Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Code topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident alleges city code was changed without council vote, asks for accountability
Summary
A Kyle resident told council members that March 2026 changes to the city's code were made without an ordinance or two‑reading process, saying staff or the city attorney usurped council authority and asking who authorized the edits and what accountability steps will follow.
Larry Golic, a resident speaking during the citizen comment period, accused city staff and the city attorney of making unrecorded changes to the municipal code in March 2026 and urged the council to demand accountability. “Supplement 4 carried exactly 3 ordinances into e code 3 60,” Golic said, and added that the city’s comparative table shows “no record of this change.”
Golic told the council that the code amendments were not approved by ordinance, that they did not go through two readings, and that city staff used an incorrect backup citation to a 2011 budget ordinance. He asked whether the council had authorized the change and, if not, who had. “The city attorney and city staff have no authority to amend the code. Only this council does,” Golic said during his remarks.
Why it matters: municipal code updates must follow a statutorily required process to ensure legislative transparency and to provide public notice before revisions take effect. Golic’s claim, if accurate, would suggest the city’s published code diverges from council‑adopted ordinances and could affect regulatory enforcement and public trust.
What council did: Council received the comment during the public‑comment period and did not take immediate action on the allegation during the meeting. The council moved on to later agenda items and executive session as scheduled; no formal staff report or council motion addressing the alleged code change was made on the record during this meeting.
Next steps reported or implied in the meeting: The complainant asked the council to explain whether it had authorized the change and to identify steps for holding any responsible staff or officials accountable. The council did not announce a follow‑up at the meeting; staff were present at the hearing and may provide a written response or a formal agenda item at a subsequent meeting.
