David Glasheen does not believe the city should use lobbyists – a longtime practice, and he’s also against a recent city decision for three council members to direct lobbying efforts when there’s not enough time to call a council meeting.
Other council members sympathized with Glasheen’s concerns – but not enough to vote with him.
Glasheen – District 3 councilman – said the city’s recent legislative agenda violates the city charter and breaks the law – at least the spirit of the law.
Glasheen raised his concern during a council meeting on December 10 when the council voted 6-1 in favor of a legislative agenda, which is detailed at the end of this story. He repeated it this month when the council voted 6-1 in favor of a lobbying contract for the Lubbock Preston Smith International Airport.
In the December meeting, Mark McBrayer, mayor, said, “I don’t think it’s a deliberate violation of the law. It falls within the law.”
McBrayer and Glasheen are both attorneys.
Glasheen told LubbockLights.com, “Taxpayer funded lobbying is the government taking our tax dollars and giving it to a lobbyist. The lobbyist turns around and gives the money to other politicians. These are politicians working against the interests of our citizens.”
“That’s a misuse of tax dollars on its own,” he added.
We asked Glasheen to clarify his claim of giving money to other politicians.
“Whether it’s buying meals or sporting tickets or things like that – that may even fall below the reporting threshold – there’s still an inappropriate transfer of wealth and influence that’s used against the interest of our citizens and taxpayers,” Glasheen said.
Lobbying firms cannot donate directly to campaigns. But owners, employees and family members can. According to opensecrets.com, people associated with the lobbying firm hired for the airport (O’Keeffe Shahmoradi Strategies) donated to the campaigns of federal lawmakers.
Glasheen is also concerned about the council’s plan to address when an issue comes up suddenly in the Texas Legislature, that the mayor and two councilmembers, not the whole council, can direct the city’s lobbying efforts.
LubbockLights.com asked local attorney Don Richards, who specializes in media law and open government.
“Glasheen is raising the right things – concerns that any councilman might have,” Richards said.
That’s not to say he totally agreed with Glasheen, but the city is in a “gray area,” Richards said.
Investment or ‘dirty game’?
Glasheen said, “The government is usually lobbying against the interests of the citizens because the government wants more spending, less accountability.”
The city’s lobbying list for this year is not all bad, he said.
“There are some noble goals that our state representatives should pursue, like increased funding for Texas Tech,” Glasheen said.
When the council voted on the airport’s lobbying contract, Christy Martinez-Garcia, mayor pro-tem, said, “You’ve got to have people that are there that know the system – know how things work. … We need to be making that investment.”
We asked Glasheen about other cities lobbying. Does Lubbock need to keep up?
“Other people making unethical choices is not a justification for us to make an unethical choice. If it’s a dirty game, then we shouldn’t play it,” Glasheen answered.
Only three, not seven
A provision in the lobbying agenda allows the mayor to consult with two members of the council, not all seven, if something comes up suddenly.
Matt Wade, city attorney, spoke in favor of the provision, telling the council, “Things happen at the Legislature that are almost spontaneous.”
McBrayer responded, “They move very slowly until they don’t.”
Glasheen objected, telling his fellow councilmembers, “I don’t like the idea of making it our policy that we’re going to deliberately circumvent the requirements of the city charter and state law in order to move quickly on something. If we can’t do it the right way, we shouldn’t do it at all.”
The city charter demands four or more councilmembers are required to adopt or repeal any ordinance or resolution. Allowing three to make a decision without the other four is a problem, Glasheen said.
The city charter says:
Any four (4) Councilmembers shall constitute a quorum for the transaction of any business, and the affirmative vote of any four (4) Councilmembers shall be sufficient and necessary to adopt or repeal any ordinance or resolution.
The reason to cap it at three is because a gathering of four or more on the council requires a public meeting.
Wade said, “There’s not an exception in the Open Meetings Act. So, we have to give the 72 hours’ notice before we would actually be able to meet and consult with one another.”
Three days might be too late. Legislation impacting Lubbock might already pass or fail in that time.
The redirecting of Lubbock’s lobbying effort would not be revealed publicly until after-the-fact at the next council meeting.
Too big of a decision
Richards told LubbockLights.com the council can delegate authority to a committee, but it cannot be open-ended. The authority needs to be specific.
“If I was on the committee, I’d be a little hesitant to make too big of a decision without coming back to the entire council. All the council needs to hear and make the majority of the substantive decisions,” Richards said.
At first, Martinez-Garcia and Councilwoman Jennifer Wilson sympathized with that point of view.
Wilson said, “I do agree. I mean, one of the things in government that everybody has concerns about is lack of transparency.”
“There are very different political opinions from people on this council. I do think you have to weigh everybody’s opinion. And if you only designate three people – whoever that might be – you sway that one way or the other,” Wilson explained.
Martinez-Garcia said, “You know how big I am about upholding non-partisanship when we’re discussing city government. And I think that’s what has made me so apprehensive that only three people would determine [this]. … It doesn’t make it fair for everyone.”
But Tim Collins, City Councilman for District 6, pushed back.
“I feel like we handcuff ourselves if we don’t allow for fast action,” Collins said.
Jarrett Atkinson, city manger, also spoke in favor, saying, “I strongly suggest the language [for a committee of three] be on the [legislative] agenda.”
Atkinson said sudden legislation impacting Lubbock is rare. It did not even happen during the previous legislative session. The committee of three might not even come into play.
“This would only trigger if something arose … that did not allow for the 72-hour notice to hold a properly posted meeting,” Atkinson said.
Without this committee of three to redirect the lobbying, McBrayer – supporting Collins’ point of view – said the city would not have any input on short notice.
Martinez-Garcia and Wilson raised no more objections. Glasheen did.
“We can’t make a policy to deliberately violate the law just because it’s convenient,” Glasheen said.
The matter then came to a vote and passed 5-1.
An emergency meeting
Richards told LubbockLights.com there might be an alternate solution. The council might call an emergency meeting on two-hours’ notice.
“They probably can get away with it during a legislative session.” Richards said.
It’s not without risk. Someone could raise a legal challenge afterward, he said.
Atkinson said a bill moving through the legislature is not grounds for an emergency meeting – telling the council, “You can’t hold a meeting without 72 hours’ prior notice, and there’s not enough provision [for a meeting] because the legislative session got in a hurry.”
Glasheen did not want to offer a legal opinion on the idea of an emergency meeting. His solution is simpler.
“It would not hurt the city at all to withdraw from lobbying, but I strongly support state legislation to abolish taxpayer-funded lobbying,” Glasheen said.
And there’s nothing wrong, he said, with councilmembers personally lobbying lawmakers themselves.
“We should be coordinating with other elected officials at different levels. We’re all working together to serve the needs of our community,” Glasheen said.
The city’s legislative agenda
The city recently approved a contract with Hance Scarborough, LLP for lobbying services. What follows is the text of the city’s state and federal legislative agenda for 2025.
2025-26 CITY OF LUBBOCK LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
Background:
Communicating with state and federal representatives and tracking legislative issues are important to ensure the Lubbock City Council has a strong voice in legislation and rulemaking that impacts City governance and operations.
Statement of Intent:
The Lubbock City Council supports active participation and partnership in the legislative process. The City Council believes that local control is necessary and provides the ability to govern in an effective and efficient manner. Accordingly, the Lubbock City Council affirms to all necessary persons and parties the following legislative positions, based on these principles:
- The city will work to pass its priority legislation.
- The city will monitor proposed legislation and take appropriate action to assure the city is able to meet its obligations under the City Charter, applicable law and to provide local services as approved by the City Council.
- The city will work with peer cities to support legislative items that are consistent with the statements and principles contained within these priorities and to oppose those that are not.
The City Council recognizes the speed with which the legislative process moves. In order to respond in a timely manner to issues that fall outside the Council’s approved principles, the mayor will consult with two Council members to direct legislative efforts through the city manager and city attorney offices. [Altered during the council meeting to indicate the mayor, will consult with the mayor pro-tem and the city councilmember from District 5.]
The Eighty-Ninth Texas Legislature
The city will initiate:
- Appropriate amendments to protect municipal critical infrastructure and cyber-security system information from disclosure when such would jeopardize these essential services.
- Appropriate amendments to remove from the Texas Public Utility Commission’s rate jurisdiction matters concerning wholesale water or wastewater contracts entered into and strictly between municipalities and allow disputes concerning those contracts to be resolved under the terms of the contract, or by a court of competent jurisdiction.
The city will support:
- Appropriate efforts to support the continued growth, development and redevelopment of Lubbock.
- Efforts to address the state’s water challenges and related funding opportunities.
- Efforts to fund the development of Interstate-27 from its current limits to interstate highway standards.
- Efforts to ensure long-term funding for the remaining development and construction of Loop 88.
- Allow cities the option of using either an official newspaper or a website for the publication of legal notices.
- Efforts to require the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts to automatically provide city-specific, local sales tax information to the particular subject city without the need for a request under the Texas Public Information Act.
The City will support continued:
- Changes to the sales tax refund and reallocation process that converts the Texas Comptroller of Public Accounts current ministerial process into a formalized administrative process.
- Efforts to require marketplace providers or facilitators of short-term rentals to remit the local portion of the HOT tax directly to the appropriate municipality.
- Changes to Chapter 143, Local Government Code that would enhance Police and Fire Chiefs’ authority in personnel matters.
- Inclusion of Larger Municipal Fire Departments in matters before the Texas Commission of Fire Protection (TCFP) Board.
- Funding for Texas Tech University, the Texas Tech University Veterinary School and the Texas Tech University Mental Health Institute.
- Full funding for the Texas Recreation & Parks Account local grant program.
- Continued state funding for mental health department Designation of a portion of south State Loop 88, from approximately Highway 87 to Highway 62 as “First Responder Memorial Highway.”
- Legislation enhancing local authority to address stray and loose animal issues.
The city will oppose:
- Legislation that would diminish or restrict an elected City Council’s ability to provide necessary and required services to its residents and community.
- Increased pass-through or regulatory fees on cities that are collected for or on-behalf of the state.
- Imposition of mandates that do not provide for a commensurate level of compensation.
The 119th United States Congress
The city will support:
- Additional funding for mass transportation and highway systems.
- Funding for the development of the Texas portion of the Ports to Plains Corridor (Interstate 27) north and south of Lubbock.
- Continued funding for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Partnership Programs.
- Efforts, including through the American Association of Airport Executives (AAAE), to ensure the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides airports and municipal fire departments with protection from CERCLA liability if it can be shown that an airport’s use of AFFF complied with federal requirements and that use was discontinued in firefighting once hazards were identified or the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) provided an approved alternate agent.
- Efforts to support communities in their growth, development and redevelopment efforts.
- [Added during the council meeting] The city will support efforts to achieve regulatory approval of Lake Seven through the United States Army Corps of Engineers permitting process.
Please click here to support Lubbock Lights.
Comment, react or share on our Facebook post.
Facebook