During its April 24 meeting, Conroe City Council voted 3-2 to approve requiring in-person attendance for the executive session portion of meetings. Council members Harry Hardman and Howard Wood voted against.

What you need to know

Before City Council’s decision, council members were allowed to video call into executive session. However, City Attorney Mike Garner said there are concerns about security and the need to protect the integrity of the closed-door executive session meetings.

The city charter does allow City Council to compel attendance—or legally require someone to be present—of its members, Garner said.

“As this council knows, we have several legal matters that are coming forward that are very important to the city and to the citizens of the city,” Garner said in the April 23 workshop meeting. “It's my belief, in consulting with other city administrators, that it's very important to have council members present in the executive session, in the room itself, so these discussions can be made face to face.”


City Administrator Gary Scott said the change is to be able to ensure that attorney-client privilege is maintained. Scott said the change was discussed between the city’s legal team and city administrators before being brought to City Council with concerns about discussions surrounding upcoming topics.

“It was something that was brought forward due to the significant sensitive items that we have coming forward in our future,” Scott said.

Quotes of note

Council members and Mayor Duke Coon provided comments to Community Impact on April 29 regarding the decision.
  • “Based on unanimous recommendation from legal staff and our engaged law firms, I am supportive of limiting executive sessions to in-person attendees,” council member Shana Arthur said. “Since the start of my term, I have been concerned with security controls and I feel this is a positive step forward.”
  • “Our citizens are again disenfranchised today by staff and the majority of council’s decision. It’s another disappointing day,” council member Howard Wood said. “Citizen participation was severely restricted and now council members who cannot always attend in-person in executive session are restricted from discussion on extremely important city issues, yet still responsible to vote. ... Our body has an accountability issue, not a software issue. But we don’t want to address that. .... Zero alternative options were presented, [and it] sure feels and looks targeted from my position.”
  • “[Mike Garner and Gary Scott] have 50 years of legal experience, and if they have an issue or concern about confidentiality, to me, it would not be in the best interest of the citizens of Conroe if I didn't pay attention to the legal advice that our city is offering,” council member Marsha Porter said.
  • “We need to explore alternatives,” council member Harry Hardman said. “I understand the points that were made, but I still think that we need to try to find, look at all alternatives to ensure that council people can participate to the full extent.”
  • “I could not disagree more with the actions of councilwoman Porter, councilwoman Arthur and councilman David Hairel,” Coon said. “By limiting participation by someone who is duly elected to do a job is absolutely wrong. I believe this disenfranchises a council member not to be able to attend executive session and make decisions on some of the most important issues facing our city, because if he or she is not able to attend executive session, whether in-person or via Zoom, then they be asked to come out right outside of executive session and vote on an issue, and in certainly that disenfranchises their position to be able to make a solid and informed decision.”
  • “It was clear that there are a number of attorneys who are uncomfortable with or advise against the use of Zoom in a setting that discusses legal matters,” council member David Hairel said. “Those attorneys include our own city attorney, our city administrator, and our deputy administrator, as well as attorneys from two of the firms we have hired. As Mr. Scott stated, this is neither punitive nor discriminatory, but it is wise counsel from a number of lawyers. An absent official can participate fully in the open meeting but using Zoom or similar technology in a private executive session is the same as leaving the door open.”