At what point does sloppy government actually become illegal government? At what point does the business conducted at improperly noticed special meetings become moot? At what point does a presentation by a council person who is also a candidate become illegal electioneering in City Hall?
On Friday, March 28, notice of a City of Bastrop Special Council meeting was posted. Two versions are provided for the public online: HTML and PDF. I typically grab the HTML version. I took screen shots of that last night.
This morning, while doing a search for “State of the City”, I happened to view, then grab, the PDF version.
What a difference!
- At the top of the HTML agenda is an Executive Session at 5PM. No rationale for that Executive Session is shown. That is required by law.
- In the PDF version, that Executive Session has been removed.
- Is there, or is there not, an Executive Session? If there is, what’s the subject?
- “Staff and Board Reports” is an item on the HTML agenda. Not on the PDF version.
- Will there, or will there not, be Staff and Board Reports?
- The HTML version lists “Presentations” during the meeting, but no indication of the subject of those “Presentations”.
- How can the public know if they’d be interested in attending to hear those “Presentations” if they don’t know what they are?
- The HTML agenda includes “Mayor’s State of the City Address” at 6PM.
- The PDF agenda does not list a “Mayor’s State of the City Address” at all, but rather during the meeting it lists “City of Bastrop Presentation” but not by whom nor the subject matter.
- Will there be a “Mayor’s State of the City Address” by Council candidate and Mayor Pro Tem John Kirkland? If so, that would seem to be illegal electioneering in City Hall. Perhaps that’s why the item name change.
- A search of City of Bastrop agendas since 2005 for “State of the City” returns only one other instance of such an address at a noticed Council meeting: in 2023 upon the retirement of Mayor Connie Schroeder.
- The City website home page shows that a “State of the City” address was just done on September 16, 2024 by the City Manager at a Chamber meeting. The video remains online. So why another one just 6 months later? Could it be there’s an election coming up on May 3?
- The HTML agenda says the meeting starts at 6:30. The PDF agenda says it starts at 6.
- So an attendee referencing the HTML agenda will be a 1/2 hour late to a meeting that the PDF agenda says starts at 6PM. Is that a legal meeting? Questionable at best.
- The HTML agenda says the meeting location is Bastrop City Hall City Council Chambers (top right). The PDF agenda says it is the Convention Center.
- So an attendee referencing the HTML agenda will go to City Hall. An attendee referencing the PDF agenda will go to the Convention Center.
- Finally, on the CityofBastrop.org website list of meetings, this meeting isn’t even listed as a “Special City Council Meeting” but rather is listed like this:
How is a member of the public supposed to know that this is actually a Special City Council Meeting? If I didn’t look at the agenda itself, I would have guessed this was a meeting of some organization and that it didn’t pertain to me.
So at what point does sloppy government become illegal government? I submit that it has done so with the publication of this meeting if the City Council chooses to hold this meeting in the face of so many notice irregularities.
March 31 Update
After sending an email to the City Manager, City Council members, City Attorney and some members of the press about this “Town Hall”, I received a quick response from the City Manager. While I appreciate her rapid response, her comments concern me.
“This is an informational meeting to give the residents an opportunity to hear from the developer, also learn the history of the project from a timeline perspective and what the local government code actually states, and lastly, where the project stands.”
Since when does a city government hold a meeting that is not a Council meeting or Planning & Zoning meeting to allow a developer to present (sell) his development concept or plans? If the developer wants to hold such a meeting, well, that’s his or her prerogative. But the city should not be doing so.
Will the city do this for every developer that wants a public forum to “sell” interested parties on its project? On what basis will the city turn down the next developer who asks for such a forum? City government cannot discriminate. This isn’t the first controversial development and it won’t be the last.
If the developer were not allowed to speak, but the city wanted to hold an educational meeting about its code and use various completed development examples to explain that code, that would be one thing. But to hold a “Townhall” on behalf of a single developer is completely inappropriate.