On Oct. 7, the city resolved a dispute with the Austin American-Statesman, deciding that still photographers will be allowed inside the arbitration hearing of former APD officer Tim Enlow. The Statesman had filed a petition for a temporary restraining order Sept. 23, after five days of testimony in the Enlow arbitration, and nearly three weeks after arbitrator Harold Moore originally granted the city’s motion to ban cameras from the proceedings. Moore halted the proceedings on Sept. 24 until the legality of the camera conundrum could be worked out.
On Oct. 2, city paralegal MaryJane Ray — helping Assistant City Attorney Mike Cronig represent the city in the Enlow arbitration — told the Chronicle that the local media has the story all wrong. The hearing wasn’t suspended because of the Statesman, she said, but because Enlow’s attorney Mike Rickman wanted “more time to prepare his case.” Cronig says Rickman did think Moore’s decision to suspend the proceedings would be a good idea, but that Cronig “did not agree to postpone.” “I was prepared to do the case for those [remaining, scheduled] two days,” Cronig said.
Rickman says Ray’s interpretation is hogwash. “We had six or seven witnesses lined up for that day,” he said. But when he got a call from the Statesman‘s attorneys, Rickman said, he didn’t think it wise to go forward. “The allegation that we could be in violation of the Open Meetings Act [is] pretty darn serious,” he said. If a judge had agreed with the Statesman that the arbitration violated the act, the entire proceeding could be rendered null and void. “And we would’ve had to start all over again,” he said. Enlow’s arbitration is now slated to resume on Nov. 18.
This article appears in October 11 • 2002.