(a short and timely jotting for CCR twits Tweeters)
dwT #49: If there is one thing that the staff of the CCR believes, it is in sharing. And maybe now is the time for some members of the school board (possibly any guilty parties) to share with mayor BVD the finer intricacies regarding the Open Meetings Act.
Backstory clue for the information impaired: With disregard and maybe a twinge of disdain, mayor BVD committed another of her infamous faux pas acts at the November 7, 2013 city council meeting. Apparently, mayor BVD believes that she just might be above the law or that only certain laws she favors are important enough to adhere to. Especially, if she is attempting to have plenty of TV face time and act as the sole arbitrator on an issue.
The Open Forum at city council meetings is for citizens to address the council on items that are not on, or part of the agenda...and this seems to always draw some dude who attempts to weave a ‘dancing’ dialogue -- that lacks understanding or sense -- into the fray.
At the meeting in question, a primary Dallas/Farmers Branch agitator (we would give his name, but don’t want him to have any additional publicity) made his monthly appearance before the Irving city council to berate city staff, uninformed council members and the general public-at-large for another of his windmill attacks. (Should one assume that he has “cured” all of the Dallas/Farmers Branch problems -- racial or otherwise -- thereby freeing up time for him to meddle in Irving affairs?)
After the dust settled on the Dallas/Farmers Branch agitator’s rant, mayor BVD proceeded to call a city staff member to the podium. (This was the first wrong as the council should not discuss or attempt to resolve any issue brought up in the Open Forum.) From all outward appearances, mayor BVD put on her prosecutorial hat and began to verbally browbeat the city staff member concerning the issue. (This was the second wrong in that personnel issues should not be address in public session unless the individual being browbeaten has requested this.) Finally, the city attorney jumped into the discussion and informed mayor BVD (Third wrong: she should have known better.) that she was violating the Open Meetings Act via her discussion and attempting to handle/resolve and issue that was not on the posted agenda for that evening.
After basically ignoring the city attorney, she continued to verbalize additional instructions and informed the city staffer to meet with the Dallas/Farmers Branch agitator. This apparently was her attempt to demonstrate to the city attorney (and cameras) that she was in charge and would definitely have the last word! Such chutzpah!
What almost makes this entire episode comical is that the Dallas/Farmers Branch agitator had asked specifically on several occasions to meet with mayor BVD on the topic being bantered about. Funny, she didn’t seem to hear these requests. After all, why schedule a meeting if no TV cameras will be present?
While no one will probably file an Open Meetings Act complaint with the Dallas DAs office against the mayor, someone should at least share with mayor BVD the portion of her drafted revised updated studied unapproved ethics plank from her campaign that reflects even the mayor is subject to the whims of all the laws.
Of course, this could interfere with her TV face time and grandstanding...but then, who is paying attention to her anyway?
A note from counsel: Some “Tweets” from Dylan Westie have been injected with fabricated nouns, verbs, adjectives, conjunctions, adverbs, modifiers and maybe a few dangling participles….Mark Holbrook