Cornell County commissioners recess meeting and cite Texas notice rule for continued meetings

5592022 · August 4, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Cornell County Commissioners Court cited Texas Government Code §551.0411 on notice for continued meetings and recessed its special meeting to 3 p.m. the next day to allow staff time to secure a vendor contract; the court discussed limits on how long a recessed open meeting can be continued without additional public posting.

At a special meeting, the Cornell County Commissioners Court invoked Texas Government Code Section 551.0411 and recessed the meeting until 3 p.m. the following day to allow staff time to obtain a vendor contract and complete related review, court speakers said.

A county staff member read the statute into the record and summarized its effect: “Section 551.0411. Meeting notice requirements in certain circumstances,” which says a governmental body that recesses an open meeting to the following regular business day need not post a new notice of the continued meeting if the action was taken in good faith and not to circumvent the Open Meetings Act; if the meeting is continued again beyond the next regular business day, the governmental body must post written notice for the further continuation.

Why it matters: the rule governs when a government body must re-post meeting notices for continued sessions. Court members discussed whether they had established a local rule for recess durations or whether they should defer to the statute and Robert’s Rules and the Texas Open Meetings Act. One commissioner asked whether the court could adopt a local rule that day; staff advised that there was no agenda item to amend local rules and that doing so would violate notice requirements.

Discussion and outcome: after debate, the presiding judge announced, “We will be in recess until 3 p.m. tomorrow,” and the court recessed. Court members discussed scheduling options — including returning the following day or scheduling a separate meeting later in the week — but noted that continued postponement past the next regular business day would require posting notice under the statute.

Ending: The recess was recorded to allow staff to pursue the vendor contract and to ensure any further continuations of the meeting would comply with Texas law on meeting notices.