The Texas Municipal League’s document “The City Attorney: A Reference Manual” addresses the attendance of a city attorney in executive session at a city council meeting.
“Bringing your city attorney into executive session is tricky. In some cases, the city attorney must be present in an executive session: namely, executive sessions in which the purpose is to consult with the attorney about litigation or a matter involving attorney-client privilege.”
The document goes on to say that when council needs legal advice, attendance of the city attorney is necessary. However:
“There is an executive session scenario involving the city attorney that the council should be careful to avoid, though. Sometimes a city is tempted to adjourn into executive session to discuss a controversial or sensitive matter for which there is no independent legal authority to hold the executive session. To get around this, the council will take the city attorney in tow and label the executive session “consultation with the city attorney.” This should not be done.”
Later they write:
“For example, say the city is negotiating a contentious contract for the purchase of a piece of equipment. The city council would like to conduct the discussions in executive session, out of the hearing of the public and press. Can it do so by consulting with the attorney? No. For one thing, there isn’t pending or reasonably anticipated litigation going on—mere controversy or sensitivity doesn’t amount to anticipated litigation. So the city will have to look for other independent authority—but there isn’t any. Discussion of real estate might qualify, but not equipment. The bottom line? Be careful not to use your new city attorney as a “crutch” to conduct otherwise improper executive sessions. Illegal executive sessions might result in jail time (for you, not the city attorney).”
Does this happen in El Paso?
Let’s take the case of the weekly updates on San Jacinto Plaza. Council should discuss the situation in public. What progress has been made? What is left to do? If it appears that legal action will be necessary they should adjourn into executive session but the citizens should hear the details of what the situation is.
Secrecy is the reason they take the whole matter into executive session.
We deserve better
Brutus
elpasospeak 
The threat of jail time for them sounds very good to me. The misuse of executive sessions is terribly out of hand. I think it all started with the public getting involved (too late after Joyce’s done deal) on the ballpark and city hall issues.
LikeLike
What mamboman3 said.
LikeLike
This has gotten much worse since El Paso went to a CM form of government. Now it is almost the rule, with San Jacinto being the poster child for it.
LikeLike
What mamboman3 and John said.
LikeLike
There’s no sunshine in Sun City government. Only shady dealings.
LikeLike
We have no one to blame but ourselves as residents. We allow this to continue administration after administration and year after year.
LikeLike
Who is “we?” I vote and try to express my views on blogs and in the opinion section (for which I get some nasty comments). I meet with my representative. What would you like us to do so we don’t “allow this to continue…”
LikeLike
I agree with Helen Marshall. There’s a ‘we’ that is speaking up and voicing our concerns which includes to city council and county commissioners. That’s what more people need to do and if anything, ‘we’ could try to do all possible to get more of the public involved. I know that is what some of us here are trying to do.
LikeLike