Proposed Amendment Requiring BSC Recommendation for Ordinance Changes Within Its Jurisdiction

[Paul Roberts]

Dear Colleagues,

I’ve placed an item on the June 26th agenda (Consent) to formally refer to the Building and Standards Commission (BSC) a proposed ordinance concept for discussion and recommendation.

Under our current code, proposed amendments to Chapter 14 (Zoning) must be referred to the Planning & Zoning Commission for recommendation before Council action. This is an important procedural check that reflects their quasi-judicial role.

However, we do not currently require the Building and Standards Commission—which is also a quasi-judicial body under Texas Local Government Code Chapter 54.033, too provide a recommendation before Council amends ordinances within their jurisdiction.

This referral proposes adding that step. The concept would require BSC recommendation for any proposed amendments to ordinances they oversee—including provisions in Chapters 3 (Building Regulations), 5 (Signs), 6 (Property Maintenance), 11 (Access Management), and other areas relating to building safety or code enforcement.

This would align our procedures across commissions and ensure that technical subject-matter review occurs before legislative action. I welcome any feedback in advance of the meeting.

—Paul

 

[Norma Owen]

At our last City Council meeting, the Charter Review Committee (CRC) presentation highlighted concerns regarding the current scope of authority assigned to the Building and Standards Commission (BSC), which are atypical for BSC’s in Texas per the city attorney’s office. I agree it would be prudent for Council to adopt a general practice of deferring action on relevant ordinance amendments for which BSC has jurisdiction until BSC has had the opportunity to review and recommend, consistent with other commissions.

This proposed referral process is a step in the right direction. Additionally, in light of the CRC’s observations, we may want to consider incorporating this procedural alignment into any broader updates to BSC roles and responsibilities that emerge from the CRC’s recommendations and the attorneys’ guidance.

 

[Paul Roberts]

Norma, thank you for your support. If I recall correctly, the CRC believes the BSC may not currently be empowered under our Charter to act in a quasi-judicial capacity, as it has historically. They're recommending language to address this, am I remembering that correctly?

 

[Norma Owen]

Paul, you are correct that the CRC believes or is concerned the BSC may not currently have the authority under our Charter. I need to review this further, but I remember there was a discussion about the CRC's qualifications to draft the necessary language. I believe the recommendation is for the Council, with guidance from our City attorney, to draft the appropriate language for consideration on the ballot. I'll review and add an update should I be incorrect.

 

[Norma Owen]

I researched further, and our assumption regarding the BSC is incorrect. The CRC found that the BSC has authority. The challenge is that the CRC received conflicting information regarding the duties of the BSC, which are atypical. See the information from the upcoming CRC meeting packet slated for this afternoon.

Page 29 of the CRC packet shows the recommendation as: Add 7.05 5/21/2025 The committee recommends adding Section 7.05 to Charter as follows: Section 7.05 Building and Standards Commission. A Building and Standards Commission is established to perform such duties and functions as required or authorized by State law, this Charter, and the enabling Ordinance. Slide 17

And on page 41: The committee discussed the BSC is not specifically cited as a quasi-judicial body in Section 7 of the charter as are P&Z and BOA. The committee questioned whether BSC should be considered advisory only. The city attorney advised BSC has quasi-judicial authority derived from Sec.54.036 of the Local Government Code. However, attorneys noted that the Lago Vista ordinances are unusual in that a decision by BSC is appealable to the City Council, which may conflict with state law. In addition, the CA cited 6 duties of Lago Vista’s BSC that go beyond traditional duties and stated “Ultimately, the charter probably needs to be amended to clarify this. But one could argue that these are board of adjustment-like functions given to the BSC so it does not violate the charter.” Given the ambiguity and the CRC’s lack of clarity of what, if anything needs to be addressed, the CRC felt this should be called out in a recommendation by adding a Section 7.05 and allow council to work with the city attorney on a final recommendation if a ballot measure is warranted

 

[Paul Roberts]

Thank you for the added context and clarifications, Councilmember Owen, I really appreciate it!