DAN MORALES

ATTcmNEY GENERAL 

## @ffice of tip!!Zittotnep Qaeneral fitate of 

## atxas

Homable Tracey Bright Ector Cuunty Attorney CountyChrbutqRoom201 Odessa,Texas 79761 June 1s. 1993

Opinion No. DM-228
Be: whether a county wmmissioner msy raise an issoe fbr disausion &es the Wm!Idssi0nersWurthsst8kW6nalwtion on it andrelatedquestions (RQ-204)
Dear Ms. Bright:
You inquireabout the prowdures for raisingan issuefor disatssion at 8 meetingof the commissionerscourt. YOU state that the cOmmissioners Court of&tor County took rfindvoteonaInendmaltstolnordiMnw wnwming sexuallyoriented businessesat a BIwthg 6om which one commissioner wss absent. See genemJ&Local Govt &de oh. 243 (dcipal and WUDQ urthority to m&ate location of sexually oriented business). opponentsof~ 8lndmemwishtohrvethewurt reconsider them. Questions bwe 8CsW011 whether this UWter

UUy be placedon the qendq or whetherthe wmmissioners lMYdiSWSSitWithOUtllWhgitphCCdOtltkrgcnda. You ask: (1) Inrsubqwntmsaing,anrCwmriuionar8isemissuefor diswssionifthe-onersCourtIlaspreviouslyts,kenfinal actionontbematter7

Thefacttbatthe anwdssionerswurthsstJEQl6ntllwtiononrmendmentstoan ordiwcedoesnotprevattithmamendhgtbeordimweintbefbtureoren&ngin discussionthat may lead to an amahatt. Se AugustA. Busch & Co. v. csrfioki, 135 S.W. 244 (Tat. Cii. App. 1911,wtit refd) (commissioners court has power to rescind an ordcrmadeinitr~~~,inrohruvertedrightsuenotimpaired); Gdliqgswah Cat+ v. h@rs, 35 S.W. 414 (TUL Cii. App. 18%. a0 wit) conrmistiomrpcorrrtmryrtlaytime~ormodifymolutionKniagcountyjudge’ s ~~r~~~olavicqvbenjudgehd~~~~tbutaloy);src~chntv. Tmant Couq Chiki We&we Unif, 509 S.W.2d 378.381 (Tar. Cii. App.-Fort Worth 1974, no writ) (kgislature may as a general matter repeal any statute at will). The

p. 1183HonorebleTmcey Bright - Page 2 (OH-228)

wmmissiooers court is abject to the Open Meetiogs Act, ae V.T.C.S. art. 6252-17, gl(c),uditr~murtw~~withtherequinmmtooftbeopen~Act. Witten ootke of the ‘dete, hour, place, end subject of each meetit& hld by the ammirdoaarcolntmustbegivalw~the~hrccordrncewithrectian3Aof the act arbject to tbe follohg exception:

Tberapdmmtfbrnotice

. ..doesnot8ppiytoolattwsaboot whichspea!&twlinfolmationorrrecituiwofarirtingpolicyis hmisbediomspoosetominquirymsdertsucbmeetin&wbetber aachitquiryisaudebyrmembaoftbegenemlpublicorbyr tlanbmoftbe govamedbody. Anydeliiqdirarrri~or decisioowitbrespwttotberubjwtrboutwbi&inqobyw8smrde &eUbelimitedtorproposeltophccsucbsubjectontbeegeoddtbr ralbsequeHtmeuingofsuchSowrmwntal body for which notice basbeeopmidedinwolplilocewitbtbisAct. V.T.C.S. ut. 6252-17. 8 3A(a).l !&ion 3A of the Open Meuings Act allows a wunty camohsiooatomJEeminquirydmiogtbemeetingrbout~intbmutioooraistiog policythudoesoot8ppearontbemeetiognotice,buttbewur&maynotdiswsstbe subjectexwptwitbintbeMrrow limitssetoutillKctioo3A Inrd~yourquertionlboutPrtboritytoptanrbjectranthc~forr wtmnissionaswllrlmeetiae,weurumethntJInrbjectsontlleylmdrofthelbating ~rlrorawt~theplblicaotiwofe~providedia -withscuioo3A of the Open Meetings Act.’ Attorney GeneralOpiioo lM-63 (1983) determinedthat the ~judgewunotruthorizedtooontroltbewnt~ofthergmdqcvcnthoughr statute desiwed him the presiding officer ofthe court. Local Gov’tCode 0 81.001(b) (formerly V.T.C.S. article 2342 (1925)). The opinioo io Hclnsbro v. Neidrhqfer, 83 S.W.2d 685 (Tex. Cii. App.-Beaumont 1935,no writ) suppotts this wnclusion. It held thatrwuntyjudgewassu&cttorwtitofmadamus wbere&refiuedtorewgoizea motiondulyproposedandsewndedatr coowimiooerswort~. Tbewultstated ~8countyjudge~rllowthemanbarofthecwrttorubmitmotionrtorvoteof the court. Xd. rt 685. Attorney Gemal Opinion JM-63 coach&d that the wmmisioners

p. 1184HonorableTracey Bright - Page 3 (DH-228)

wurtasawhoiehastheauthoritytodetennheitsownagenda. &eTex.Const.ut.V. 518 M-Y commiuiowrscwrtsblludsepoweruldjurirdictionoverwuoty hsiness); &n’t code 0 311.013; Cumles v. LouglJin, 214 S.W.2d451 (Tcx. 1948). It Jlodltedtht’ [e]rchmankrofthtcarrl...murtkparnittedtoplrcewthirlleenda aoyitanofbisc4msiog.’ **AltomeyGamlopinioom4-63u3.** Tbus$rwunty wmmissionerm3yphcermatterontheagendaforrmeeting. Thiswncblsioodoesnotmedotbatrwmmissiooerswlotuonot~ptr pro&we fbr phcing items on the gada. The set effkct of any procedure adopted, howmr,armotbeto~~ermemkrofthecourt~p~mitcmwmig~ sotb~itouybediswssedpublicly. Wbilevoteswwypartiwhrmatt~mrybeoubjwt to tosjority rule, we aooot condone the implaneotuioo of any procedure that would effeaively preclude a duly elected reprexntative on tbe wmmissioncrswurt6om8ta oioimm providioga publicforumfor discussionofany partiadar issue. Youdsoa!k **(3)** 

### MayRo&n’sRvlrsofOrdrrkusedtogovall~oninthc commirsioouscourtoleetiogs? (4)IfrtrratiKmaykuredtoregulatethcoonductofmectiagq mostitbefomlauyadoptedastbewotrolliogwdmrityin cbmmbsiooerscourc, sections 81.005 and 81.006 of the Local GovammtCdeaddresstbetiw, loution,mdquonunrequirrmentsofwmmiuioncncourt~.Thccourtirlro aubjecttotheOpettMeetingsAct,butwebavehmdwstatutesettingout wmpreknsive procuhs for the wnduct of wmndssioners wurt mectiqs.

TbCW moissiooerswmofrwootybasonlythosepowrcstbatmupmsslyor bynecersuyimplicrtionIpuaeditbythcconrtitutioa~thertltutcs,butLhrbrord dkretion in exercisingexpresslyw&red powers. Gmaks, 214 S.W.2d451; An&rsun v. Wood, 152 S.W.2d 1084 (Tar. 1941). A wmmissioners court may 8dopt re8aonable rulestht~coasirtmtwitbrelmntprwirionroft~togovantheoonductofitr mwtiogs. See gtmcml!y Attorney General Opiiw **H-188 (1973).**  Iftbe coodsd0DCrS courtwishes~meetingstokw~~rccordingtoRobcrl’ sRvlrsojOrdcrorof those provisions of a treatise that are wnsistent with law, and to require wmpliww with thorepro~o~~rllmcmbasofthecorut,thewurtmuptfomullyvoteto~optthe plWiSi00.

p. 1185Honor&le T~cay Bright - 1 ’ 8ge4 W-228)

SUMMARY Tkwooniuionerscourtouycoosirnretodiscossmis8uehr allbsqemeetiogevaltlKnlgbithupmiaulyt8kal6o8l~ OSlit#gldddtb9tOpiCOfdiSWSSiWlUSbWOpropatyOOtiWd. dharitytoprep8retbe~forr~isvestedi”* l3imlbiooersoourturwbole,uldnothtbecarntyjod~. An individwl txmmisdonerm8ypi8ceitemrofhis~singontbc
w- como&sioners wmt my adopt reasonable rules WllSi!UWtWitbnlcvlntStUOt~UldWUStiMidproviriOBStO pwa7litsolwdngs. IftbewurtwisbesitsmwtingstobegovaDed bytbeprovisioosofrtnrtirethatmam8istaltwithlaw,ittmJst votetofonnrltyadoptthoseprovisiomasitscoattmUiaSattho~.

DAN MORALES Attomq Omerd ofTexas
WILL PRYOR Fii AssistJnt Anomey oeod
MARYKELLER DeputyAttomeyG?aenlfortiguion RENEAHlcKs State Soticitor MADELEINEB. JOHNSON chsir,opioion~

p. 1186