Ask AI
Opens the assistant with a question about this page. Answers come from the AI, not this site.
ChatGPTClaudePerplexity· Peak
Council adopts Ordinance 7893 on second reading, 4-1
At a second special meeting the council passed Ordinance 7893 on second and final reading, 4-1, with Councilmember Hays voting no. The City Attorney said the maximum fine of $2,000 was the limit under Local Government Code Section 54.004, that a judge would set the amount, and that the ordinance enforced state law. Hays said the ordinance was punitive to businesses; Mayor Nelson said it asked businesses to post signs and ask people to wear masks, not to enforce mask-wearing.[1][2][3][4]
Ginger NelsonFreda PowellEddy SauerHoward SmithElaine HaysJared Miller
What the sources say
- ✓ Verified
The City Attorney said that under Local Government Code Section 54.004 a home-rule city's fine for a safety matter cannot exceed $2,000, that the ordinance set that maximum, and that a judge would set the amount. KFDA reported that a city judge could order a fine of up to $2,000 for a second offense, after a first step of counseling by environmental health inspectors. [1][2]
- Max fine
- $2,000
- ✓ Verified
Councilmember Hays said the ordinance misdirected effort and was punitive to businesses and that she was concerned it would increase resistance; the Amarillo Pioneer quoted her calling it "unconstitutional, potentially illegal, and an unfair transfer of burden to our small businesses." Mayor Nelson said the ordinance asked businesses to post signs and ask people to wear masks and did not ask businesses to enforce mask-wearing. The City Attorney said it was legal, constitutional and within home-rule powers. [1][3]
- Unverified
KVII reported on November 24, 2020 that the ordinance's effective date was December 11 and that it would remain in effect while the Trauma Service Area had a high hospitalization rate. The adopted ordinance text was not obtained to confirm the date. [4]
