Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Open Meetings Transparency topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Conroe mayor asks attorney general to review council quorum rules after disputed department retirements
Summary
Mayor submitted a letter to the county attorney requesting an official opinion from the Texas Attorney General about whether the city charter and state open‑meetings law allow a majority of council members to make decisions outside public meetings; council members debated the move at length during the March 26 work session.
Mayor and city council members debated a March 2025 letter the mayor sent to County Attorney B.D. Griffin asking for an opinion from the Texas Attorney General about potential "loopholes" in how Conroe's council forms a quorum and whether a majority can make decisions outside public meetings.
The dispute centers on events last July when four department heads were offered retirement packages. Mayor said he learned the night before interviews were scheduled and called for review by the Attorney General to ensure the city is operating in the spirit of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Council members who opposed sending the letter said the mayor should have first circulated the request to the full council and city attorney and expressed concern that the letter’s format implied it represented the city rather than the mayor alone.
Why it matters: The question touches on the city charter, how council majorities communicate and make policy decisions, and whether council procedures should be amended to increase transparency. Council members warned an AG inquiry could invite state involvement in local affairs; others said an outside opinion could resolve ambiguity and prevent future disputes.
Council discussion and claims Mayor (role: Mayor) told the council he wrote the letter to the county attorney requesting an AG opinion because he was concerned that a majority of council members might be making decisions outside public meetings. He described the July incident in which four department heads were offered retirement packages and said he found out at 9:45 p.m. the night before interviews were set to begin. "I found out about it at 09:45 on Wednesday night," the Mayor said, describing the timing as his reason for seeking outside review.
Councilwoman Porter said she and two other council members did not know in advance about the director retirements and asked for confirmation of the timeline; later in the meeting city staff confirmed that they had informed the mayor the night before. Porter also criticized the letter’s presentation on mayoral letterhead and recommended that similar requests go through city attorney and council review in the future.
Council members who opposed the mayor’s approach, including one who characterized the letter as "deceptive and extremely unprofessional," argued the record of past votes showed almost universal unanimity: staff presented a summary that from June 27, 2024, through March 2025 the council had cast 499 votes, 486 of which were unanimous among members present; only 13 votes had any disagreement and only one item had passed 3–2. Those council members said the AG referral was unnecessary and risked "bringing the state into our local business." They also said the mayor did not consult other suggested options the city attorney had given him before sending the letter.
Support for outside review Councilman Wood (role: Councilman) said he sought advice from the county attorney after meeting with the city attorney and that he welcomed an AG opinion to clarify whether the charter’s language conflicts with the spirit of the Texas Open Meetings Act. Wood said he was not alleging misconduct and framed his request as a question of whether the charter needs updating to avoid future confusion.
Process and next steps City staff and councilors agreed to wait for the Attorney General’s response. Mayor said he expects the AG opinion to take months; one councilor noted the AG’s statutory timeline may extend to September. Several speakers suggested that, whether or not the AG finds an issue, the council could still consider charter amendments or a council agenda item to discuss changes locally.
Ending The council did not take a formal vote on charter changes at the March 26 work session. Instead, members debated the mayor’s letter and awaited the Attorney General’s guidance. Several members repeated calls for greater transparency in how council and staff communicate about personnel matters and for clearer internal processes going forward.
