Council members Tom Crews, Tommy Cones and Andy Mann voted against adopting the ordinance.
The details
The city proposed the ordinance following the passage of House Bill 4310, which went into effect Sept. 1.
The new law asserts that members of governing boards have a special right of access to certain public information, and allows cities to ask those members to sign confidentiality agreements when that information is confidential under the law.
Public information is any information the government collects or maintains, including internal communications, police records, attorney-client communications and ordinance drafts, according to the Texas Public Information Act.
Those opposed
Several council members said the proposed city ordinance was redundant, going beyond the scope of state law and could be used to target elected officials.
“We're going a little bit further from state law that we're mandating council members sign the agreement,” Cones said.
Those in favor
Mayor Nick Long said the ordinance intends to protect the city as a whole should one elected official breach confidentiality, and clarifies that only the City Council as a whole has the right to waive its privilege.
“If one person decides to release it, it doesn't really matter if you sign the confidentiality agreement or not, because you suffer the same penalties,” Long said.
Council member Chad Tressler, who voted for the ordinance, said council members are subject to penalties for releasing confidential information, but requiring them to sign the agreement ensures they acknowledge and understand the rules and prevents them from claiming ignorance later.
“Signing this agreement says, ‘I know I shouldn't be releasing this stuff,’” Tressler said.
The takeaway
Per city code, council will vote on the second final reading of the ordinance at its next meeting Dec. 16.
