Action taken at last night’s meeting of the Ruston City Council appears to have violated Louisiana’s Open Meeting Law, LA RS 42:11, et seq.
Specifically, a matter as listed on the published and council-approved agenda was not considered, and action was taken to amend a proposed ordinance without properly amending the meeting agenda.
No such amendment action was listed on the approved agenda. The agenda had earlier been unanimously approved by the council, upon a motion by Carolyn Cage, and a second by Jim Pierce.
Section II, Item D of the approved agenda was listed thus:
Consider Ordinance No. _____ of 2018, Levying an Additional Sales Tax of One and Seventy-Five Hundredths Percent (1.75%) in Economic Development District No. 1 of the City of Ruston, State of Louisiana (The “District”)…
However, when it was time for the item to be considered, Mayor Ronny Walker, who chairs the meeting, said it would not be voted upon. He claimed that an ordinance amending the boundaries of the district was being introduced, and that the tax itself couldn’t be voted upon until those boundaries were set.
Said Walker, “Although the ordinance will not be acted on tonight, we will have a public hearing as previously announced, in which any person desiring to make a public comment on the ordinance levying the tax may do so tonight.”
That appears to conflict with this provision of the Open Meetings Law:
LA RS 42§19. Notice of meetings
A.(1)(b)(i) All public bodies, except the legislature and its committees and subcommittees, shall give written public notice of any regular, special, or rescheduled meeting no later than twenty-four hours, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, before the meeting.
(ii)(aa) Such notice shall include the agenda, date, time, and place of the meeting. The agenda shall not be changed less than twenty-four hours, exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays, and legal holidays, prior to the scheduled time of the meeting.
Next, the mayor proceeded to seek an amendment to the tax ordinance that would limit the tax to a maximum of ten years. No such action was contemplated on the approved agenda.
The motion was made by Angela Mayfield, and seconded by Jedd Lewis. It passed unanimously.
In response to questions, City Attorney Bill Carter said that was the only amendment under consideration.
Here again, there appears to be a conflict with the law:
(cc) Upon unanimous approval of the members present at a meeting of a public body, the public body may take up a matter not on the agenda. Any such matter shall be identified in the motion to take up the matter not on the agenda with reasonable specificity, including the purpose for the addition to the agenda, and entered into the minutes of the meeting. Prior to any vote on the motion to take up a matter not on the agenda by the public body, there shall be an opportunity for public comment on any such motion in accordance with R.S. 42:14 or 15. The public body shall not use its authority to take up a matter not on the agenda as a subterfuge to defeat the purposes of this Chapter.
During the public hearing, several citizens opposed to the tax commented. There were no comments in support of the tax.
James Fuller, who last month wrote a letter to the council members, and which was subsequently published as a letter to the editor, commented opposing the tax. He noted that questions brought up in his letter had not been answered.
Also heard from was Lou Taylor, who said, “We need to complete Phase I. We need to get additional information regarding the sports districts, etc. from other cities that have them. I just think we are overextending ourselves until we finish phase one.”
Chris Garriga, a local restaurant owner, said he felt that the tax should be limited to 5 years instead of ten.
Mary Halbrook said she had contacted her council member to oppose the tax.
“I feel that if we’re having all these people that are coming to town – coming to the sports complex – these thousands of people that are coming to town eating in restaurants – just the sheer number of people coming will increase the tax revenue, and you’ll have that money to fund Phase II,” she said.
She added that the tax should be levied on hotels only and not restaurants.
As we had noted upthread, an amendment to the tax district boundaries was introduced.
Walker said the amendments added food trucks and crawfish trailers to the list, and removed some closed restaurants.
One notable deletion was Ruston Theaters, LLC.
See here the original ordinance as adopted on 10/1/18.
See here the amendments.
Walker also announced a special called meeting for Thursday, November 29, at 5:00 PM. He said a final voted on the tax ordinance would be held then.
About 15 minutes into the meeting, a tornado warning caused the meeting to be interrupted for about 30 minutes. Everyone was evacuated into adjacent offices during that time.
