Shirley Temple once said that time is money, and wasted time means wasted money means trouble.
Last weekend marked nearly three months since a power struggle between elected officials in the city of Reno and their police chief, Tony Simmons, erupted into public view.
During that meeting, city council members presented a letter outlining 11 accusations of “incompetency, corruption, misconduct, or malfeasance” to Simmons who, as city council stated, was given a reasonable timeframe in which to respond to those allegations.
The Weatherford Democrat pried loose a copy of that letter through a freedom of information request. Unfortunately, city officials didn’t see fit to comply with a similar records request submitted Sept. 9 seeking Simmons’ response.
Last month, we published an editorial calling out the city’s lack of transparency, both to us and to taxpayers. The city has argued that information contained in Simmons’ response should not be released based on, among other things, relation to litigation of a civil or criminal nature.
Such assertions sure seem like grasping at straws since we haven’t been able to find any litigation in local courts related to Simmons’ departure. Thankfully, the Texas Attorney General saw fit to address this circumvention of transparency laws when we asked for help. In a ruling released via a Dec. 2 letter, the AG commands the city must release the information with the exception of personal information, such as home addresses, phone numbers and social security numbers, and any information that would interfere with the investigation or prosecution of a crime.
The latter comes after attorneys representing the city argued that some information contained in Simmons’ response pertains to open criminal investigations by the city’s police department — arguments we find far-fetched considering Simmons was the last remaining employee of that department prior to his “voluntary resignation” in late October.
That context sure makes such an argument seem like just another smokescreen from a city government that, for some reason, seems bent on keeping the contents of that letter from public view.
And thus, after waiting months for the AG’s ruling, the clock starts over — again.
An email to the city attorney inquiring when officials will heed the AG’s decision and release the letter has lingered unanswered. Under Texas law, Reno has 30 days from the issuance of the letter ruling to file suit against the attorney general if it wishes to contest the ruling. If not, the city is required to turn over the documents “promptly,” attorney Joe Larsen said.
The city is required by statute to give notice in the event it chooses to sue.
More money, more time … and more trouble?
Weatherford Democrat
