Update _ no appeal - produced documents

[dcb]

The City produced documents which apparently are the documents the AG
indicated were to be produced. It is 19 pages - 7 of the 19 pages I
drafted. The other 12 pages were efforts to explain why concerns
regarding local government code 331.001 did not apply to
Friendswood. The documents also show as of late April and early May
the Mayor was the point of contact for the attorney(s) not Councilman
Barker. In early May, a city attorney queried whether the Alvin
property could be addressed in the validation proceeding. This shows
that the City was contemplating a validation proceeding as of the
morning of May 4 which makes it even more confusing as to why Council
waited until June 1 (after suit was filed) to approve the filing of
the suit. There were Council meetings on May 4 and May 18. The
City's lawsuit was filed on May 22. Council did not need to seek
retroactive approval but could have received approval before the suit
was ever filed.


OPEN RECORDS REQUEST - EDUCATIONAL TIP FOR THE WEEK
As a caution, if you submit an open records request for example on
April 16, 2009 and then get a response on April 24. The April 24
response will not include any documents received by the City during
the gap period from April 16 to April 24. Therefore, if a document
came in on April 21 you would not be advised even if the document is
directly responsive. In order to get around such gameplaying, all the
requestor has to do is submit a follow up open records request the day
the responsive documents are produced seeking only those documents
during the gap period. In other words, submit a follow up open
records request covering the period of time from the date the original
request was submitted to the date of the City's response.

Another lesson learned. . . When we learn, we grow. . .