One tradition that's worth keeping

The Galveston County Daily News has established a New Year’s tradition of printing a column on its editorial page about the Public Information Act. The column describes why the PIA is important, to whom it applies, what the general policy of the state is, things the public is not entitled to see and how to make a request for public information.

“Why get into all that now?” the column asked. “The New Year is a time of reflection. Many people resolve to make the world a little bit better. That doesn’t take a magic wand. In a democracy, things get better when individual people become better citizens.”

FOI battles on the county level

Bandera County has filed its second suit against the attorney general in a year despite a dispute over the filing of the suit. County commissioners voted in December to ratify the filing of the suit, which initially was filed by attorney George Hyde on the authority of County Judge Richard Evans without the commissioners’ approval, according to the San Antonio Express-News.

County Commissioner Bobby Harris dissented, saying he objected to the county judge involving the county in litigation without consulting with the commissioners. The county is challenging a ruling involving an open records request from a past candidate for county judge asking for details of fees the county paid to Hyde in the past.

The county claims Hyde’s invoices are exempt because they contain his work product and may compromise the attorney-client privilege on former and pending cases. The attorney general ruled that the information sought was open because the county failed to ask for an opinion within 10 days.

Last February, the county asked a state district court to exempt a county file regarding the settlement of a wrongful termination complaint. That case, in which the county also claims attorney-client privilege, is pending, according to the newspaper.

...And the city level

A former Farmers Branch City Council member has sued the city to gain access to copies of legal bills and consulting fees incurred in connection with the city’s attempts to ban home rentals to illegal immigrants. Council member Carol Dingman filed the suit in state court, according to the Associated Press. She requested copies of the bills related to the city’s defense of its fight to enforce measures to keep illegal immigrants from living in the city, a suburb of Dallas.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott told the city information about the expenditure of public funds is public. The city had cited attorney-client privilege. Opponents of the ordinances estimate the city has spent more than $1 million dollars to pay several law firms and a public relations firm to defend lawsuits over it immigration ordinances, the AP reported.

***

A provision of a proposed amendment to the Rockwall City Charter allowing a majority of the City Council to call a special meeting of the council has come under fire from the FOIFT. Attorney Joe Larsen filed a brief with the Opinion Committee of the AG’s office pointing out some of the problems with the proposed charter amendment. Any action by a majority of the council members requires a posted open meeting, he noted.

“It is difficult to see how an agenda item can be agreed upon by a quorum of a governmental body without deliberation,” Larsen wrote.

The solution would be for the council to post an item for the regular meeting calling a special meeting, he said.

***

The City of Taft is appealing a jury’s award of $142,000 to a fired city manager, arguing that its City Council violated the Open Meetings Law when a 15-month severance contract was made with the woman. The appeal argues that the action of the council resulted from an agenda item that was too vague and the action the council took was too vague. The posted agenda said the council would “Consider and act in regards to employment status of City Manager.” It should have included the possibility of an employment contract providing for severance pay, the appeal said.

Also, when the council came out of an executive session, the vote was “to adopt a contract with City Manager, as discussed in executive session.” That, also, was too vague.

“I’m amazed that they are taking the position they are,” said Jon D. Brooks, Topper’s attorney.