Source: City of Richardson
On October 12, 2026, the Richardson City Council agreed to have the City coordinate scheduling for a series of town hall meetings at which council members would answer questions from the public.
Mayor Amir Omar initiated quarterly town halls, rotating among four areas of the City. He has held six such town halls in total. The format is straightforward: members of the public submit questions; all attendees vote for questions they are most interested in; the Mayor answers the questions that receive the most votes. In the first six such town halls, he managed to answer *every* question. A ChatGPT-generated summary of the Q&A from the Mayor's most recent town hall held on August 5, 2026 can be found here: Mayor Amir Omar Town Hall Reference Book.
What's not to like? Well, the council had concerns, but at the end of the deliberation, there was a consensus to proceed with the proposal.
Council Member Jennifer Justice: "I think that we should follow the model that [Mayor Omar] created, which is we do one per place, and then for those that are in at-large seats, you either get an option to attend any one of the four or the one where you happen to live."
Council Member Joe Corcoran: "Based on experience, I would definitely support a pilot program for this idea of taxpayer-funded town halls." He did express a concern about holding them during election season. More on that later.
Mayor Pro Tem Ken Hutchenrider: "I think we should pilot it in a city space. Any and/or all seven of us can attend. [Mayor Omar] would moderate. We keep it as open format. We would not expect any PowerPoint, anything from city staff. It would just be questions from whoever shows up to the meeting, and you would moderate and keep it to only two of us to answer any question that is out there."
Council Member Arefin: "Mayor Pro Tem has a pretty good solution."
Council Member Daniel Burdette: "I'm falling in line with a lot of the opinions expressed. I think that one of my biggest concerns was equal airtime opportunity. If we approach it with at least all seven are invited, then everyone has an opportunity if they feel like they need to be directly interacting with the residents."
Council Member Curtis Dorian: "I mean, I support it, but I think I'm not sure if it's the right time for the town hall meeting." Does that sound like he supports it? Really? It's not the first time he has said he supports something, but... This sounds to me like a polite way of saying, go away and don't come back anytime soon.
Some of the differences among members concerned the value of direct public access; the balance between costs and benefits; the burden on city staff; the scheduling challenge; and the political implications during election campaigns. Mayor Omar addressed some of these.
Mayor Omar on the cost of prior town halls: "The total cost for all six [prior town halls] so far has probably been something like $500. So just in case the taxpayer-funded element of this is a concern, it can be very inexpensive." Omar later said that venue rental accounted for $500 of a $600 total. Setting a fixed budget for these was not pursued.
Mayor Omar on limiting staff involvement: "We could do it with no staffers, with no prep for the meetings, which is exactly the way we've been doing it so far for six town halls." His summary of what was finally agreed: "The level of city coordination will just be on the scheduling, and we may bring back some questions that were unanswered at the end of it."
Mayor Omar on the burden on council members: "Is the goal for us all to be sitting in front of every single one of these town halls, or is the goal to allow residents to be able to ask the questions that are near and dear to their heart, and to actually be able to get an answer from someone?" He offered an alternative based on how the town halls have been scheduled so far: "One scenario has you adding one meeting to your schedule a year versus four."
Mayor Omar did not directly address Corcoran's concern about holding taxpayer-funded town halls during election campaigns. Justice suggested scheduling the first town hall in January and the next after the election. Candidate filing for the May 1, 2027, election begins January 13. If the council does decide not to hold town halls during election season, the timing of the proposed January meeting could become an issue, but the council did not adopt that restriction during this discussion.
The discussion concluded with a consensus to try a pilot program under these general conditions:
- Timing: Begin with the next quarterly town hall in January 2027.
- Participation: Invite all seven council members, without requiring every member to attend.
- Format: Retain the existing open-question and QR-code submission approach.
- Staffing: Have the City coordinate scheduling, but do not require staff to attend or prepare presentations.
- Moderation: The mayor would moderate and rotate opportunities to answer questions.
- Follow-up: Unanswered questions could be brought back for responses.
The Council has done its part. The rest is on the public. Show up. Ask questions. Hold your representatives accountable.
The City Council also supported two other transparency measures: live-streaming council meetings on Facebook and creating short videos, about five minutes long, summarizing council meeting actions. More on those can be found here: "Council Recap: 4 Wins for Public Outreach".
Quotes have been lightly edited for clarity and brevity.
"Voices rise and fall.
Questions are asked in town hall.
Answers serve us all."
—h/t ChatGPT
I have attended two - did not use a QR code - had my questions answered - I cherish each as an opportunity for informal exchanges between voters and their elected officials. I have heard elected officials agree to disagree - civilly and respectfully in one of these informal forums - without time limits - without a moderator - an example that many more should witness.
ReplyDeleteThe perceived need to make these more formal concerns me - the goal is to provide a forum for voters to ask folks questions and for the elected to talk freely about their ideas - rules that in any way diminish that goal concern me greatly. The idea has been great - it has been executed well - let's not water down the purpose.
If some council members don't like what is happening - don't feel comfortable with the informal format - let them hold their own events - with their own rules - I applaud the Mayor's efforts for transparency, engagement and access that started long before he was elected.
We live in a great community - I believe these opportunities provide concrete evidence that civil discussions are possible and can be fostered through transparency - access - and engagement.