I had a coworker make the point about someone leasing an apartment being in control and being able to exclude others from carrying in their apartment. That isn't exactly the same point you're making here, but very similar. I think the differences are that an apartment is usually not on government owned property and the lease doesn't give the leaser total control. They still have to abide by the terms of the lease and even if something is not stated as being prohibited in the lease that doesn't mean they can perform other illegal acts with immunity.srothstein wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 9:05 pmThe problem I see is that the letter itself, as quoted above, says it is a lease agreement. The lease authorizes the State Fair to take control of the functions of the operation of the property. The way I read this, and not being a lawyer I could be wrong, this is the same as my apartment lease which authorizes me to take control of my apartment. I am not an agent of the complex and I do not see the State Fair as an agent of the city. If it were a contract to run the fair for the city, it would require the State Fair to perform certain actions, such as operating the property and running the fair. That would make them an agent of the city and then they could not post signs.Grayling813 wrote: ↑Thu Aug 15, 2024 10:26 am According to the letter that Paxton sent to City of Dallas, the SFOT is contracted by the city to operate the fair. And he considered KP-0108 in issuing the letter to City of Dallas.
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/si ... 0Final.pdf
Through this lease agreement, the City of Dallas authorizes the State Fair of Texas to take control
of the functions of operating the public city park, various city buildings, walkways and sidewalks
contained within the 277 acres over a 24-day period.The big question is: will the Attorney General's office seek judgement to prevent the new policy in time for it to actually matter? And, of course, whether a judge will agree with the City or the AG's office.To the extent that the State Fair of Texas, as a nonprofit organization, may have considered Texas
Attorney General Opinion KP-0108 (dated August 9, 2016), in making its decision to exclude
license holders from the entirety of the 277-acre Fair Park and all of its buildings, walkways and
sidewalks, such reliance was misplaced in regard to the 277-acre Fair Park.
I do not see any difference between the fairgrounds situation and the offices leased in Stephenville in the opinion. I think Paxton also saw it this way, though I could be wrong and the court saw it this way, in the case of the Fort Worth Zoo.
But i do agree that how far Paxton takes it and when is a major question we need to keep an eye on.
Just my also not a lawyer argument.
