Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Charter Amendments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Tomball council debates ballot wording on communications, quorum and department responsibilities
Summary
Council reviewed four potential charter amendments including prohibiting discussion of city business by three or more council members outside noticed meetings, shifting engineering into Public Works, and streamlining ordinance readings; staff will revise ballot language and return for formal action.
City staff presented proposed charter amendments to the Tomball City Council on Jan. 5 and asked for direction on ballot language and timing ahead of potential spring elections.
Thomas (city staff) outlined four propositions forwarded from prior discussion: amending Article 6 to prohibit communications regarding city business by groups of three or more council members outside a publicly noticed meeting (intended to tighten open‑meetings language), moving engineering duties from Community Development into Public Works, modifying ordinance-readings/publishing requirements to reduce duplication, and cleaning up appointment/confirmation references for department heads.
Ballot wording and timeline: Thomas read draft ballot language for the communications change to clarify the proposition the public would see on the ballot. "Shall the city of Tomball be, charter be amended regarding article 6, section 6.1, and adding the language prohibiting discussion of city business outside, of a publicly noticed meeting by groups of 3 council members," he said while asking council for feedback on whether the draft captured intent.
Key council concerns included defining "members of the council" (whether the mayor counts as a council member for this purpose), the interaction with the Texas Open Meetings Act, and whether this change would unduly limit informal communications. Multiple council members recommended separating quorum/voting provisions from communications language and inserting clarifying examples in the draft to reduce ambiguity.
On ordinance readings, the council discussed keeping two readings but publishing final passage once, or moving to one reading with one publication to reduce cost. Staff advised some charter provisions still require two readings for specific matters (typically financial) and said they would reconcile the language and provide clear examples.
On department assignments, staff explained that moving engineering from Community Development to Public Works reflects current departmental structure; the change would be reflected in charter language and ballot descriptions.
Next steps: Council did not vote on amendments at the workshop. Staff was directed to refine the ballot language, consider a single paragraph for communications separate from quorum definitions, and return with revised text that can be used if the council chooses to call a special or candidate election (staff noted candidate filing deadlines around Feb. 17 could affect timing).
Ending: No ordinance or charter amendment was adopted. Staff will provide revised language and supporting materials for council review ahead of any formal election call.
