The Richardson City Council met March 23, 2026. The main draw (for me) was the discussion about the process the city council will use to fill mid-term vacancies on the council. But, first, there were a couple of other agenda items that drew my scrutiny as well.
Visitors Forum
According to the agenda, "The visitors forum portion of the meeting is set aside for members of the public to address the City Council on any topic in which the subject matter is within the jurisdiction of the City." I guess that's interpreted pretty loosely. Here's an excerpt from the comments by the only speaker during the visitors forum:
Now that we've gotten through Ramadan and nobody lost their life in Richardson, thank goodness, I'm here to talk to us about what is happening in the next two weeks. I'm here to talk to us about Jesus Christ. It is not God's desire that anyone should perish or go to hell, but when you reject Jesus Christ, that's exactly what's going to happen. It's going to get really hot for you.Source: City of Richardson.
Where to start? The city council is not allowed to respond to public comments, either in support or in opposition. The mayor did ask if anyone else in the audience cared to speak and no one raised their hand. For not responding myself, I apologize to the council. If the purpose of the speaker's comment was to invite audience members to his church's Easter services, I think he'd get a better response using a message of universal love than using the threat of fire and brimstone. And his vaguely worded introduction definitely should have be reworded. Whatever did that mean? Was it meant to be as Islamophobic as it sounded to me? My words are simply inadequate to express the disapproval I felt.
"Kid N Play" Indoor Playground
ZF 26=01 is a request for a change in zoning granting a special permit for a commercial amusement center. After too much extraneous discussion, the council granted the request 7—0.
Why do I say extraneous? There were questions about how the business would be operated than whether an indoor playground is an appropriate use for that property. Ironically, earlier in the meeting the council gave rote approval to the "standards of care" used in the city's early childhood and youth programs. Are there "standards of care" defined by the state or city for commercial playgrounds? If yes, then let city staff enforce the ordinance. If not, maybe that's something the city council should address.
Instead, as a zoning matter, it seems to me there should have been some discussion whether a children's playground is an appropriate use next to distillery. Richardson has an ordinance prohibiting alcohol sales within 300 feet of a school. Why is a children's playground different? Especially without standards of care?
Appointment Process for Council Vacancies
Now for the main event. How are vacancies on city council filled? Why is this so timely? It turns out that two council members could be resigning before this term is done. Council member Dan Barrios is running for Congress. Council member Joe Corcoran is running for Collin County Appraisal District.
The City Charter says that a single vacancy "shall be filled by appointment by majority vote of the remaining members of the city council." The problem here is the charter is silent on what process the council shall use leading up to that vote. In the case of two of more vacancies at the same time, the vacancies "shall be filled by special election." This takes the process out of the hands of the council and puts it in the hands of the voters.
The council, after long deliberation, came up with a process that will look something like this.
- Council to Review/Approve Application (Council Meeting) 1 week
- Application Period 3 weeks
- Council Reviews Applications (On Own) 1 week
- Selection of Applicants to be Interviewed (Council Meeting) 1 week
- Initial Applicant Interviews (Council Meeting) 2 weeks
- Deliberation/Announce Finalists (Council Meeting) 1 week
- Finalists Interviews (Council Meeting) 1 week
- Deliberation/Announcement Appointee (Council Meeting) 1 week
- Council Vote on Appointment/Swearing In of New Council member 2 weeks
- Total 12 weeks
I won't go into it in detail because I wasn't clear on the details agreed upon. How many applicants will be interviewed, how many times, and which meetings will be open and which closed. I only know for sure where a few council members stand.
Council member Curtis Dorian: "As I've said before, on many occasions, when you're interviewing someone or even a Progress Review, I find that that's very personal, and I think it's something that should be considered an executive session."
Council member Dan Barrios: "I disagree with Councilman Dorian in the sense that I think it's when you run an election, it's a very public process. And I think therefore we we need to make this as transparent, open and in front of audience and cameras as possible."
In the end, the council agreed to conduct initial interviews in open session and finalist selection and appointment itself in closed sessions. (I think.)
I fear that if they come down on the side of interviewing candidates in open meetings, but taking their own deliberations behind closed doors, they run the risk of violating the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA). The steps of the process above that I highlighted in bold text are the most problematical. TOMA applies when a government body deliberates public business or policy over which the body has control. There are very limited exceptions to the requirement of open meetings. The exceptions include personnel-type matters...but Attorney General guidance suggests that appointing a council member is not a personnel matter. It's deciding who will exercise governmental power. That puts it squarely in the realm of "public business / policy" and requires open session. Conducting individual interviews in closed meetings is allowed, as long as they don't compare candidates or qualifications. Such debate must occur in open session.
I applaud the city council on working out this process in open session instead of taking it behind closed doors and thrashing everything out there. But I do think they are taking the convenient way out when the law doesn't permit them that option.
Quotes have been lightly edited for clarity and brevity.
"In the end, a seat
Filled by both light and shadow —
Does the law allow?"
—h/t ChatGPT
No comments:
Post a Comment