On Tuesday evening, Lufkin City Hall was the scene of a robust discussion over government transparency and responsible use of taxpayer dollars. Council members voted unanimously to advance a proposed ordinance that would impose statutory caps on the amount of complimentary staff time provided for public information requests under Texas Government Code Section 552.275.
What the ordinance would do
If the measure passes a second reading scheduled for Dec. 1, 2026, individuals could receive up to 15 hours of free personnel search time per calendar month and a total of 36 hours per fiscal year. Once a requester exceeds those limits, the city would be authorized to require advance payment for labor, overhead, and material costs before any additional records are assembled.
City officials explain the need
City Secretary Aimee Cloutier testified that the volume and complexity of Texas Public Information Act (TPIA) inquiries have risen dramatically. She noted that just seven requesters accounted for the majority of time‑limit breaches over the past six months, with single requests often demanding 20 to 30 hours of staff work. Approximately 56% of recent requests listed an address outside Lufkin, meaning non‑residents—who do not pay local property or sales taxes—are driving more than half of the administrative workload.
Cloutier also highlighted that under state law cities must respond within ten days and may seek rulings from the Texas Attorney General when records must be withheld or redacted. She estimated that nearly half of requesters abandon their requests after receiving a cost invoice.
City Manager’s perspective
City Manager Kevin Gee emphasized that the ordinance does not prohibit anyone from seeking records. “It enacts an ability to charge ahead of time on those large requests that come in, where you calculate the allowable charges and you receive payment prior to assembling the information for the requester,” Gee said. He framed the measure as a fiscally responsible tool created by the Texas Legislature (House Bill 3107) to protect taxpayers while preserving access to public information.
Public comment and criticism
During the public comment period, Angelina County resident David Stua argued that the caps would punish citizens seeking accountability. He referenced a prior request to Lindale Independent School District concerning the death of an eight‑year‑old student, saying, “A parent asked for the reports and 911 audio, the video – that may take hours of staff time. Would you want that family to reach a limit and get a bill?”
Ward 4 Councilwoman Kim Ogden responded by questioning Stua’s personal connection to the Lindale case and stressing that non‑residents should not consume Lufkin’s taxpayer‑funded resources. “Why in the world are you spending Lindale’s taxpayer money on a request for a child you do not know, a city you are not aware of, you do not live in, and you have no family there?” Ogden asked, adding, “You are a waste of our taxpayer dollars. Thank you, sir.”
Next steps
The council’s unanimous first‑reading vote moves the ordinance forward, but it must survive a second and final reading on Dec. 1 to become law. Council members also discussed the possibility of hiring a part‑time records clerk in future budget cycles to alleviate staff burdens, though any such hire would require a feasibility study.
Supporters view the measure as a prudent safeguard for limited municipal resources, while opponents fear it could hinder transparency for families and watchdogs seeking answers. The upcoming vote will determine whether Lufkin adopts the state‑mandated cost‑recovery framework or seeks alternative solutions to manage its growing public‑records workload.
Original reporting: KLTV 7 Tyler (news) — read the source article.
