Rebecca Terrell and Chandrashekhar Thanedar v. Pampa Independent School District

Summary

The Seventh District Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed a trial court judgment denying Rebecca Terrell and Chandrashekhar Thanedar relief on claims that Pampa Independent School District violated the Texas Open Meetings Act at twenty-two meetings. The court held that the district substantially complied with notice requirements, that the website-posting failure was excused by the statutory technical-problem exception, and that the appellants failed to prove an improper closure of the March 26, 2009 meeting. Because no TOMA violation was established, the court also denied the requested voidance, mandamus, injunction, damages, costs, and attorney’s fees.

Holdings

1. The notices substantially complied with the Texas Open Meetings Act even though they identified locations such as Pampa High School without specifying the meeting room, street address, or city.
2. The evidence supported the finding that the March 26 notice was posted at least seventy-two hours before the meeting and identified approval and termination of probationary-contract employees as subjects.
3. Appellants did not establish a violation based on Linder's signing and posting of the notices.
4. Posting notices on the inside of the glass door at PISD's central administrative office substantially complied with the Texas Open Meetings Act's requirement to post notices on a bulletin board in a place convenient to the public.
5. PISD's failure to post meeting notices on its website from January 15 through May 19, 2009, was excused because it resulted from a technical problem beyond PISD's control and followed a good-faith attempt to comply.
6. The trial court properly admitted the testimony of Linder and Jameson; appellants did not show that the absence of vendor contracts required exclusion or that the testimony was hearsay.
7. Appellants failed to establish that PISD violated the Texas Open Meetings Act by closing the March 26 meeting.
8. Appellants were not entitled to voidance, reinstatement, damages, costs, attorney's fees, or other requested relief because they failed to prove any Texas Open Meetings Act violation.

Questions Presented

1. Whether PISD substantially complied with the Texas Open Meetings Act's requirement that meeting notices identify the place of the meetings.
2. Whether the notice for the March 26, 2009 meeting was timely and sufficiently identified Terrell's probationary-contract termination as a meeting subject.
3. Whether the notices were invalid because Karen Linder allegedly lacked authority to sign and post them.
4. Whether posting notices on the glass door of PISD's central administrative office satisfied the statutory bulletin-board requirement.
5. Whether PISD's failure to post notices on its website during the website transition was excused by the Texas Open Meetings Act's technical-problem and good-faith exception.
6. Whether the trial court improperly admitted testimony concerning the website vendors and improperly excluded recordings of the March 26 meeting.
7. Whether PISD illegally closed the March 26 meeting after Terrell requested that it remain open.
8. Whether appellants were entitled to voidance, reinstatement, damages, costs, attorney's fees, or other requested relief.

Disposition

affirmed