MAYOR BOSWELL VIOLATES TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT, TEXAS CONSTITUTION, AND U.S. CONSTITUTION! CITY ATTORNEY, CITY MANAGER, AND CITY COMMISSIONERS REMAIN SILENT DURING VIOLATIONS!

ABOVE: HARLINGEN CITY COMMISSION MEETING 4/18/12
GO TO: [1:15:43-1:18:51] [1:56:15-1:56:45] [1:57:12-1:57:45] ON THE TAPE ABOVE FOR TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT VIOLATIONS!

MAYOR BOSWELL, CITY ATTORNEY, AND CITY COMMISSION VIOLATIONS:

1: TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT/ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION ALLOWS FOR "CITIZENS COMMUNICATION" THIS WAS CITY COMMISSION MEETING AGENDA ITEM #5 AND THEREFORE CITIZENS ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK DURING THIS PERIOD.

READ: HARLINGEN COMMISSION AGENDA FOR 4/18/12
READ: BOSWELL MAY NOT DISCRIMINATE

2: TEXAS OPEN MEETINGS ACT ALLOWS FOR CITIZEN'S INPUT DURING "PUBLIC HEARINGS" THIS WAS CITY COMMISSION AGENDA ITEM #8 AND WAS A PUBLIC HEARING AND THEREFORE CITIZENS ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK DURING THIS PERIOD

READ: HARLINGEN COMMISSION AGENDA FOR 4/18/12

3: UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION-FIRST AMENDMENT FREE SPEECH RIGHTS

READ: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

4: TEXAS CONSTITUTION, ARTICLE 1, SECTION 8

Every person shall be at liberty to speak, write or publish his opinions on any subject, being responsible for the abuse of that privilege; and no law shall ever be passed curtailing the liberty of speech or of the press. In prosecutions for the publication of papers, investigating the conduct of officers, or men in public capacity, or when the matter published is proper for public information, the truth thereof may be given in evidence. And in all indictments for libels, the jury shall have the right to determine the law and the facts, under the direction of the court, as in other cases.

READ: FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND PRESS; LIBEL.

Managing Discussions at an Open Meeting

QUESTION 43. What right does the public have to speak on a particular agenda item? 
ANSWER 43: The Act allows the public to observe the open  portion of a meeting.  However, the attorney general has concluded that the Act does not give members of the public a right to speak on items considered at an open meeting.  Such a right exists only if a specific state law requires a public hearing on an item or if state law requires that public comment be allowed on an issue.  If a local entity allows members of the public to speak on an item at a meeting, the governing body may adopt reasonable rules regulating the number of speakers on a particular subject and the length of time allowed for each presentation.  However, the governing body must apply its rules equally to all members of the public.


QUESTION 44: What is the general distinction between a public hearing and an open meeting?
ANSWER 44: A governing body is not required by the Act to allow members of the public to speak at an open meeting. However, during a public hearing, members of the public must be given a reasonable opportunity to speak.  Another difference between public hearings and open meetings is the type of notice that must be provided.  Many statutes that require a public hearing also require that special notice of the hearing be given.  For instance, when a city council is going to have an annexation hearing, it must publish notice of the hearing in a newspaper at some time between 10 and 20 days before the hearing. On the other hand, the only notice generally required for an open meeting is the 72 hour posted notice. 


QUESTION 45: May a governing body limit the number of speakers at an open meeting?
ANSWER 45: A governing body may make reasonable rules regulating the number of speakers on a particular subject and the length of each presentation. Arguably, such rules could include a requirement that a group select one of  its members as a spokesperson.  However, the body should not differentiate between one group and another on a particular issue. Further, in no case may the governing body adopt procedural rules that are inconsistent with the state or federal constitution, state or federal statutes, or a home rule city charter. Restrictions on the subject matter that citizens may discuss or the manner in which they may discuss them may in some instances violate the United States Constitution's First Amendment, which prohibits governmental bodies from imposing laws or regulations that abridge free speech. A local entity should consult its legal counsel if it decides to impose such procedural rules. 

READ: TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL: "2012 Texas Open Meetings Act MADE EASY": 

BOSS HOG GIVING THE PEOPLE OF THE RIO GRANDE VALLEY WHAT THEY DESERVE: BUCKETS OF CHICKEN!

here joe, never mind all that,  just have another piece of chicken and listen to me, I KNOW BEST!
\
OK JERRY, I WILL SUCK IT UP AND EAT THE CHICKEN, REALIZING THAT YOUR DISTRICT IS 95% HISPANIC, AND YOU HAVE NEVER GOTTEN ONE VOTE, BUT I REALIZE, YOU ARE A GRINGO AND YOU KNOW WHAT IS BEST FOR OUR HISPANIC DISTRICT!  THANK YOU JERRY FOR YOUR WISDOM AND DON'T FORGET TO SEND THE ENVELOPE!