Sign up for Bulldog News Alerts so you don't miss a thing!

donate

inn-art_copy

spj-vert

ire

guidestar

ilhigh

 

Print E-mail
(3 votes, average 5.00 out of 5)

City Hosting Open Government Symposium

 Follows county attorney’s investigation
of City Council open meetings violations

by Ken Martin
© The Austin Bulldog
Posted Tuesday March 19, 2012 2:59pm
Updated Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 3:27pm

The City of Austin is taking a giant step into the sunshine by hosting its first-ever Open Government Symposium April 17, an all-day event featuring six panel discussions.

The symposium comes six months after the county attorney concluded a 21-month investigation of the mayor and council members, in which he “found probable cause to believe that multiple violations of the Texas Open Meetings Act had occurred,” according to the Travis County Attorney David Esamilla’s Press Release of October 24, 2012.

That investigation—triggered by The Austin Bulldog’s investigative report of January 25, 2011 and a formal complaint filed by civic activist Brian Rodgers—resulted in these elected officials (excluding Kathie Tovo, who was not on the council at the time of the violations) signing deferred prosecution agreements, also called compliance agreements.

David EscamillaDavid EscamillaIn a Monday interview, Escamilla said of the symposium, “I’m happy to see the city move forward in this direction. I think it's a needed initiative given that during our investigation we identified a lack of understanding and education in this area.”

The open government symposium comes two years after The Austin Bulldog sued the City of Austin over its refusal to release e-mails about city business that the mayor and council members exchanged on private accounts.

That lawsuit, The Austin Bulldog v. Lee Leffingwell, mayor, et al filed March 1, 2011—five weeks after the county attorney launched his investigation—not only triggered release of those e-mails about city business exchanged on private accounts but led to new policies for how the City Council, city employees, and board and commission members handle electronic communication in accordance with the Texas Public Information Act.

City’s efforts aim to boost openness

Sabine RomeroSabine RomeroThe symposium was organized by Assistant City Attorney Sabine Romero. She leads an Ethics and Compliance Team that was formed during the county attorney’s open meetings investigation as part of a reorganization that moved the city’s Integrity Officer from the city manager’s office to the Law Department.

“The City of Austin’s commitment to open government reflects its commitment to transparency in every aspect of City service,” Romero said in a press release. “This symposium is an opportunity to focus on these issues and better serve the public.”

In an interview Monday, asked if the symposium was required by the county attorney’s investigation, Romero said, “No. The only formal agreements with Escamilla are between the council members and him. We are voluntarily doing this symposium. It is not required.”

Joseph LarsenJoseph LarsenAttorney Joseph Larsen, special counsel to Sedgwick LLP in Houston and a Freedom of Information Foundation of Texas board member, offered high praise for the city’s open government initiative.

“It's really great to see Austin leading on this issue,” Larsen said in an e-mail. “I don't know of a city holding a symposium like this before, but it is a great idea for many reasons.

“Symposiums can actually be useful for helping both requestors and governmental bodies to deal with the day-to-day practicalities of open government, as well as recalling to us all the privileges and duties of a representative democracy,” Larsen said

Wide-ranging program scheduled

The all-day Open Government Symposium includes opening remarks by Mayor Lee Leffingwell followed by a half-dozen panel discussions. To see the agenda, which names the panel and speakers, click here.

An RSVP is required via e-mail to This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , specifying which panels you would like to attend. Romero said that additional speakers may be added to the program as preparations continue.

Panelists will discuss interaction and compliance, legislative developments, a corporate perspective on building an effective compliance program, social media and trends, and open government beyond the city.

The broad scope of the symposium is further exemplified by the fact that one of the scheduled panel discussions titled “Open Government Litigation Developments” features two attorneys who have fought to limit access to what open government advocates say are public records and to decriminalize conduct prohibited under state law.

Mick McKamieMick McKamieSan Antonio-based attorney Mick McKamie of McKamie Krueger LLP (with offices in Austin, Dallas, and Laredo), said he is lead counsel with Craig Enoch of Austin-based Enoch Kever PLLC, and assisted by Houston-based Dick DeGuerin of DeGuerin & Dickson, on a case currently pending the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision on whether to hear it. (Updated Tuesday, March 19, 2013 at 3:27pm to clarify the attorneys involved.)

Asgeirsson et al v. Abbott (No. 11-50441) is being appealed to the high court after losing its appeal from the U.S. Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit. The case involves 15 elected officials who contend the Texas Open Meetings Act’s criminal penalties established in Government Code Section 551.144 (for knowingly participating in a closed meeting that is not permitted) violate the officials’ First Amendment rights.

In addition, McKamie said, “I did an amicus brief for 50 cities (for public officials not from Dallas) and for Dallas Mayor Laura Miller on the Blackberry case (No. 05-07-01736-CV). The court held that e-mails on her Blackberry were not public information. That’s what the law is right now.”

George HydeGeorge HydeScheduled to be on the same panel with McKamie is Austin-based attorney George Hyde of Denton Navarro Rocha & Bernal PC, who represents Bexar County Commissioner Tommy Adkisson.

The lawsuit, Adkisson v. Abbott, No. 03-12-00535-CV, “challenges an attorney general letter ruling (OR2010-08701) that e-mails from his private e-mail account relating to county business are public information. The trial court agreed. The case is on appeal at the Austin Court of Appeals,” according to information on the Texas Municipal League’s website.

City expanding focus

To improve transparency and raise standards, the city is doing more than hosting this symposium.

Romero said her Ethics and Compliance Team, which now consists of herself and ethics trainer Alicia Olmstead, will be expanded.

“We’re definitely hiring,” she said, including two attorneys, an additional trainer, and an administrative assistant.

The team may also get additional help from the Law Department, if required, she said.

Romero said the team’s work will extend beyond open government, to include ethics (doing the right thing) and compliance (following the letter of the law) with City Code and state law.

More open government symposia likely

Romero said the panel discussions will be captured on video, some of which may be telecast live on Channel 6, and all will be uploaded for later viewing on demand.

“I think it’s going to be fun,” Romero said. “I had the flexibility to decide what the panels would be and put in not just the city perspective but state, federal and corporate. Next year maybe we will do a different perspective.”

So there will be more of these symposiums in the future?

“I don’t see why not,” Romero said.

This report was made possible by contributions to  The Austin Bulldog, which operates as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit to provide investigative reporting in the public interest. You can help to sustain  The Austin Bulldog’s coverage by making a tax-deductible contribution.

Related Bulldog coverage: This is the 37th story covering the City of Austin’s problems and progress in dealing with open government issues.

Deferred Prosecution Ends Open Meetings Investigation: Mayor and five current council members sign agreements waiving the statute of limitations and requiring major reforms, October 24, 2012

Austin Board and Commissions Get E-mail Policy: Fifteen months after City Council ordered changes, board and commission members to be assigned city e-mail accounts, August 23, 2012

Open Meetings Investigation a Year Old Today: County attorney says investigation of whether City Council violated Open Meetings Act is still ongoing, January 25, 2012

City of Austin Moving, Slowly, Toward Greater Transparency in Electronic Communication: New system for board and commission members targeted for first quarter 2012, October 27, 2011

Employee E-Communication Policy Drafts Show Each Revision Weakened Rules: Policy that was near fully compliant on first draft crippled by changes, September 13, 2011

The Austin Bulldog Files Second Lawsuit Against City of Austin for Withholding Records: City not responsive to open records request concerning water treatment plant construction, September 1, 2011

City Manager Establishes Policy for Employees’ Electronic Communications: Open government legal experts say policy is seriously flawed, but it’s an important start, August 10, 2011

City of Austin Dragging Its Feet on Implementing Lawful E-mail Practices: City employees, board and commission members still not covered by city policies, July 13, 2011

E-mails Exchanged by Council Members Expose Private Deliberations and Political Maneuvering: More than 2,400 pages of e-mails published here in searchable format, July 6, 2011

Taxpayers Footing Big Bills to Correct City of Austin’s Open Government Issues: $200,000 spent on attorneys so far and no end in sight, June 24, 2011

Treasure Trove of Public Documents Made Available in Searchable Format: E-mails, text messages, meeting notes obtained through open records, lawsuit, May 12, 2011

County Attorney’s Office ‘Cannot Determine’ City of Office Committed Alleged Violations: Bulldog’s complaint was the first presented for violation of the Texas Public Information Act, April 22, 2011

Council Staff Training Lapsed from 2007 Until Lawsuit Filed: Only one current staff member had taken training, city records show, April 20, 2011

Austin City Council Adopts Policy to Improve Compliance with Texas Public Information Act: Policy does not cover all city employees or all city board and commission members, April 15, 2011

City of Austin and Council Members File Answer to The Austin Bulldog’s Lawsuit: Answer challenges standing and claims requests for open records fulfilled, mostly, April 11, 2011

Call for Public Help in Analyzing City Council Members Private E-mails, Text Messages: Volunteers needed to review correspondence and provide feedback on any irregularities, April 9, 2011

City of Austin’s Records Retention Undermined by Lack of Controls Over Deletion of E-mails: Missing records likely more important than gossipy tidbits, April 6, 2011

Council Member Laura Morrison Releases E-mail on City Business from Gmail Account: Morrison second council member to turn over more e-mails responsive to The Austin Bulldog’s requests, March 30, 2011

Private E-mails About City Business May Be Pulled Into City of Austin Records Retention: City Council votes to consider policy draft at council meeting of April 7, March 29, 2011

The Austin Bulldog Files Civil Complaint Against City of Austin and Council Members: Travis County Attorney David Escamilla has legal authority to force compliance, March 23, 2011

Expired: The Austin Bulldog’s Offer to Settle Its Lawsuit with City, Mayor and Council Members: Does this mean these elected officials want to continue to violate state laws?, March 18, 2011

Council Member Spelman’s City E-mails on UT Account Will Not Be Provided: University of Texas will seek opinion from Texas attorney general to withhold, March 18, 2011

The Austin Bulldog Files Lawsuit to Compel Compliance with the Law: Mayor and city council members not in compliance with statutes for public information, records retention, March 2, 2011

Smoking Gun E-mail Shows Council Aide Advocated Evasion of Open Meetings Act: Provided detailed guide to allow chats with council members on dais but leave no trace, March 1, 2011

Council Member Bill Spelman Goes On the Record About Private Meetings, Fifth in a series of recorded question and answer interviews, February 20, 2011

Council Work Sessions Stir Concern Over Tying Up Staff for Two Meetings: City manager presents summary of options for council consideration, February 15, 2011

Mayor Claims Lawyers Okayed Private Meetings But City Won’t Release Proof: City pledges cooperation with county attorney’s inquiry but is withholding these key documents, February 13, 2011

County Attorney Asks City of Austin for Records Related to Open Meetings Complaint: Former Mayor Wynn and Former Council Member McCracken included, February 9, 2011

Council Member Randi Shade Goes On the Record About Private Meetings: Fourth in a Series of recorded question-and-answer interviews, February 9, 2011

City of Austin Commits $159,000 for Advice in County Attorney’s Open Meetings Act Inquiry: Three attorneys hired for $53,000 each, February 7, 2011

Council Member Chris Riley Goes On the Record About Private Meetings: Third in a Series of recorded question-and-answer interviews, February 6, 2011

Council Member Sheryl Cole Goes On the Record About Private Meetings: Second in a Series of recorded question-and-answer interviews, February 3, 2011

Mayor Pro Tem Mike Martinez Goes On the Record About Private Meetings: First in a series of recorded question-and-answer interviews, February 2, 2011

Will I Said Come On Over Baby, Whole Lot of Meetin’ Goin’ On: Council Member Chris Riley tops the chart with 256 private meetings, January 30, 2011

County Attorney Reviewing Complaint, Brian Rodgers Will Not Run for Council, January 25, 2011

Open Meetings, Closed Minds: Private meetings to discuss public business shows Austin City Council may be violating Open Meetings Act, January 25, 2011

 

Comments   

 
+1 #1 POKEY 2013-03-19 20:05
This is big right. The magnitude of this my be hard for some one like me to comprehend. Thanks Ken Martin for all your efforts, April 17th will be on my calender.
Quote
 
 
+1 #2 Chris Walker 2013-03-19 20:51
Great start by the Mayor/City Council &, in fairness, this 'event' is coming only after CoA's strenuous efforts last year to fight off (unsuccessfully ) BullDog's legitimate requests for 'secret Email' info to which the Public was entitled, followed by what many consider t/b the County Att'y's 'whitewash' report which found violations of the law but gave the guilty pleas, pass/promise of no repeat. A convincing gesture toward transparency would involve addressing still-current questions by various parties, posted in:-- www.austinaccountabilityproject.com !That would reflect a real fresh start v. what many may interpret - given the past UNwillingness cited above - as largely an attempt at further coverup: i.e, at this point what's needed appears to be more Official Will than Public wallet (cost to Taxpayers of these panel lawyers - some of questionable objectivity)!
Quote
 
 
+1 #3 Leslie Aisenman 2013-03-19 21:42
Sorry to disagree here, but it all looks like window dressing of a piece with County Attorney's sweetheart deal with confessed miscreants. it all contributes to the practice of the Mayor in limiting and muzzling critics. I guess the old South, where Justice was bought and paid for, that is where justice wasn't found, still exists in the "most liberal" city in Texas. "The day will come, the walrus said...."
Quote
 
 
+1 #4 Editor 2013-03-19 22:05
Re: #1 Pokey: If you want to attend the Open Government Symposium don't just put it on your calendar. Be sure to RSVP.
Quote
 
 
+1 #5 Editor 2013-03-19 22:09
Re: #2 Chris Walker: Regarding the "questionable objectivity" of the panel lawyers, I would not expect lawyers to be objective but to be strong advocates for their clients. And I'm sure that Mick McKamie and George Hyde would qualify as strong advocates for their clients.
Quote
 
 
0 #6 POKEY 2013-03-19 22:25
I copy on RSVP. I was hopping to just hang around. "" When responding, specify the panel(s) you would like to attend."" Sure are a lot of Lawyers there. I'm already nervous.
Quote
 
 
+1 #7 Chris Walker 2013-03-21 12:03
Editor's point is well-taken: therefore, given expectation McKamie/Hyde'll defend clients who oppose full public access to information - there seems little reason to have confidence in CoA's proclaimed goal to 'improve transparency and raise standards'. Again, seems just another effort to justify earlier white-wash(es) by County Attorney et al of improper and or illegal actions by the Mayor, council members, city manager & staff and - all over again - @ Taxpayers'/Publ ic expense: when a real need is for thoro Investigation by an outside 3rd Party; US attorney or a Congressional Inquiry!-
Quote
 
 
+1 #8 Grady Bennett 2013-03-28 22:31
Examples: Dallas, New Orleans, Newark & other cities may be pattern for Austin; i.e., Citizens' demand investigation by the United States Attorney into corrupt practice by elected/appoint ed officials.-Seve ral years ago done here, & needs t/b resurrected: see earlier DoJ complaint - www.austinaccountability.com - .
Quote
 
 
+1 #9 Grady Bennett 2013-03-28 22:34
- www.austinaccountabilityproject.com - < Correction Link info: see left Margin >
Quote
 

Add comment


Security code
Refresh