Graphic by Noah Dawson for The Amarillo Pioneer
Welcome to The Amarillo Pioneer live blog for the first day of the trial in the lawsuit between local businessman Alex Fairly and The City of Amarillo over the city’s use of anticipation tax notes to fund civic center renovations.
To read more about the background of the trial and a summary of what has happened leading up to the trial, read our recap here. This page will update regularly, so be sure to refresh often.
8:45 am
Blog is live. We are waiting for the trial, scheduled to start at 9:00 am, to begin. Updates can also be found on our Twitter (@AmaPioneer).
9:00 am
It is 9:00 am, we are waiting for the court’s livestream to begin.
9:02 am
The court’s livestream has started.
9:05 am
Judge Sowder is instructing those watching live to not record the livestream.
9:08 am
Judge Sowder is instructing those testifying to not view the YouTube livestream.
9:14 am
Evidence, including video and transcript of the relevant City Council meeting, have been admitted into evidence. The City of Amarillo is beginning its opening statement.
9:16 am
The City of Amarillo opens with the following: “I’d like to apologize in advance for this opening statement.” He also notes that his presentation is “not sexy.”
9:20 am
The city’s lawyers are arguing that the case is not about whether or not the city had the authority to issue the debt.
9:21 am
“It’s our burden to show the City Council approved the tax notes,” says the city’s attorney.
9:23 am
The city’s attorneys are arguing that the discussions about the civic center funding was “an open and active discussion.” They also brought up the citizen’s committee, which was made up of those who supported and opposed Prop A. They did not mention the fact that several members resigned the committee.
9:34 am
The city’s attorney: “either the agenda that was published on the Friday before the May 24th meeting, and no-one suggests it wasn’t in a timely fashion and posted as required by statute, it’s whether the substance of that agenda satisfies the subject requirement of the Texas Open Meetings Act.”
9:40 am
"They do it all the time,” says the city’s attorney regarding the “informational” meetings city staff has with members of city council on items regarding upcoming agenda items ahead of meetings. It is worth noting that some have alleged these “informational” meetings could be better classified as rolling quorums in violation of the Texas Open Meetings Act.
9:45 am
The City has concluded its opening statement, Fairly’s team is beginning their opening statement.
9:47 am
“This case is is about the City of Amarillo using the wrong tool for the wrong purpose in the wrong way secretly to trample upon the rights of the people of Amarillo, ultimately resulting in forcing a tax increase on them without their consent” says Fairly’s team.
9:50 am
Fairly’s team is arguing that the city’s pledging of a tax levy is not sufficient for imposing a tax as required under the law.
9:53 am
“We’ve taken the position that it is not” say Fairly’s team regarding whether or not it is legitimate to use the instrument used by the city to issue the debt.
9:55 am
“Government is the servant and not the master of the people,” says Fairly’s team.
9:58 am
Fairly’s legal team is laying out a timeline for what they allege was a secretive plan to fund the civic center project with the tax anticipation notes. They are essentially arguing that the city used a convoluted scheme to make the funding count as debt instead of maintenance & operations, as requirements for M&O portions of the budget are more strict.
10:05 am
“The city should have had heightened sensitivity to” the public interest on the issue due to the failure of Prop A, says Fairly’s legal team.
10:08 am
“There was no public deliberation whatsoever of that seven year term,” says Fairly’s team regarding the debt schedule under the ordinance passed by the city.
10:11 am
Fairly’s team has concluded their opening statement. A representative to the Attorney General’s office is now giving an opening statement on behalf of the AG.
10:15 am
“There is a realistic chance that [the anticipation tax notes] could not be refinanced” due to issues being taken up by the state legislature. The Attorney General’s office further notes that they feel the city’s actions were at odds with the spirit of state law.
10:17 am
The Attorney General's representative has concluded her opening statement. The court is taking a brief recess.
10:31 am
Court is back in session
10:32 am
The city’s team is offering their evidence.
10:35 am
The city calls Council Eddy Sauer as a witness.
10:38 am
Sauer states he knew during the meeting that the ordinance did not approve tax and revenue notes, only tax notes.
10:42 am
The city has passed the witness to Fairly's team.
10:45 am
“The combination was 100% tax notes and 0% revenue notes” says Eddy Sauer.
10:47 am
The witness has been passed back to the city
10:48 am
Eddy Sauer’s testimony concludes.
10:50 am
The city calls Councilman Howard Smith as a witness.
10:56 am
Smith states he did not ever have a meeting with 3 or more members of the council ahead of the council meeting to discuss the tax notes. Witness passed to Fairly’s team.
11:00 am
“I read the motion as it was presented to me,” noting that the ordinance did not have a revenue component despite the agenda and motion mentioning a revenue component. Smith’s testimony concludes.
11:01 am
The city calls City Secretary Stephanie Coggins as a witness
11:16 am
The city passes the witness to Fairly’s team
11:17 am
Canvassing of the results of the 2020 Prop A election have been entered into evidence
11:48 am
Fairly’s team has passed the witness to the Attorney General’s representative
11:49 am
The AG’s representative is asking questions regarding the citizen petition which sought to repeal the anticipation note ordinance. Coggins is speaking to technical deficiencies she felt the petition had.
11:51 am
Witness passed back to the city.
11:52 am
Coggins finishes her testimony. Lunch break begins. Court will reconvene at about 1:10 pm.
1:15 pm
Court is back in session. The city has called Councilman Cole Stanley as a witness.
1:19 pm
Stanley stated he did not receive a draft of the ordinance “until the day after” the city council meeting the ordinance was passed.
1:21 pm
Witness passed to Fairly’s legal team
1:22 pm
“I was not prepared to vote on the ordinance on that day,” says Cole Stanley. He explains he had been made to understand they were planning to discuss the ordinance, not to actually pass the ordinance that day. He did not feel that the way it was done was “procedurally correct.” He further states that, as it was done with a variable interest rate, it did not make sense to move quickly in an attempt to “lock in” an interest rate.
1:27 pm
Witness passed back to the city.
1:30 pm
Stanley finishes his testimony. The city has called Assistant City Manager Andrew Freeman as a witness.
1:39 pm
Witness passed to Fairly’s legal team
1:43 pm
Questioning of Freeman is centering around the updating of the center city TIRZ.
1:56 pm
Witness passed back to city.
2:01 pm
Witness passed back to Fairly’s team.
2:04 pm
Testimony from Freeman concludes. The city has called Assistant City Manager Laura Storrs as a witness.
2:20 pm
Laura Storrs has stated that the Civic Center renovations could have “expanded” uses if renovated as the city has planned. A major argument of the city has been that the Civic Center would be used for the same types of uses as currently used once renovated.
2:34 pm
Witness has been passed to Fairly’s legal team.
2:38 pm
Questioning is now centering around contrasting the City Hall tax and revenue notes vs the tax notes passed for the Civic Center. Both were labelled as tax and revenue notes on the agendas they were respectively posted on, but only the City Hall project utilized any revenue component.
3:06 pm
The witness has been passed to the AG’s representative, who asked Laura to confirm there were no plans for a professional sports team at the new Civic Center arena. The AG’s representative finished her questions and the court recessed for a break.
3:30 pm
The trial has resumed, the city is now questioning Storrs.
3:34 pm
Witness passed to Fairly’s team
3:38 pm
“The more time the city can give the citizens to study and learn about what the city’s trying to do, the better, right?” asks Fairly’s team.
“In theory,” answers Storrs.
“They sure can’t hear and can’t understand what you don’t tell them, can they?” asks Fairly’s team.
“Well, that’s true,” answers Storrs.
Fairly’s team is now asking why the total amount of the debt was not published on the face of the agenda. She has said that that number is not usually included.
3:40 pm
Witness passed to the AG’s representative. The AG’s representative is asking if Storrs feels that more people would have attended the meeting if the face of the agenda had mentioned the amount and focus of the item. Laura Storrs deflected, stating the focus was included in the transmittal memo, deep into the hundreds of pages long agenda packet.
3:44 pm
Storrs concludes her testimony. The city has called the City’s Director of Facilities Jerry Danforth as a witness.
4:10 pm
Witness passed to Fairly’s team
4:18 pm
Fairly’s team is showing the difference between a graph printed by Danforth and a fuller version of the graph. The graph appears to show steel prices, with August 2022 being shown on the full graph and not on the cutoff graph. Danforth claims he did not cut off a portion of the graph. The increase in prices appears to be significantly slowed once after the area that was seemingly cut off.
4:26 pm
Witness passed back to the city.
4:29 pm
Witness passed back to Fairly’s team. Danforth is asked if he’s an economist, he says he is not.
4:31 pm
Danforth concludes his testimony. The city has now called Amarillo City Manager Jared Miller as a witness.
4:38 pm
Witness passed to Fairly’s team.
4:44 pm
Per questioning of Jared Miller, it was a week between Mayor Nelson requesting placing the Civic Center item on the agenda and the meeting to pass the item.
4:48 pm
It appears that the city’s attorney tried to object to admitting a portion of the city charter requiring presenting councilmembers with copies of ordinances ahead of meetings, stating that the copy of the portion of the document was produced after the meeting. They appear to argue that there is no way for the court to know if the charter was amended between the meeting and the document being produced. The objection was overruled.
5:00 pm
Witness passed to AG’s representative
5:08 pm
Miller has concluded his testimony. “You guys have been efficient and I appreciate that,” says Judge Sowder. The city will call Councilwoman Freda Powell and Mayor Ginger Nelson as witnesses tomorrow. Both have expert witnesses tomorrow. “Hopefully we can wrap it up by the end of tomorrow,” says Judge Sowder.
The parties hope to finish presenting evidence and present closing statements tomorrow. Both sides are seeking attorney’s fees, will continue on that issue via Zoom afterwards, looking tentatively at Tuesday afternoon. Court is adjourned for the day. The trial will continue tomorrow at 9:00 am.