour- thouse. (g) The governing body of å water district, other district, or other political subdivision, except a district or political subdivision described in Subsection (f) of this section, shall have a notice posted at a place convenient to the public in its administrative office, and .shall also furnish the notice to the county clerk or clerks of the county or counties in which the district or political sub- division is located. The county clerk shall then post the notice on a bulletin board located at a place convenient to the public in the county courthouse. (h) Notice of a meeting must be posted in a place readily accessible to the general public at all times for at least 72 hours preceding the scheduled time of the meeting, except that notice of a meeting of a state board, commission, department, or officer having statewide jurisdiction, other than the Industrial Accident Board or the governing board of an institution ôf higher education, must be posted by the Secretary of State for at least seven days preceding the day of the meeting. In case of emergency or urgent public necessity, which shall be expressed in the notice, it shall be sufficient if the notice is posted two hours before the meeting is convened. Provided further, that where a meeting has been called with notice thereof posted in accordance with this subsection, ad- ditional subjects may be added to the agenda for such meeting by posting a supplemental notice, in which the emergency or urgent public necessity requiring consideration of such additional subjects is expressed. In the event of an emergency meeting, or in the event any subject is added to the agenda in a supplemental notice posted for a meeting other than an emergency meeting, it shall be sufficient if the notice or supplemental notice is posted two hours before the meeting is convened, and the presiding officer or the member calling such emergency meeting or posting supplemental notice to the agenda for any other meeting shall, if request therefor containing all pertinent infor- mation has previously been filed at the headquarters of the governmental body, give notice by telephone or telegraph to any news media requesting such notice and consenting to pay any and all expenses incurred by the governmental body in providing such special notice. The notice provi- sions for legislative committee meetings shall be as provided by the rules of the house and senate. Viola Hons and penalties Sec. 4. (a) Any member of a. governing body who wiìfully calls or aids in calling or organizing a special or called meeting or session which is closed to the public, or whp wilfully closes or aids in -11- . ~~ . . - 4!... .. - closing a regular meeting or session to the public. or who wilfully participates in a regular. special. or called meeting or session which is closed to thf publìc where a closed meeting is n~t permitted by the provisions of this Act. shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is punishable by a fine of not less than S100 nor more than 5500 or imprisonment in the county jail for not less th,1O one month nor more than six months, or both. (b) Any member or group of members of a go...·erning body who conspire to circumvent the pro- visions of this Act by meeting in numbers less than a quorum for the purpose of secret delibera- tions in contravention of this Act shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and on conviction is punishable by a fine of not less than S100 nor more than $500 or imprisonment in the county jail for not less than one month nor more than six months or both. J -12- ([ /~Jh -3 ~~~;",..".".,.¡\,..~;:., ·.;i ;:f' ... . ":TRlòS1æ..stRUCTUQES.irK·",I;;.,5 ~~"'>",,~ ~ ~¡Vt. CtlCULte..6 W. LVill.Á£{;n6 P.O. Box 18609 Foft,t {OoUh~ Te.XM 76718 Ðe.alL Sht: / Janua!ty 15, 1981 ,f þf~~" -3-~Oo I woultl appfteúctte. veJty mLt.c:h being ptac-e.d on. YOM age.nda f10ft :the. mee-Ung 0·6 Jaf1U1Vty 26, 1981. ^{y pu/r.rJO/5e 60ft ;t~ fte.queót Áh J:.o r)fte..6e.nt a pftOpO-6a£ áoft ~ome mu.Lu-ûctrrU,iy apafttme.n,t UvÚ,t,ó to be. C-OJ'L~:tJr..u..~te.d by OLUt c:ompany. Quft buLeciln.g-6 a/r.e. a uvU,que. YOUfL C-OLU1C-J-l will. '6~nd vVtfj ~nte)r.e.-6üng. . ~q(~> W BA/wl (", ,/1 w ~ . 1~ ("'-- S,Lnc.eJte.ly, ..., I '" ~., - f - / ~ ,j "./ Bo b Áó h Pft~~de.nt PeT~a-Stee.i Conó~uetion Co.~ Ine. ~ ) ,..-------- ~~ , .~" "'~- " ''\: '- -, '. . operation shall keep all streets, alleys and sidewalks adjacent to such excavations or building operations car~ied on by them~ in a clean and orderly condition, and unobstrutted, except as provided herein, during such operation, and at the expiration of the time stipulated in the permission aforesaid, they shall restore all such streets, alleys and sidewalks to as good condition as they were before the beginning of such opera~ions. 1 . 04 75~~ Bri ck All multi-family, two family and one family dwellings shall have exterior walls constructed of 75% brick, stone, or if --ãpprõvecr-bY--tJi-ë-·-L-'·-·[Y-C-6unc-nJ4other masonry or materials of equal characteristics. Exterior wall shall mean that exposed portion of the building from the foundation up to the ceiling line of the first floor of the building. SECTION 1.05 Barbed Wire Fence. ... ' . It shall be unlawful for any person, persons~ firm or corporatipn, or agent or employee thereof~ to build~ erect~ keep or maintain or permit or allow to be'built, erected, kept or maintained, any barbed v/ire fénce on or around any property or premises owned or controlled by such person, persons, firm or corporation \'/ithin the limits of the City of North Richland Hills, Texas. SECTION 1.06 Enclosure of Swimming Pool. a. Every swimming pool shall be completely surrouneB by a fence or wall not less than four feet in-height, which shall be so constructed as not to have openings, holes, or gaps larger than four inches in any dlmension except for doors and gate$; and if a picket fence is erected or maintained, the horizontal spacing bet~Jeen pickets shall not exceed four inches. A dwelling house, or accessory building may be used as part of such enclosure. b. All gates or doors opening through such enclosure shall be equipped with a self-closing and self-latching -device for keeping the gate or door securely closed at all times when not in actual use, except that the door of any dwelling which forms a part of the enclosure need not be so equipped. .