My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Ord 1984-025
San-Marcos
>
City Clerk
>
02 Ordinances
>
1980 s
>
1984
>
Ord 1984-025
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/30/2007 2:28:40 PM
Creation date
8/30/2007 2:28:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Clerk
City Clerk - Document
Ordinances
City Clerk - Type
Code of Ordinances
Number
1984-25
Date
2/27/1984
Volume Book
64
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
7
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />Memo to Mayor Craddock and Members of the <br />City Council <br />Dated February 23, 1984 <br />Page 3 of Memo <br />For the future, I recommend that meeting s of the City <br />Council, whether regular meetings or workshops, that are <br />held outside the City Hall be published in the newspaper <br />at least seventy-two (72) hours before the meeting. While <br />supplemental notices of additions to the agenda do not <br />need to contain the phrase "emergency or urgent public <br />necessity" I recommend that all time changes in the future <br />be posted with that phrase. <br />Coddington's article states also that there was a revised <br />agenda distributed at the meeting that differed from the <br />legally posted agenda. The legally posted agenda called <br />for a "discussion of Reinvestment Zone No. I, City of San <br />Marcos, Texas (JASBA)." The entire meeting was taken up <br />by such discussion. The attorney for JASBA, Jane Wood, <br />distributed some materials that included an agenda item <br />that read "composition of board of directors of <br />Reinvestment Zone No. 1, City of San Marcos. " That item <br />was included in the "discussion" carried on by the <br />participants in the meeting on February 7. Mr. <br />Coddington's assertion that the agenda was changed is <br />without merit and is untrue. <br />Mr. Coddington waited twelve days to notify any officials <br />that he believed the meeting held on February 7 was <br />illegal. If he believed this at the time of the meeting, <br />he could have prevented any possible wrong-doing by <br />raising these issues at that time. However, since no <br />action was taken by the City Council at the workshop on <br />February 7, there is nothing that could 'be voided as a <br />result of a failure, if any, to comply with the Open <br />Meetings Act, contrary to Mr. Coddington's assertions. <br />In general, these types of problems can be avoided in the <br />future by more careful planning of regular Council <br />meetings as well as workshops held by the Council. <br />~ ~cr- ~ <br />LAMAR W. HANKINS <br />CITY ATTORNEY <br />LWH: jv <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.