Residents press council on transparency, alleged Open Meetings Act violations and city attorney disputes

Public commenters and several council members used the June 4 meeting to air concerns about transparency, alleged written deliberations among council members, and the process that led to the city attorney’s pending departure.

Mark Merrill and other speakers cited public-record requests and emails they said showed council members had engaged in deliberations outside an open meeting — conduct they described as inconsistent with the Texas Open Meetings Act. Merrill said he had a stack of emails and urged colleagues to stop conducting policy decisions "behind everybody's back." He pointed to examples in which agenda language, email exchanges, or rapid changes raised questions about whether deliberations had been appropriately noticed.

Another strand of comments focused on an agenda item related to the city attorney. Some council members said the agenda language appeared to be definitive rather than exploratory and that the attorney resigned after the item was posted; others said the agenda item was listed to solicit discussion. Council members asked staff to clarify the procedural history, including who requested the agenda item and whether appropriate notice and authorization occurred.

The council agreed to add follow-up items to a future agenda to examine the email/discussion records, clarify rules for placing items on the agenda and discuss corrective steps to avoid future misunderstandings. Several council members apologized for a lack of coordination and emphasized the need to restore public trust through clearer processes and more transparent agenda practices.