September 17, 2015 Ms. Susybelle Gosslee League of Women Voters of Dallas 2720 North Stemmons Freeway, Suite 812 Dallas, TX 75207-2241 Dear Ms. Susybelle Gosslee: It was nice to see you in the Dallas County Commissioners Court on September 15, 2015, as you addressed us and the people of Dallas County in your capacity as a representative of the League of Women Voters, Dallas chapter (“LWV, Dallas”). As an African American who has seen and been a part of the ongoing struggle for the right to vote, I have always been impressed with the work performed by the LWV in general and the Dallas chapter, in particular. In fact, I recall being captivated after reading about the work of the president of the National American Woman Suffrage Association, Carrie Chapman Catt, who fought tirelessly for the creation of a "league of women voters to finish the fight and aid in the reconstruction of the nation." My fascination with your organization became more resolute upon learning that after Maud Wood Park became the first national president of the League of Women Voters she accepted the challenges to fight for issues pertaining to women, and to educate citizens about the electoral process. As I recall the information in the public domain, since the founding of the Dallas chapter, in 1938, the League of Women Voters, a nonpartisan political organization, you encouraged informed and active participation in government, and work to increase understanding of major public policy issues, and to influence public policy through education and advocacy. Therefore, you seek to perform important roles where:public policy through education and advocacy. Therefore, you seek to perform important roles where: (1)You educate voters by presenting unbiased nonpartisan information about elections, the voting process, and issues; and (2)You use your positions to advocate for or against particular policies in the public interest. The information on your website specify in fulfilling these two important roles, that your organization is guided by principles whereby you: ( act after study and member agreement to achieve solutions in the public interest on key community issues at all government levels; @) build citizen participation in the democratic process; and © engage communities in promoting positive solutions to public policy issues through education and advocacy. Once more, as an African American elected official, I find these roles and principles to be essential and admirable for the citizenry of Dallas County. It is because of the roles and guiding principles of the LWV and your discourse at the aforementioned commissioners court meeting, that I write this letter. In faimess to you, I think it is important to recap the events surrounding the passage of this court order changing the court’s meeting from weekly to every other week. Prior to the court taking action to approve changing the weekly Tuesday meeting to the first and third Tuesday, effective September 30, 2015, this item was placed on the commissioners court’s agenda on the following dates: (1) On July 7, 2015, as briefing item. There were no public speakers on this item. (2) On August 11, as a court order. There were no public speakers on this item. After some public discussion in court among the court members about the item, it was tabled for a later date. Page | 2(3) Then, on August 18, 2015, this item was brought back on the court’s agenda as a court order, and then approved. There were no public speakers on this item. For the reason that the Dallas County Commissioners Court is a public body, and can act only publicly on community matters, I assume you know that at the August 18, 2015, court meeting, Commissioner Mike Cantrell showed a PowerPoint presentation that made clear the various ways the change in the court meeting serves to enhance transparency for the public. For example, bis presentation indicated that under the current court policies and procedures, members of the public are given only four days’ notice (it is somewhat ironic to use the word only in describing the length of the notice because state law obligates all public entities to simply give the public three days’ notice, or 72 hours, before acting on a matter) before the commissioners court vote to approve an item. This is so because the court’s agenda of the peoples’ business is published the Thursday preceding the Tuesday's court meeting Under the change to the court's meeting, effective September 30, 2015, the public will be given twelve days’ notice of every item (or 288 hours? notice) before the commissioners court acts on a matter. By the way, as all our commissioners court meetings are broadcast, recorded and then stored on the county’s website, all of this information is available there. Your public comments, mentioned a problem with the new change to the court’s meeting with a matter being approved after appearing only once on the court’s agenda. Under the commissioners court current rules, procedures and policies, the court has the legal authority and does in fact approve items that appear only once on the court’s agenda, with at least seventy-two hours’ public notice. Additionally, under the new twice a month meeting schedule, any member on the court retains the right to pull an item from the court’s agenda, and have the item be brought back at another meeting. Ms. Gosslee, the rules pertaining to members of the public addressing the court have not changed. A member of the public is still at liberty to come to court and address their elected officials once a month on anything of a public nature. Additionally, a member of the public retains the right to come and address the Page |3commissioners court on any matter on the court’s agenda, prior to the court taking action on that matter. Given these facts, Ms. Gosslee, and given the stated goals of your organization: (1) To educate voters by presenting unbiased nonpartisan information about elections, the voting process, and issues; and (2) To use your positions to advocate for or against particular policies in the public interest, 1 must tell you 1 was deeply disappointed and saddened by the false-nature of your presentation on this matter to the commissioners court on September 15, 2015. T understand the utility of being asked by an elected official to lend your voice and the prestige of your organization to an issue of public concern, What I don’t understand, and disappointed with, is when your advocacy is used to address matters you are not fully informed about or where you are purposefully misled because you have failed to take the time to be informed prior to publicly speaking on matters of community interest. In the future, may I suggest that you remain mindful of the roles of your own organization, to advocate for or against public policy, but only after following your organization's other stated goal, to educate, which in this context, means to be District No. 3 Co: County Judge, Clay Jenkins; Commissioner Mike Cantrell; Commissioner Dr. Elba Garcia; Commissioner Dr. Theresa Daniel Page | 4