HomeMy WebLinkAboutCharter_Review_Committee_Agenda_4_20_2021_3882Notice of Meeting for the
Charter Rev iew Committee
of the City of Georgetown
April 20, 2021 at 3:00 P M
at Virtual
T he C ity of G eorgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If you
require as s is tance in partic ipating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA, reas onable
as s is tance, adaptations , or ac commodations will be provided upon request. P leas e c ontact the C ity S ec retary's
O ffic e, at leas t three (3) days prior to the sc heduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or C ity Hall at 808 Martin
Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626 for additional information; T T Y users route through R elay
Texas at 711.
This is a me eting of the C ouncil appointe d Charte r Re view C ommitte e.
Consiste nt with Gover nor Gr eg A bbott’s suspension of var ious provisions of
the O pen M ee tings A ct, e ffec tive A ugust 1, 2020 and until fur the r notic e, to
r educ e the c hance of C O V I D-19 tr ansmission, all C ity of Ge orge town
Advisor y B oar d mee tings will be held vir tually. P ublic c omment will be
allowed via telec onfer ence ; no one will be allowed to appear in pe rson.
J oin fr om a P C, M ac , i P ad, i P hone or A ndroid devic e, P lease c lick this U R L
to join:
J oin Zoom M e eting
https://geor getowntx.zoom.us/j/95351464616?
pwd=Tnl TO E Y 3d0w2 Y W N C Y U h B U GhI R XhL dz09
M e eting I D: 953 5146 4616
P assc ode : 782557
O ne tap mobile
+13462487799,,95351464616# U S (H ouston)
+12532158782,,95351464616# U S (Tac oma)
Dial by your loc ation
+1 346 248 7799 U S (H ouston)
+1 253 215 8782 U S (Tac oma)
+1 669 900 6833 U S (San J ose)
+1 312 626 6799 U S (Chic ago)
+1 929 205 6099 U S (Ne w Yor k)
+1 301 715 8592 U S (Washington D C)
833 548 0276 U S Toll-fre e
833 548 0282 U S Toll-fre e
Page 1 of 64
877 853 5257 U S Toll-fre e
888 475 4499 U S Toll-fre e
M e eting I D: 953 5146 4616
F ind your loc al numbe r: https://geor getowntx.zoom.us/u/ab5 M twJ dq2
Citizen comme nts are acc epted in thr ee differ ent for mats: S ubmit wr itte n
c omments to mayra.c antu@geor getown.or g by 5:00 p.m. on the day before
the date of the me eting and the Re cor ding Se cr etar y will re ad your
c omments into the r ec ording during the item that is being discussed.
L og onto the mee ting at the link above and “r aise your hand” during the
item.
Use your home /mobile phone to call the toll-fre e numbe r.
To join a Zoom me eting, c lick on the link provided and join as an attende e.
You will be aske d to e nte r your name and email addre ss (this is so we can
ide ntify you when you ar e c alled upon). To spe ak on an item, clic k on the ic on
labe le d "P articipants" at the bottom ce nte r of your P C or M ac sc re en. At
the bottom of the window on the right side of the sc re en, clic k the button
labe le d "R aise H and." C lick "Raise H and" if you want to say some thing in
the mee ting. Whe n you are calle d upon by the Re cor ding Se cr etar y, your
devic e will be r emotely un-muted by the A dministrator and you may speak
for thre e minute s. P lease state your name clear ly, and when your time is over,
your devic e will be mute d again. You can lower your hand by clic king the
same button, now labe le d "L ower H and."
The same me thod can be used to raise your hand in a Zoom me eting on a
mobile de vice , simply tap "Raise H and" at the bottom left cor ne r of the
scr ee n. The hand ic on will turn blue and the text below it will switc h to say
"L ower H and" while your hand is r aised.
Use of pr ofanity, thr eate ning language, slande rous r emarks or thr eats of
harm are not allowed and will re sult in you be ing imme diately re moved fr om
the mee ting.
Regular Agenda
A C all to O rder - Louis e Epstein, C hair
B R eview and approval of the minutes from April 6, 2021 C harter R eview C ommittee - Louis e Epstein,
C hair
Page 2 of 64
C Disc ussion of pos s ible amendment of C ity C harter, S ection 2.01, Number, S election, and Term of O ffic e
relating to length of terms and term limits – S kye Mas s on, C ity Attorney
D Disc ussion of pos s ible amendment of C ity C harter, S ection 2.02, Q ualifications - S kye Masson, C ity
Attorney
E Disc ussion of pos s ible amendment of C ity C harter, S ection 2.03, Vacancies - S kye Masson, C ity
F Disc ussion of pos s ible amendment of C ity C harter S ection 2.06, Mayor and Mayor P ro Tem – S kye
Mas s on C ity Attorney
G Disc ussion of pos s ible amendment of C ity C harter provisions in Artic le I V related to petition
requirements for S ection 4.01, power of initiative; S ec tion 4.02, power of referendum; and S ection 4.07,
R ec all of C ity O fficials; and S ec tion 4.08, R ec all P etition - S kye Mas s on, C ity Attorney
H Disc ussion of pos s ible amendment of C ity C harter to appoint a C ity Auditor – S kye Mas s on, C ity
Attorney
I Disc ussion of pos s ible amendment of C ity C harter regarding the organizational reporting struc ture of the
C ity Attorney, C ity S ec retary, and Municipal Judge – S kye Mas s on, C ity Attorney
J Disc ussion of next s teps and agenda items for May 4, 2021 and additional charter amendments for
c onsideration at a future meeting – Louise Eps tein, C hair
Ce rtificate of Posting
I, R obyn Densmore, C ity S ecretary for the C ity of G eorgetown, Texas, do hereby c ertify that this Notic e of
Meeting was posted at C ity Hall, 808 Martin Luther King Jr. S treet, G eorgetown, T X 78626, a plac e readily
acc es s ible to the general public as required by law, on the _____ day of _________________, 2021, at
__________, and remained s o posted for at leas t 72 c ontinuous hours prec eding the s cheduled time of said
meeting.
__________________________________
R obyn Dens more, C ity S ec retary
Page 3 of 64
City of Georgetown, Texas
Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
S UB J E C T:
R eview and approval of the minutes from April 6, 2021 C harter R eview C ommittee - Louise Eps tein, C hair
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
NA
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mayra C antu, Management Analyst
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Minutes -April 6, 2021 Exhibit
Page 4 of 64
Minutes of Meeting of the
CHARTER REVIEW COMMITTEE (CRC)
City of Georgetown, Texas
April 6, 2021
The Charter Review Committee met on Tuesday, April 6, 2021 at 3:00 PM via Zoom virtual meeting.
The City of Georgetown is committed to compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). If
you require assistance in participating at a public meeting due to a disability, as defined under the ADA,
reasonable assistance, adaptations, or accommodations will be provided upon request. Please contact the
City Secretary’s Office, at least three (3) days prior to the scheduled meeting date, at (512) 930-3652 or
City Hall at 808 Martin Luther King Jr Street for additional information; TTY users route through Relay
Texas at 711.
The meeting was held with the Governor’s Order, all City Buildings are following these procedures:
• Masks are recommended
• Physical distancing; 6 feet between you and anyone not in your household
• Practice good hygiene and wash your hands
Committee Members Present: City Staff Present:
John Hesser
Louise Epstein
Bob Glandt
Joseph Burke
Troy Hellman
John Marler
Rick Vasquez
Ben Stewart
Skye Masson, City Attorney
Mayra Cantu, Management Analyst and Board
Liaison
Karen Frost, Assistant City Secretary
Rachel Saucier, Executive Assistant
Board Members Absent:
Others present:
Cristopher De Los Santos, The Sun
Legislative Regular Agenda
Louise Epstein called the meeting to order at 3:00 p.m.
A. Review and approval of the minutes from March 16, 2021 Charter Review Committee - Louise
Epstein, Chair
Strike there is a general preference for being at least 21, but not consensus. In item D change recommend
a benchmark Present for discussion
Motion to approve by Bob Glandt; Second by Rick Vasquez with amended changes. Approved 8-0.
B. Introduction to the benchmark Home-Rule Charter cities – Skye Masson, City Attorney
El Paso, Round Rock, Cedar Park, New Braunfels, Sugar Land, Fort Worth, Carrollton, and Richardson.
Chair opened the discussion of the benchmark cities, discussion around El Paso and Fort Worth being
significantly larger and possibly substituting them with more comparable cities.
John Marler stated having larger cities allows for a good cross-section, even if they are significantly larger
and the charters do not differ greatly.
Page 5 of 64
Joseph Burke suggested possibly even adding smaller towns and Pflugerville. John Hesser liked the list
of benchmark cities. Troy Hellman also liked having larger cities included.
Committee will continue using the benchmark cities as listed when reviewing charter language.
C. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter, Section 2.01, Number, Selection, and Term
of Office relating to term limits - Skye Masson, City Attorney
Skye Masson introduced the topic. John Marler stated elections act as term limits, and people who
do well will get re-elected and vice versa. Joseph Burke asked do we feel a need to have term limits
given our current Council, if we feel no need then does not think we need term limit. Joseph Burke
does not think we should have term limits. John Hesser likes the idea of term limits. Chair presented
that it is hard for Council challengers to raise money, but that term limits could also hinder the
experience Council can gain over various terms if there was a limit. Chair asked what is an acceptable
amount of time in years that would be acceptable for people to be on Council and to serve as Mayor?
John Marler spoke about voter displeasure being enough of a term limit, not in favor of term limits.
John Hesser inclined for term limits with 4-year terms, and a limit of 2 terms. Rick Vasquez is in
favor of term limits of 9 years, with 3 terms for Council and 6 years for Mayor. Bob Glandt is in
favor of term limits for Council of 9 years, with 3 terms; would rather have longer term residents
identify the limit for Mayor. Ben Stewart is not in favor of term limits and agrees that the electorate
is the term limit. Troy Hellman mentioned in favor of 3 lifetime 3-year term limit, and possibly an
additional 2 three-year terms for Mayor.
Joseph Burke stated he is not hearing a compelling case to enact term limits from the discussion had.
If there were limits enacted, does not think a lifetime limit should be added, but rather consecutive
term limits. John Marler mentioned 3-year terms keep Council accountable to the voters, but 4 years
may require term limits.
Chair would like to discuss length of terms and term limits in next meeting with research from staff.
D. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter Section 2.02, Qualifications - Skye Masson,
City Attorney
Skye Masson introduced research done by staff and potential revised charter language to consider.
Staff seeking direction on:
• Does the committee recommend amendment to include age and residency requirement as
allowed by State Law?
• Does the committee wish to alter bolded language in any way? Current language matches
Sugar Land and Pflugerville.
Chair opened discussion on changing the age. Ben Stewart mentioned if you can vote, you should be
allowed to run for Council; in favor of moving from 21 to 18. Other members stated they are not in
favor of changing to 18.
Motion made by John Marler to approve Staffs recommended language but changing the last line to
“A member of the Council ceasing to reside in the City and their District shall immediately forfeit
that office.” Second made by John Hesser.
Joseph Burke asked committee to possibly change some words, as well as the Chair.
Recommended changes:
Page 6 of 64
Mayor shall be at least twenty-one (21) years of age as of the first day of their term for office shall
be a citizen and qualified voter of the State of Texas and the City of Georgetown and a resident of
the Council District the member would be representing for a period of twelve (12) months as of the
last legal date for filing preceding their election day. No member of the Council shall hold any other
office or employment under the City Government while a member of said Council, nor hold any paid
employment under the City Government within 1 year thereafter. member of the Council ceasing
to reside in the City and their district shall
immediately forfeit that office.
This item will come back to the committee with staffs recommended language given the committees
direction.
E. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter, Section 2.03, Vacancies - Skye Masson, City
Attorney
Skye Masson introduced the item, background and research on this item.
Joseph Burke mentioned that the language needs to be clear on timing so as not to leave any
vagueness. Sugar Land’s language is liked. Cross referencing the section of qualifications may be
needed in order to be very clear.
John Marler asked whether we need to include a provision where if we are not permitted by law to
have an election, then this section of appointment goes into effect.
If a Mayor vacates, the Mayor Pro Tem would assume the position if under 12 months.
Committee discussed possibly reducing 60 days to 30 days of Sugar Land’s following language:
If, at the time of the vacancy, less than twelve (12) months remain on the term, the council
shall within sixty days of the vacancy appoint a qualified person to fill the vacancy.
Motion to go to 45 days made by Bob Glandt, second by John Hesser. (8-0)
Staff will craft recommended language based on direction given by the Committee using Sugar
Land’s language and bring back at next meeting.
F. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter Section 2.06, Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem –
Skye Masson City Attorney
Skye Masson introduced item, background, and research. Based on a possible recommendation this
item will probably have a domino effect on other sections of the charter that staff would have to
review and bring back to the committee.
Chair opened the discussion of the Mayor being a voting member or non-voting member.
John Marler in favor of the Mayor voting. Joseph Burke is in favor of Mayor voting. Bob Glandt in
favor of Mayor voting. John Hesser is in favor of Mayor voting; ties allow for compromises and more
discussion if needed. Rick Vasquez asked how many times has the Mayor had to break a tie? Troy
Hellman is in favor of the Mayor voting. Ben Stewart made a comment about the benefit of a Mayor
not voting and allowing for a bigger picture; in favor of language as-is. Chair in favor of the Mayor
voting.
Discussion on ties; If an item ties, then it dies.
Page 7 of 64
If this Charter change was made to where a tie would have an item die, then a review of ordinances
on meeting procedures and voting would be needed.
Motion to have the Mayor be a voting member of Council made by John Marler, Second by John
Hesser. (8-0)
Staff will craft language using Sugar Land’s language and Committee’s direction and bring back to
committee.
G. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter provisions in Article IV related to petition
requirements for Section 4.01, power of initiative; Section 4.02, power of referendum; and Section
4.07, Recall of City Officials; and Section 4.08, Recall Petition - Skye Masson, City Attorney
Skye Masson introduced item, background and research. Last election there were 49,410
registered voters within the City of Georgetown. John Marler stated 40,046 people actually voted in the
last election. Under the Election Code, qualified voters has a different definition that is harder to
determine than registered voters.
Chair interprets 15 percent of qualified voters to 15 percent of registered voters who voted in last election.
John Marler recommends 15,000 registered voters or 15% of registered voters, whichever is less keeping
Georgetown’s future growth in mind. Joseph Burke not in favor of a minimum threshold number,
preference for 15% of registered voters in last municipal election. John Hesser also in favor of a number
that is representative of the population, in favor of Joseph’s recommendation. Bob Glandt also in
agreeance with Joseph’s recommendation. Rick Vasquez also in favor of Joseph Burke’s
recommendation. Ben Stewart also in favor of Joseph Burke’s recommendation. John Marler mentioned
as Georgetown grows 15% will become too big of a hurdle.
The Committee discussed the adoption of whichever would be less, 15,000 or 15%, as a standing
minimum. Marler noted that the ability to petition should be a hurdle but not impossible.
Masson asked for clarification regarding special elections and the Committee agreed to exclude
calculating the percentage from special election voters.
Chair Epstein proposed two motions for the Committee’s consideration.
First, consideration of using the calculation of 15% of voters in last regular municipal election.
Motion by Hesser, second by Marler. Voting in favor: Hesser, Marler, Burke, Vaquez, Blandt
Second, consideration of using the calculation of 15% of voters in last regular municipal election or
15,000
Motion by Marler for 15,000, second by Stewart. Voting in favor: Marler, Hesser, Stewart, Hellman
Opposed included Epstein, Vasquez, Burke, Glandt.
The second motion was tied 4-4 and staff was directed to bring this up to discuss at next meeting.
Burke asked for additional background to make decision between these options. Epstein is not
comfortable with fixed number and prefers percentages. Staff is requested to identify cities and summary
from TML and percentages.
Masson will prepare proposed language to pick regarding petition language including no ceiling and a
ceiling regarding the number of signatures required to initiate a petition before City Council.
Hesser departed at 5:09pm.
Page 8 of 64
H. Discussion of agenda items for April 20, 2021 and additional charter amendments for
consideration at a future meeting – Louise Epstein, Chair
Epstein asked for other items to address at next meeting.
Masson indicated the following items from today’s discussion that will require follow up at the next
meeting. Staff will bring back information regarding the length of term and term limits together
while also reviewing how length interplays with limits. Staff will bring back information regarding
qualifications with language changed to indicate 1 year. Staff will prepare language for the Mayor
as a voting member and review any triggers to other sections such as defining the governing body
and governing members. The discussion regarding Article IV and petitions will be continued.
Discussion regarding a city auditor and the report status of the City Attorney, City Secretary, and
Municipal Judge. Masson mentioned staff recommendations may need to be reviewed.
Epstein noted that the next meeting will be in two weeks.
Motion to adjourn meeting by Vasquez, second by Burke, approved 7-0. Meeting adjourned at 5:15 pm.
__________________________________ ____________
Louise Epstein Date
Committee Chair
___ _______________________________ ____________
John Hesser Date
Committee Vice Chair
__________________________________ ____________
Mayra Cantu Date
Board Liaison
Page 9 of 64
City of Georgetown, Texas
Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
S UB J E C T:
Dis cus s ion of possible amendment of C ity C harter, S ec tion 2.01, Number, S elec tion, and Term of O ffice
relating to length of terms and term limits – S kye Masson, C ity Attorney
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
NA
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mayra C antu, Management Analyst
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Item C. Length of Term and Term Limits Exhibit
Item B. Term Limits Backup Material
Page 10 of 64
Page 1 of 7
Amendment Review Coversheet
2021 Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
Item C. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter, Section 2.01 Number, Selection,
and Term of office relating to length of term and term limits – Skye Masson, City Attorney
1. Current City Charter Language (no term limits):
Sec. 2.01. - Number, selection, and term of office.
The Council shall be composed of seven (7) Councilmembers elected from single-member
districts and a Mayor elected at-large, each of whom unless sooner removed under the provisions
of the Charter, shall serve for three-year terms, from the first meeting of the Council following
the Councilmember's election until the first meeting of the Council following the election two (2)
years later, or until the councilmember's successor has been elected and duly qualified.
Four (4) members of the Council shall be elected each odd-numbered year and three (3)
members and a Mayor each even-numbered year.
Councilmembers must reside in the districts from which they are elected except that
Councilmembers may complete the terms to which they were elected if district boundaries are
changed during their terms causing their residences no longer to be within the districts from
which they were elected.
The authority to adopt council district boundaries shall reside in the council. The council may
revise district boundaries from time to time and shall adopt district boundaries within one year
after the publication of each United States decennial census.
Councilmembers and Mayor shall be elected for three-year terms, which shall begin with the
general election to be held in 1995, and the terms shall be staggered such that three Council
members are elected in one year, the Mayor and two Council members are elected in the
following year and two Councilmembers are elected the last year. For the staggering of the initial
three-year terms, the following procedure shall apply:
(1) In 1995, Councilmembers shall be elected for Districts 1, 3, 4 and 5. Following the election,
the Councilmembers shall draw lots to serve either a three-year term (2 members) or a two-year
term (2 members).
(2) In 1996, the Mayor shall be elected for a three-year team, and Councilmembers shall be
elected for Districts 2, 6 and 7. Following the election, the Councilmembers shall draw lots to
serve either a three-year term (2 members) or a two-year term (1 member).
(3) In 1997, the two Districts whose Councilmembers serve two-year terms shall elect
Councilmembers for three-year terms. All succeeding elections shall be to elect Councilmembers
for three-year terms in compliance with this Charter.
Page 11 of 64
Page 2 of 7
2. Update with direction from 4/6/2020 CRC:
A. Suggested Georgetown Language:
i. Length of Term:
Councilmembers and Mayor shall be elected for [2-3-4]-year terms
ii. Term Limits:
- If no change, no term limit then nothing is needed.
- Councilmembers and Mayor shall serve no more than [X] consecutive terms.
- Councilmembers and Mayor shall serve no more than [X] terms in a lifetime.
B. Benchmark Cities Length of Terms:
El Paso - 4-year terms
Round Rock – 3-year terms
Cedar Park – 2-year terms
New Braunfels – 3-year terms
Sugar Land – 3-year terms
Fort Worth – 2-year terms
Carrollton – 3-year terms
Richardson – 2-year terms
C. Benchmark Cities Term Limits:
El Paso – no more than a total of ten years throughout their lifetime.
Round Rock – no term limit identified
Cedar Park – no term limit identified
New Braunfels – no more than 2 consecutive 3-year terms of office and no more than 3,
3-year terms during a lifetime.
Sugar Land – no more than 4 times in any consecutive 9-year period.
Fort Worth – no term limit identified
Page 12 of 64
Page 3 of 7
Carrollton –
- A person who has served as a member of the city council in any place, other
than mayor, for two (2) consecutive terms, shall not again be eligible for
election in any place on the city council except mayor, until at least one term
approximating three years has elapsed.
- A person who has served two (2) consecutive terms as mayor shall not again
be eligible for election as mayor until at least one term approximating three
years has elapsed, but shall be eligible for election as a member of the city
council in any place, other than mayor.
- A "term" as used in this paragraph, is that period of time beginning with the
taking of the oath of office and running through the oath of office following
the next election for that office.
- Partial terms will not be counted when determining term limits.
Richardson – no more than 6 consecutive terms until at least one full term shall have
elapsed from the expiration of such person's last term of office.
3. TML Survey of Cities:
20. Term limit applies
Both council and mayor 88 35%
Separately 12 5%
N/A 149 60%
Total 249 100%
Page 13 of 64
Page 4 of 7
4. Samples from benchmark cities:
El Paso
Section 2.2 - NOMINATIONS.
A. Qualifications for Office. In addition to the requirements prescribed by law, the following
shall be the qualifications for City elective offices:
1.Candidates for Mayor shall have been City residents for the 12 months next preceding
the election, and must be at least 21 years of age;
2.Candidates for Representative shall have been City residents for the 12 months next
preceding the election, and residents of the district for 6 months next preceding the
election, and must be at least 21 years of age;
3.Candidates for Municipal Judge shall have been City residents for the 12 months next
preceding the election, licensed to practice law in Texas, and at least 21 years of age;
4.Candidates for Mayor and Representative shall be eligible for that elective office
only when holding that office for a term of four years shall not result in the
candidate exceeding the term limitation established in Section 2.2 C.
C. Limitation. No Mayor or Representative may hold such office for more than a total of ten
years throughout their lifetime.
Round Rock
Sec. 3.01. - Number, selection and term.
The City Council shall be composed of the Mayor and six (6) Council members. The Mayor and
all Council members shall be elected from the City at large and each Council member shall
occupy a place on the City Council, such places being numbered 1 through 6 consecutively. The
Mayor and Council members shall be elected in the manner provided in Article 5 of this Charter
to serve for three (3) year terms.
Cedar Park
Section 3.01 Number, Selection and Termv
The Council shall be composed of the Mayor and six (6) Councilmembers. The Mayor and all
Councilmembers shall be elected from the City at Large and each Councilmember shall occupy a
position on the Council, such positions being numbered one (1) through six (6) consecutively.
The Mayor and Councilmembers shall be elected in the manner in Article V of this Charter to
serve for two (2) year terms. The Mayor, Councilmember Place Two (2), Councilmember Place
Four (4), and Councilmember Place Six (6) shall be elected in the even years. Councilmember
Place One (1), Councilmember Place Three (3), and Councilmember Place Five (5) shall be
elected in the odd years.
Page 14 of 64
Page 5 of 7
New Braunfels
Sec. 3.01. - Number, selection and term.
The legislative and governing body of the City shall consist of seven (7) Councilpersons and
shall be known as the "Council of the City of New Braunfels," and who shall each serve a term
of three (3) years.
The City of New Braunfels shall by ordinance be divided into six (6) districts. Each district
shall to the extent reasonably possible be equally populated and the City Council shall
maintain such equality of population, as from time to time deemed necessary, by ordinance.
The districts shall be designated Number 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6. The qualified voters of each
district shall elect one (1) Councilmember for each of the six (6) districts. The six (6)
Councilmembers so elected from each district shall have been a resident of the district from
which the Councilmember is elected for no less than six (6) months prior to filing for office
and must continue to reside in said district for his or her entire term of office.
The Mayor of the City of New Braunfels shall be elected by the qualified voters of the City at
large and elections for the Mayor shall be held pursuant to Article IV, Elections, of the City
Charter of New Braunfels, Texas.
Each Councilperson shall hold office until his or her successor is elected and qualified.
Candidates elected at the municipal election shall take office at the regular City Council
meeting, the same being at the first regular meeting held after the meeting in which the election
returns are canvassed and the result of the election is officially declared.
No current or future elected official shall serve more than two (2) consecutive three (3)
year terms of office and no more than three (3), three (3) year terms during a lifetime.
However, years or time of service that an elected official may serve in filling an unexpired
term or a partial term of office shall not be counted toward the above limitations.
Sugar Land
Sec. 2.01. - Election and Term.
(a) The council shall consist of a mayor and six (6) council members elected by the voters for a
term of three (3) years, or until their successors have been elected and qualified.
(b) The mayor and two (2) council members shall be elected at-large. The two (2) at-large
council member positions shall be respectively designated as Position 1 and Position 2. The
remaining four (4) council members shall be elected by districts, designated as Districts 1, 2, 3,
and 4. The council shall modify the size, configuration, and geographic definition of the council
districts as necessary to provide equal representation to all citizens of the city and to comply with
state and federal law.
(c) The council shall serve staggered three-year terms. Council elections shall be held in May on
the date specified by state law. A candidate must be elected to office by majority vote. If no
candidate for office receives a majority vote, a run-off election shall be held as required by state
law. The council shall be the judge of the election and qualifications of its own members.
(d) A person may not be elected in a city election to any council position more than four
times in any consecutive nine-year period. For purposes of this provision, district and at-
large council member positions are aggregated, while the position of the mayor is
considered a separate office from other council positions.
(e) The city secretary shall promptly notify all persons elected to office. The persons elected
shall take their oaths of office and begin their duties at the meeting at which the city council
declares the results of the election.
Page 15 of 64
Page 6 of 7
Fort Worth
§ 1 [POWERS OF CITY VESTED IN] THE CITY COUNCIL [;COMPOSITION, TERMS].
The powers of the city government shall be vested in a body to be known as the City Council,
composed of eleven (11) members, one of whom shall be the mayor. Their terms of office shall
be for a period of two (2) years and until the election and qualification of their successors.
Carrollton
Sec. 2.01. - Number, selection, term.
The council shall consist of a mayor and seven (7) council members elected from the city in the
manner provided in Article VII, for a term of three (3) years or until their successors have
been elected and inducted.
Sec. 2.02. - Qualifications.
The members of the council shall be qualified voters of the City of Carrollton who have been
residents of the State of Texas for at least one (1) year and residents of said city or residents of an
area now within the corporate limits of said city for at least six (6) months, shall hold no other
public office except that of notary public or member of the National Guard or armed services,
and not in arrears in the payment of any taxes or other liability due the city. If a member of the
council shall cease to possess any of these qualifications or shall be convicted, including the
entering of any plea and receiving deferred adjudication, of a felony or a crime involving moral
turpitude, his or her office shall immediately become vacant.
If a member of the council shall announce his or her candidacy, in any general, special or
primary election, for any office of profit or trust under the laws of this state or the United States
other than the office then held, at any time when the unexpired term of the office then held shall
exceed one (1) year, such announcement or such candidacy shall constitute an automatic
resignation of the office then held. Such resignation shall become effective on the date of the
next regular municipal general election or the election for which such candidacy is announced,
whichever occurs first.
A person who has served as a member of the city council in any place, other than mayor,
for two (2) consecutive terms, shall not again be eligible for election in any place on the city
council except mayor, until at least one term approximating three years has elapsed. A
person who has served two (2) consecutive terms as mayor shall not again be eligible for
election as mayor until at least one term approximating three years has elapsed, but shall
be eligible for election as a member of the city council in any place, other than mayor. A
"term" as used in this paragraph, is that period of time beginning with the taking of the
oath of office and running through the oath of office following the next election for that
office. Partial terms will not be counted when determining term limits.
Page 16 of 64
Page 7 of 7
Richardson
Section 3.01. - Number, election, terms.
a. Except as otherwise provided by this charter, all powers conferred on the city shall be
exercised by a city council consisting of seven (7) members comprised of a mayor and
six (6) council members. The members of the city council shall each be elected by the
qualified voters of the entire City to numbered places in the manner provided in this
charter for a term of two (2) years and until a successor is elected and qualified. As used
in this charter, unless the context clearly means otherwise, the word or phrase “city
council”, “council”, “member(s) of the city council” and “member(s) of the council”
means and includes the mayor and the six (6) council members. The word or phrase
“councilmember(s)” or “council member(s)” means the six (6) members of the city
council excluding the mayor, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.
b. No person elected or appointed to the city council at the May 2009 city officer
election or thereafter, shall serve as a member of the city council in any place for
more than six (6) consecutive terms until at least one full term shall have elapsed
from the expiration of such person's last term of office.
c. For purposes of this section and in computing term limits:
i. A member of the council, who resigns or vacates office prior to the expiration of the
term for which such person was elected or appointed, shall be deemed to have served
a full term.
ii. A person appointed or elected to fill a vacancy on the council for an unexpired term
shall be deemed to have served a full term if fifty percent (50%) or more of such
term is remaining at the time of such appointment or election.
Page 17 of 64
tricacies of city government and to learn
about the problems of city agencies and pro-
grams or those parts of the city with which
they may have had no prior experience.
Three-year term: A three-year term’s princi-
pal advantage is that it lengthens the period
of service before facing the voters, giving a
member time to compile a record and giving
a new member time to become proficient in
the job. The three-year term also clearly dif-
ferentiates council service from other public
offices. It is a long enough time to accom-
plish something, but too short to feel like
there is a lease on the position.
The principal disadvantage of the three-year
term is that one of every two municipal elec-
tions will fall in a state or national election
year. It could necessitate a separate elec-
tion, producing some voter confusion. There
is also some prospect that the partisanship
of state and national elections would be car-
ried over into city elections.
Four-year term: Most observers of govern-
ments tend to feel that four-year terms en-
courage those elected to them to invest more
time in working on substantive and larger
problems of government, rather than thinking
about campaign strategy, and to become
more proficient in policy issues.
Longer terms can, however, work to increase
the insulation of elected officials from the
electorate; although, the many arenas for di-
rect contact with constituents in city govern-
ment appear to make this a far less severe
problem than it is for members of Congress
or state legislatures.28
Staggered terms: More than 95 percent of
Texas charters call for staggered terms.
Charter drafters in Texas have obviously felt
that it is desirable to have some continuing
experience on the city council and avoid a
wholesale turnover of city councilmembers.
Staggered terms do tend to provide some sta-
bility on the council. On the other hand, they
also thwart the will of the people to make a
major change of direction. For example, with
a five-member council and two-year stag-
gered terms, three members would come up
for election one year and two the next. If the
council had taken or failed to take a stand on
a major issue before the election year when
two members were running, the vote for the
two incumbents or for two newcomers would
not necessarily change the stance taken by
the council prior to election.
Term limits
Perhaps no legislative issue in many years has
evolved with such gathering momentum as term limits. Orig-
inally proposed for members of the U.S. Congress and, in
some states, for state-elected officials, term limits have now
come to the local level. Actually, they may have started at the
local level in Texas. The citizens of the North Texas city of
Paris placed a two-term (four-year) limit on their city council
when they adopted their first home rule charter in 1948. A
few other cities adopted such provisions in the 1970s, but
the real movement did not start until the late 1980s. Today,
41 percent of Texas home rule cities have limits on the num-
ber of consecutive years their mayors and city councilmem-
bers may serve; the form of government or size of the city
appears to have very little influence on voter adoption of term
limits.
Arguments rage back and forth over the merits of
the “term limits” movement. Opponents generally include
political scientists and so-called “urban experts” who insist
that voters have the ability to terminate any elected official’s
career by merely turning him/her out at the polls. Proponents
of term limits maintain that advantages of incumbency, both
in campaign finance and in name recognition, deter or block
the termination vote. They argue that term limits are neces-
sary to bring “government back to the people.” Along with a
widespread distrust, or at least suspicion of government, this
“back to the people” plea accounts for term limit elections
passing across the country with generally wide margins.
Whatever the merits, term limits appear to be here to stay;
thus, this book will examine the charter provisions in Texas
cities and analyze the trend to 2008.
One of the obstacles to analyzing this movement
is the wide variation in charter terminology. It is impossible
to ascertain in a few cities whether the limits apply to com-
bined service of one person as a mayor and councilmember
or whether the two offices are meant to be considered sepa-
rately. An equally formidable obstacle is the absence of any
case law history and the resulting proliferation of different in-
terpretations.
Term limits in charters are expressed in one of two
ways. One way is to have separate limits for the mayor and
members of the council. A typical charter with this type limit
is Friendswood. That charter states: “The mayor and coun-
cilmembers shall be elected to serve for three-year terms as
provided below, but no person shall be elected to serve in the
capacity of councilmember for more than three consecutive
three-year terms, nor shall any person be elected to serve in
the capacity of mayor for more than three consecutive three-
year terms.”
41
The city council - election and service
Page 18 of 64
The other way to express limits is to count service as mayor
and service as a councilmember together. The charter of the
City of Rockport is very straightforward. It states: “No person
shall serve more than ten consecutive years on the City Coun-
cil.” The statement to look for here to assure that the mayor
is included in the definition of “City Council” is this additional
statement found in the Rockport charter: “The legislative and
governing body of the City shall consist of a Mayor and four
Councilmen and shall be known as the City Council of Rock-
port.”
Separate limits on years of service
A total of 36 cities have separate limits for mayors
and councilmembers. The most popular limit for these cities
is six years for each of the offices. This includes cities that
have a three-term limit on two-year terms, as well as cities
that have a two-term limit on three-year terms. The full break-
down by limit in years is as follows:
aJacksonville and Waco have limits on mayors, but not on the
council.
bPearland has limits on councilmembers, but not on the
mayor.
*This chart uses 1994 data, but other aspects of the recent
survey indicate that the numbers are essentially the same.
The chart above considers limits in one of the two
positions – mayor or councilmember. In this type of language,
a councilmember could serve his/her limit of, say, six years,
and then run and be elected as mayor and serve another six
years. Assuming both posts carry six-year limits, one individ-
ual could legally serve 12 years.
It should be noted that these limits have been
constrained in six cities by imposing “combination” limits.
For example, in Graham, although the mayor and coun-
cilmembers have six-years limits individually, the charter lim-
its any combined service in those two positions to ten years,
not twelve years.
The following chart portrays the maximum num-
ber of consecutive/successive years a person could serve as
council member or mayor under the separate limits category:
*This chart uses 1994 data, but other aspects of the recent
survey indicate that the numbers are essentially the same.
Counting service years together
Thirty cities combine mayoral and councilmember
service into a single-term limit. The Rockport charter is an
example: only “ten consecutive years” on the council. When
examining these charter provisions, we find the following term
limits:
*This chart uses 1994 data, but other aspects of the recent
survey indicate that the numbers are essentially the same.
Charter language on term limits
Since “model” language has not evolved on this
subject, current charter language varies widely. Many charters
simply place a limit on “consecutive” or “successive” terms,
leaving unanswered the question whether a person appointed
or elected to a partial term loses some of the time that might
otherwise be allowed. Occasionally, a charter will clearly state
that “a portion of a term” does not count as a term of office
42
Texas Home Rule Charters
Figure 9-3: Term limits in years when limits are separately applied*
Cities in which Limit in years Cities in which
the mayor has councilmembers have
separate limits separate limits
9a 47
18 6 18
9 8 10
b
2 9 2
Total Cities: 38 37
Figure 9-4: Maximum years service when limits separately applied*
Limit on years Number of cities
of service
6 1
8 9
10 1
12 15
16 8
18 2
Total cities: 36
Figure 9-5: Term limits in years when service applied together*
Limit on years of service Number of cities
as member of city council,
including mayor
4 2
6 19
8 3
9 1
10 3 (five two-year terms)
12 2
Total cities: 30
Page 19 of 64
for purposes of a limit. Some charters use the word “full
term” or “regular term.” These are generally interpreted to
mean that if a person comes into a partial term, the partial
time will not count toward the limit.
Several cities require a person to “sit out” one
year or one term before running for office again (one city re-
quires that an individual must sit out 30 months). Whether
this means that in the other cities a person reaching his/her
maximum can never come back is unknown. Two cities do
state that the term limit is for the “lifetime” of the individ-
ual.
Finally, a charter should make it clear whether the
limits apply to current councilmembers. Several charters spell
this out. Most do not at the present time.
In summary, the term limit movement is still rel-
atively young. If a city does not have this kind of provision in
its charter and desires to have a
charter amendment election, offi-
cials are urged to carefully review
with the city attorney the language
to be used in order to avoid some of
the ambiguities identified. In May
1994, Austin adopted a charter
amendment limiting terms of office,
but did provide that if an incumbent
councilmember, when his/her limit
of terms have been reached, can get
a petition signed by five percent of
the qualified voters in the city,
his/her name shall go back on the
ballot. Houston adopted such an
amendment in 1991, had several
councilmembers qualify under the
petition route in the 1993 election,
and decided at a January 15, 1994
election to rescind the petition by-
pass. Thus, Houston’s term limits
have no exception to them.
Qualifications for office
Early Texas city charters included a detailed and
lengthy list of qualifications for the prospective mayor or city
councilmember. The first officeholders and voters had to be
white, male, and citizens of the Republic. Several cities also
had property and residence requirements. The original Galve-
ston charter in 1840 required the mayor to own $1,000 worth
of property. A number of charters still require ownership of
property within the city and no indebtedness to the city, plus
three years residence in the city before filing as a candidate.
Arguably unenforceable, these provisions in current charters
are historical reminders of practices before state law and court
cases established the controlling criteria for qualifications of
all public officials.
For more than 30 years, state law has set forth re-
quirements to run for public office in Texas and these require-
ments apply to candidates for the governing bodies of Texas
home rule cities. In addition, federal court cases have held
that a city may not require an officeholder to be an owner of
property and may not refuse to seat a councilmember for
being delinquent in taxes to the city.
The Election Code criteria are set out in Section
141.001. Under that section, a candidate must:
(1) be a United States citizen,
(2) be 18 years of age or older upon the
commencement of the term to be filled at
the election,
(3) have been a resident of Texas for at
least 12 months as of the deadline for filing
for the office,
(4) have resided in the city for at least six
months as of the deadline for filing for
the office,
(5) not have been convicted of a felony
for which he or she has not been pardoned
or otherwise released from the resulting dis-
abilities, and
(6) not have been found mentally incom-
petent by a final judgment of the court.
Exceptions for home rule cities
The Election Code authorized home rule cities to
make two exceptions: (1) the charter can require council can-
didates to be up to 21 years of age, rather than 18, upon the
commencement of the term to be filled at the election; and
(2) the charter can require candidates to be residents of the
city for up to 12 months, rather than six months, as of the
deadline for filing for office.
Virtually every charter in the state says a candi-
date must be a qualified voter. This is not required by state
law, but a home rule city may include this requirement in its
charter.
Despite the provisions in the Election Code, some
cities still amend their charters to add requirements that are
not enforceable. In earlier days, charter writers might have
been accused of placing unenforceable qualifications in the
charter in an attempt to discourage citizens who might other-
wise consider filing for office. It is believed that today’s char-
ter writers are simply not aware of the state law limitations
that supersede any charter language.
One disqualification for office that some charters
have addressed is dual office-holding. There are two distinct
legal barriers to holding more than one public office at the
same time: (1) the Texas constitutional prohibition against
dual office-holding; and (2) the common law doctrine of in-
compatibility.
All three of these barriers are too complex to dis-
cuss in detail in this publication. Any mayor or councilmem-
ber contemplating elective or appointive office in another
43
The city council - election and service
AGAINST
THE GRAIN
Although the trend is
strong for adopting term
limits, Port Neches in
1983 and Sachse in
1990 adopted charter
amendments rescinding
the term limits then in
existence in their char-
ters. And Schertz, in
1994, defeated two dif-
ferent charter amend-
ments that would have
set limits on coun-
cilmembers.
Page 20 of 64
City of Georgetown, Texas
Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
S UB J E C T:
Dis cus s ion of possible amendment of C ity C harter, S ec tion 2.02, Q ualific ations - S kye Mas s on, C ity
Attorney
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
NA
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mayra C antu, Management Analyst
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Item D. Sec. 2.02 Qualifications Exhibit
Item D. Qualifications Backup Material
Page 21 of 64
Cover Sheet
Item E. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter, Section 2.02 Qualifications
*This is a follow up to the discussion at the previous two meetings.
As background:
1. Current City Charter Language:
Sec. 2.02. - Qualifications.
At the time of election to office, each Councilmember and the Mayor shall be at least
twenty-one (21) years of age, shall be a citizen and qualified voter of the State of Texas
and the City of Georgetown and a resident of the Council District the member would be
representing for a period of twelve (12) months as of the last legal date for filing. No
member of the Council shall hold any other office or employment under the City
Government while a member of said Council, nor hold any paid employment under the
City Government within two (2) years thereafter. A member of the Council ceasing to
reside in the City shall immediately forfeit that office.
2. Conflict with State law:
The Election Code authorizes home rule cities to adopt age and residency requirements greater
than those in state law, but such local provisions cannot require a candidate to be more than 21
on the first day of the term and cannot require residency in the District for longer than 12 months
immediately preceding election day. Otherwise, the local provision is void, and the applicable
statute would apply.
The current Charter language requires a candidate to be 21 at the time of election, which in turn
requires the candidate to be greater than 21 years on the first day of the term (as the term will
always commence after the election). Similarly, the current Charter requires a candidate to be a
resident of the District for 12 months prior to the filing deadline, which in turn requires the
candidate to be a resident for 15 months preceding election day (as the filing deadline is 3
months before election day). Therefore, the Charter’s age and residency requirements are both
void and the requirements of state law apply.
3. Previous direction from the Committee
Majority of Committee has indicated an interest in amending language to include minimum age
of 21 years old and a residence requirement of 12 months. In addition, the Committee has
indicated an interest in reducing the time an elected official could not work for the city from two
years to one year.
Page 22 of 64
4. Updated potential revised charter language to consider (redline version):
Sec. 2.02. - Qualifications.
At the time of election to office, eIn addition to other qualifications prescribed by law,
each Councilmember and the Mayor shall be at least twenty-one (21) years of age on the
first day of the term to be filled at the election or on the date of appointment, as
applicable. For period of twelve (12) months preceding election day, each
Councilmember shall reside in the, shall be a citizen and qualified voter of the State of
Texas and the City of Georgetown and a resident of the Council council District district
the member would be representing and the Mayor shall reside within the City of
Georgetown. No member of the Council or the Mayor shall hold any other office or
employment under the City Governmentwith the City while a member of said
Councilserving as a member of the Council or the Mayor, nor hold any paid employment
under the City Governmentwith the City within two (2) yearsone (1) year thereafter. A
member of the Council ceasing to reside in the City shall immediately forfeit that office.
5. Direction requested:
Motion to either approve language as presented, or recommend other changes as needed.
Page 23 of 64
for purposes of a limit. Some charters use the word “full
term” or “regular term.” These are generally interpreted to
mean that if a person comes into a partial term, the partial
time will not count toward the limit.
Several cities require a person to “sit out” one
year or one term before running for office again (one city re-
quires that an individual must sit out 30 months). Whether
this means that in the other cities a person reaching his/her
maximum can never come back is unknown. Two cities do
state that the term limit is for the “lifetime” of the individ-
ual.
Finally, a charter should make it clear whether the
limits apply to current councilmembers. Several charters spell
this out. Most do not at the present time.
In summary, the term limit movement is still rel-
atively young. If a city does not have this kind of provision in
its charter and desires to have a
charter amendment election, offi-
cials are urged to carefully review
with the city attorney the language
to be used in order to avoid some of
the ambiguities identified. In May
1994, Austin adopted a charter
amendment limiting terms of office,
but did provide that if an incumbent
councilmember, when his/her limit
of terms have been reached, can get
a petition signed by five percent of
the qualified voters in the city,
his/her name shall go back on the
ballot. Houston adopted such an
amendment in 1991, had several
councilmembers qualify under the
petition route in the 1993 election,
and decided at a January 15, 1994
election to rescind the petition by-
pass. Thus, Houston’s term limits
have no exception to them.
Qualifications for office
Early Texas city charters included a detailed and
lengthy list of qualifications for the prospective mayor or city
councilmember. The first officeholders and voters had to be
white, male, and citizens of the Republic. Several cities also
had property and residence requirements. The original Galve-
ston charter in 1840 required the mayor to own $1,000 worth
of property. A number of charters still require ownership of
property within the city and no indebtedness to the city, plus
three years residence in the city before filing as a candidate.
Arguably unenforceable, these provisions in current charters
are historical reminders of practices before state law and court
cases established the controlling criteria for qualifications of
all public officials.
For more than 30 years, state law has set forth re-
quirements to run for public office in Texas and these require-
ments apply to candidates for the governing bodies of Texas
home rule cities. In addition, federal court cases have held
that a city may not require an officeholder to be an owner of
property and may not refuse to seat a councilmember for
being delinquent in taxes to the city.
The Election Code criteria are set out in Section
141.001. Under that section, a candidate must:
(1) be a United States citizen,
(2) be 18 years of age or older upon the
commencement of the term to be filled at
the election,
(3) have been a resident of Texas for at
least 12 months as of the deadline for filing
for the office,
(4) have resided in the city for at least six
months as of the deadline for filing for
the office,
(5) not have been convicted of a felony
for which he or she has not been pardoned
or otherwise released from the resulting dis-
abilities, and
(6) not have been found mentally incom-
petent by a final judgment of the court.
Exceptions for home rule cities
The Election Code authorized home rule cities to
make two exceptions: (1) the charter can require council can-
didates to be up to 21 years of age, rather than 18, upon the
commencement of the term to be filled at the election; and
(2) the charter can require candidates to be residents of the
city for up to 12 months, rather than six months, as of the
deadline for filing for office.
Virtually every charter in the state says a candi-
date must be a qualified voter. This is not required by state
law, but a home rule city may include this requirement in its
charter.
Despite the provisions in the Election Code, some
cities still amend their charters to add requirements that are
not enforceable. In earlier days, charter writers might have
been accused of placing unenforceable qualifications in the
charter in an attempt to discourage citizens who might other-
wise consider filing for office. It is believed that today’s char-
ter writers are simply not aware of the state law limitations
that supersede any charter language.
One disqualification for office that some charters
have addressed is dual office-holding. There are two distinct
legal barriers to holding more than one public office at the
same time: (1) the Texas constitutional prohibition against
dual office-holding; and (2) the common law doctrine of in-
compatibility.
All three of these barriers are too complex to dis-
cuss in detail in this publication. Any mayor or councilmem-
ber contemplating elective or appointive office in another
43
The city council - election and service
AGAINST
THE GRAIN
Although the trend is
strong for adopting term
limits, Port Neches in
1983 and Sachse in
1990 adopted charter
amendments rescinding
the term limits then in
existence in their char-
ters. And Schertz, in
1994, defeated two dif-
ferent charter amend-
ments that would have
set limits on coun-
cilmembers.
Page 24 of 64
governmental entity would be well advised to consult with the
city attorney before making any definitive moves.
Some charters provide that city employees must
resign before they can run for the city council in their own
city. Provisions of this type have been struck down by the
courts for city employees covered under the state fire and po-
lice civil service law.29
Financial
disclosure
The Colleyville,
Friendswood, and San
Marcos charters each
have provisions that
candidates must file fi-
nancial disclosure
statements with the city
secretary before any
election in which they
are a candidate. Chap-
ter 145 of the Local
Government Code, en-
acted in 2003, now
mandates financial dis-
closure for certain can-
didates and officials in
cities over 100,000 in
population.
Filing
requirements
The Election Code
is very specific in regard
to a candidate filing for
a place on the govern-
ing body of a city.
Figure 9-6: Filing requirements for city council
(Section 143.005)
(a) A city charter may prescribe require-
ments in connection with a candi-
date’s application for a place on the
ballot for an office of a home rule city.
This section does not authorize a city
charter requirement in connection
with the timely filing of an applica-
tion, and any charter requirement re-
lated to an application’s timely filing
is superseded by Section 143.007
and other applicable filing provisions
prescribed by the code.
(b) If a city charter prescribes the re-
quirements that a candidate’s appli-
cation must satisfy for the candidate’s
name to be placed on the ballot, Sec-
tion 141.031(4)(L) also applies to the
application.* The other provisions of
Section 141.031 do not apply.
(c) If a city charter requires candidates to
pay a filing fee, the amount of the fee
and an alternative procedure to pay-
ment of the fee shall be prescribed by
the charter or by ordinance under
charter authorization. However, if an
ordinance prescribing an alternative
procedure to payment of a filing fee is
adopted before the effective date of
this code without charter authoriza-
tion, the ordinance, as it exists on the
effective date of this code, continues
in effect until the adoption of a char-
ter provision prescribing an alternative
procedure or authorizing prescription
of an alternative procedure by ordi-
nance.
(d) For any petition required or authorized
to be filed in connection with a can-
didate’s application for a place on the
ballot for an office of a home rule city,
the minimum number of signatures
that must appear on the petition is
the greater of: (1) 25, or (2) one-half
of one percent of the total vote re-
ceived in the territory from which the
office is elected by all candidates for
mayor in the most recent mayoral
general election.
(e) If the city charter of a home rule city
with a population of more than 1.8
million, that holds nonpartisan elec-
tions for its offices, requires both a
petition and a $50 fee to be filed for
a candidate’s name to be placed on
the ballot, those requirements super-
sede this section.
*Section 141.031(4)(L) referred to
above requires a statement that the
candidate is aware of the nepotism
law, Section 573.041 of the Govern-
ment Code, et seq.
44
Texas Home Rule Charters
WANTED:
ONE BRAVE CITY
MANAGER
“Any person having
the qualifications set for coun-
cilmember under Section 4.02
in this charter shall have the
right to file an application to
have his name placed on the of-
ficial ballot as a candidate for
any one elective office. Such
application shall be made in
writing and shall include name,
address, date of birth, and per-
sonal signature of each candi-
date. Such application shall be
accompanied by his loyalty affi-
davit, as prescribed by Section
141.031(k) Texas Election
Code; his signed affidavit indi-
cating willingness to submit
himself for substance abuse
testing, within thirty (30) days,
after elected and when randomly
selected by the city manager,
throughout the duration of his
term of office.”
Page 25 of 64
City of Georgetown, Texas
Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
S UB J E C T:
Dis cus s ion of possible amendment of C ity C harter, S ec tion 2.03, Vac anc ies - S kye Mas s on, C ity
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
NA
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mayra C antu, Management Analyst
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Item E. Qualifications Exhibit
Item E. Vacancies-TML Exhibit
Page 26 of 64
Cover Sheet—Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter, Section 2.03 Qualifications
Current City Charter Language:
Sec. 2.03. - Vacancies.
When a vacancy occurs in the Council, the vacancy shall be filled at a special election called for
this purpose within one hundred and twenty (120) days after the vacancy or vacancies occur in
compliance with Article XI, Section 11 of the Texas Constitution and other applicable State
laws.
Relevant State Law Provisions:
The Texas Constitution requires that all members of the City’s governing body elected for a term
exceeding two years must be elected by a majority vote of the qualified voters in such
municipality. Any vacancy occurring must generally be filled by a special called election within
120 days of such vacancy except that by Charter a municipality provide a procedure for filling a
vacancy occurring with an unexpired term of 12 months or less.
Discussion
Staff has provided potential charter amendment language below, but would like additional
direction regarding the filling of a vacancy in the office of the Mayor. Specifically, (1) Does the
committee seek to have the Mayor Pro Tem automatically fill a vacancy? (2) what if the Mayor
Pro Tem declines? Or (3) Does the committee want to consider the second option below from
Sugar Land?
Finally, does the Committee the additional language below to the charter provision?
Potential Charter Amendment language:
Option A.
Sec. 2.03. - Vacancies.
(1) When the office of a council member becomes vacant, the following provisions apply:
a. If at the time of the vacancy more than twelve (12) months remain on the term,
the Council shall within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the vacancy call a
special election in compliance with Article XI, Section 11 of the Texas
Constitution and other applicable State laws.
b. If at the time of the vacancy less than twelve (12) months remain on the term, the
council shall within forty-five days of the vacancy appoint a qualified person to
fill the vacancy.
(2) When the office of Mayor becomes vacant, the following provisions apply:
a. If at the time of the vacancy more than twelve (12) months remain on the term,
the Council shall within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the vacancy call a
Page 27 of 64
special election in compliance with Article XI, Section 11 of the Texas
Constitution and other applicable State laws.
b. If at the time of the vacancy less that twelve (12) months remain on the term, the
Mayor Pro Tem shall be appointed as the Mayor. If the Mayor Pro Tem elects not
serve as Mayor for the remainder of the term, then the City Council shall call a
special election to fill such vacancy in accordance with Article XI, Section 11 of
the Texas Constitution and other applicable State laws.
Option B
Sec. 2.03. - Vacancies.
(1) When the office of a council member becomes vacant, the following provisions apply:
a. If at the time of the vacancy more than twelve (12) months remain on the term,
the Council shall within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the vacancy call a
special election in compliance with Article XI, Section 11 of the Texas
Constitution and other applicable State laws.
b. If, at the time of the vacancy, less than twelve (12) months remain on the term,
the council shall within forty-five days of the vacancy appoint a qualified person
to fill the vacancy.
(2) When the office of Mayor becomes vacant, the following provisions apply:
a. If at the time of the vacancy more than twelve (12) months remain on the term,
the Council shall within one hundred and twenty (120) days of the vacancy call a
special election in compliance with Article XI, Section 11 of the Texas
Constitution and other applicable State laws.
b. If at the time of the vacancy less that twelve (12) months remain on the term, the
Council by majority vote may appoint one of the Councilmembers to fill the
vacancy until the next regular City Election date. If the City Council elects not to
appoint a Councilmember to fill the vacancy of Mayor, then the City Council
shall call a special election to fill such vacancy in accordance with Article XI,
Section 11 of the Texas Constitution and other applicable State laws.
Additional Language:
(3) If a special election cannot be held as required above due to emergency orders issued by
the Governor of Texas, the Council may by majority vote appoint a qualified person to
fill the vacancy until such time as a special election can be held.
Page 28 of 64
Vacancies on the council
Vacancies on the council can result from resigna-
tion, death, disability, recall, or failure of a councilmember to
meet the requirements of the charter. In some instances, a
vacancy can occur if a member of the council announces for
another elective office. For example, under Article XI, § 11,
of the Texas Constitution, in cities where the term of office
for councilmembers is three or four years, any councilmember
who announces for another elective office is automatically re-
moved from the council if more than one year remains in his
term at the time of such announcement.
Also, some city charters with two-year terms pro-
vide that any councilmember who runs for another office au-
tomatically vacates his or her seat on the council. A city
charter may provide that:
If any officer of the city shall file as a candidate for
nomination or election to any public office, except
to some office under this charter, he shall immedi-
ately forfeit his office.
Procedures for filling vacancies vary from charter
to charter. In some instances, charters require that vacancies
on the governing body be filled by appointment of the council
in every case; i.e., regardless of whether a regular municipal
election is imminent. The most popular provision for cities
with two-year terms of office is for appointment by the council
in the case of one vacancy, or special election in the case of
two or more vacancies. An election to fill a vacancy must be
on one of the uniform election dates specified in the Election
Code, unless it is a vacancy required to be filled under the
Texas Constitution.
Under Article XI, § 11, of the Texas Constitution,
cities with three- or four-year terms must fill all vacancies by
election of majority vote within 120 days of the vacancy. Fi-
nally, some cities with two-year terms require that all council
vacancies must be filled by special election. Among these
cities, the common practice is not to require special elections
in cases where a regular municipal election is imminent; e.g.,
within 60 to 90 days of the time the vacancy occurred.
53
The city council as a legislative body
Figure 10-4: Charter Requirements for Fulfillment of Vacancies
Appointed Elected Provides for Either
1 Vacancy 36% 39% 25%
2 Vacancies 13% 67% 20%
I NOMINATE MY
BROTHER-IN-LAW
“Section 2.06 Vacancies
A single vacancy in the Council shall be
filled within thirty (30) days of the oc-
currence of the vacancy by a majority
vote of the remaining members of the
Council by selection of a person quali-
fied for the position as described in this
Charter. If the vacancy is caused by the
resignation of a Councilmember who is
in good standing, that Councilmember
may submit a nominee for that position.
This nominee must be accepted or re-
jected by the Council before other nom-
inees can be considered. Once
appointed, this appointee shall serve
until the position can be filled at the
next regular City election.”
Page 29 of 64
City of Georgetown, Texas
Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
S UB J E C T:
Dis cus s ion of possible amendment of C ity C harter S ec tion 2.06, Mayor and Mayor P ro Tem – S kye
Masson C ity Attorney
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
NA
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mayra C antu, Management Analyst
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Item F. Mayor Exhibit
Item F. Mayor-TML Backup Material
Page 30 of 64
Cover Sheet—Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter, Section 2.06 Mayor and
Mayor Pro Tem
*This is a continuation of the discussion on this item at the last meeting.
Current City Charter Language:
Sec. 2.06. - Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem.
The Mayor shall preside at all meetings of the Council and shall be recognized as head of the
City government for all ceremonial purposes, for the purpose of receiving services of civil
process, for emergency purposes, and for military purposes; but the Mayor shall have no regular
administrative duties. The Mayor, as a member of the Council, shall be entitled to vote only in
case of a tie upon all affairs considered by the Council and shall have no veto power. At its first
meeting following each regular election of Councilmembers, the Council shall, by election,
designate one of its number as Mayor Pro Tem, who shall serve in such capacity during the
pleasure of the Council. The Mayor Pro Tem shall act as Mayor during the absence or disability
of the Mayor, and shall have power to perform every act the Mayor could perform if present;
provided, however, that in all cases the Mayor Pro Tem shall be entitled to vote.
Discussion:
The Committee requested discussion on the issue of the Mayor’s powers related to voting
specifically. Current language only allows for the Mayor to vote in order to break a tie.
Potential amendment language for consideration:
Sec. 2.06. - Mayor and Mayor Pro Tem.
The Mayor shall preside at all meetings of the Council and shall be recognized as head of the
City government for all ceremonial purposes, for the purpose of receiving services of civil
process, for emergency purposes, and for military purposes; but the Mayor shall have no regular
administrative duties. The Mayor, as a member of the Council, shall be entitled to vote only in
case of a tie upon all affairs considered by the Council and shall have no veto power. At its first
meeting following each regular election of Councilmembers, the Council shall, by election,
designate one of its number as Mayor Pro Tem, who shall serve in such capacity during the
pleasure of the Council. The Mayor Pro Tem shall act as Mayor during the absence or disability
of the Mayor, and shall have power to perform every act the Mayor could perform if present;
provided, however, that in all cases the Mayor Pro Tem shall be entitled to vote.
Page 31 of 64
Nevertheless, the absence of effective leadership,
a citistate totally adrift, is a more frightening
prospect. The nurturing of new leaders and the cre-
ation of metropolitan partnerships that open a way
for those leaders to play important region-wide roles
are two of the most critical challenges for American
citistates in the 1990s.24
Distinct differences in mayors’ positions
There remain, however, distinctive differences be-
tween the charter authority and duties of a mayor leading a
mayor-council city and a mayor leading a council-manager
city.
A comparison of key elements of the mayor’s role
in the three largest cities in Texas pinpoints the differences.
*The City Council, with mayor voting, does appoint the city
manager, city attorney, city secretary, and city auditor.
It seems obvious from the comparison in figure 8-
1 that an examination of the mayor’s role demands two sepa-
rate tabulations for the two forms of government. It would be
useless to report that the average salary of the mayors in the
three largest cities in Texas was something like $6,649 per
month. Yet, some national and state publications in the past
have combined mayors of all cities into one summary tabula-
tion.25
Charter language regarding the mayor
The pay and responsibility table displays the dif-
ferences between the mayor’s position in Houston, Dallas, and
San Antonio reflecting the content of the “Mayor” articles in
their respective charters.
The Houston charter, and similarly the mayor-
council charters of Pasadena, Bay City, and others, devote a
specific article to the mayor. These articles cover such areas
as the definition of the mayor’s position, general powers of
the mayor, privilege of vote and veto, authority for removal of
appointive officers and employees, and compensation of the
mayor. Mayor-council charters thus address the mayor as the
elected head of the city and the chief executive officer. For
the latter role, the provisions are similar to the city manager
sections in a council-manager charter.
The Dallas charter, and many other council-man-
ager charters, devote one section (one paragraph) to the mayor
exclusively. Other sections cover the responsibilities of the
mayor as a member of the entire city council.
Selection of the mayor
Mayors of all mayor-council cities in Texas are
elected at-large by the voters. Although this is the practice
in the great majority of council-manager cities, mayors in six
percent of council-manager cities are elected as councilmem-
bers and then selected by their colleagues as the city’s mayor.
Selection of the
mayor by the council
is reported in some
35 percent of coun-
cil-manager cities na-
tionwide. The Texas
number at six percent
is down from the nine
percent of the cities
in Texas reporting this
method in 1994.
Compensation
of the mayor
Salary of the mayor
is addressed in two different ways by Texas charters. The table
below shows these provisions and the number of charters, by
form of government, that utilize each of these methods:
*These figures include charters that specifically state the city
council shall set its own compensation and charters that are
silent on this subject. Where a charter is silent, Section
141.004 of the Local Government Code provides that a gov-
erning body of a home rule city may establish a level of com-
pensation for itself.
34
Texas Home Rule Charters
Figure 8-1: Differences in mayor’s positions
Factor Houston Dallas San Antonio
(Mayor-Council) (Council-Manager) (Council-Manager)
Pop. - 2,208,000 Pop. - 1,240,000 Pop. - 1,328,000
Pay $14,583/month $5,000/month $366/month
Appointment of city’s Appoints, subject to No individual decision No individual decision
Department heads City Council approval authority in this area* authority in this area*
Annual budget Prepares for City No individual decision No individual decision
Council approval authority in this area authority in this area
Figure 8-2: Setting the salary of the mayor
Mayor-Council Council-Manager
charters charters
1994 2008 1994 2008
Council sets pay* 46% 38% 55% 38%
Charter sets specific 54% 62% 45% 62%
salary or salary range
Page 32 of 64
Salary is an area in which the difference between
the two forms of government is very apparent, particularly in
the larger cities. The average pay of the mayors in mayor-
council cities is $861.68 per month. This is virtually mean-
ingless, however, since that figure includes not only Houston
and Pasadena, but also DeLeon (pop. 2,400) and Olney (pop.
3,300) as well as a host of other smaller cities. It is important
to note that 45 percent of mayors in mayor-council cities re-
ceive no compensation at all. It is more enlightening to note
that the salary of mayors in cities over 50,000 using the
mayor-council form of government ranges from $14,583 on
the high end (Houston) to $50 per month on the low end (San
Angelo), with an average salary of $5,277.
Overall, the average mayoral pay of the council-
manager cities is $159 per month. The average pay for the
three largest council-manager cities – Dallas, San Antonio,
and Austin – is $3,677.88. If the San Antonio mayor’s salary
at $4,020 per year were omitted, the average of the other two
would be $5,333 per month.
Mayors in council-manager cities not only receive
less in salary, but also the difference between the mayor’s
salary and the councilmembers’ salary is usually small.
Vote in council meetings
Mayor-council charters do not give mayors the un-
restricted right to vote as those in council-manager cities gen-
erally do. Among the mayor-council cities, 40 percent allow
mayors to have a regular vote in council meetings, while 55
percent allow the mayor to vote only in case of a tie by the
council, and the remaining 5 percent allow for no vote at all.
In council-manager cities, 65 percent have a regular vote,
while 35 percent of the mayors vote only in case of tie. Again,
these figures are not unlike national survey figures.
Deciding when a mayor votes has caused at least
two Texas council-manager cities a lot of grief. Several cities
have retained in their home rule charters a provision of the
Type A general law municipality. State law provides that if a
Type A city is not divided into wards (and many smaller home
rule cities are not), the governing body shall always consist of
a mayor and five councilmembers, and the mayor shall vote
only in case of a tie. The two cities in question had retained
this council number and the mayor’s restricted vote provision
when they adopted home rule charters. The city councils fired
their city managers over the protest of the mayor in each city.
Both mayors cited provisions in their charters that purported
to give the mayors voting power in the event of a vote on dis-
missing the city manager. The district court in one county
upheld one council’s dismissal of the manager, ruling the
mayor could not vote. A district court in an adjoining county
reversed the council decision of the second city and reinstated
the manager! The difficulty in both charters came from trying
to delineate the cases in which the mayor might have a vote,
other than on a tie vote by the council. Both cities have since
gone to an odd number on the council and given the mayor a
“regular” vote. Because of the problems of these two cities
and the difficulty of wording a charter clearly, several charter
consultants recommend that councils be composed of an odd
number of individuals and that mayors be given a “regular”
vote just as any other councilmember–on all matters. Urban
experts offer other reasons for allowing the mayor to vote on
all issues. They concur that a mayor’s leadership role can be
enhanced by the power to vote, particularly on such critical
policy issues as appointment and removal of a city manager
or chief administrative officer and on bond issues, tax rates,
and the adoption of the annual budget.
Veto
The veto power of the mayor is generally another
distinguishing mark of the difference between the two forms
of government. Veto provisions in mayor-council charters are
much more common than in council-manager charters–na-
tionwide and in Texas. Of those communities with mayor-
council charters in Texas, 32 percent provide for a mayoral
veto of council actions. Usually these vetoes can be overcome
only by a two-thirds or more vote of the council. But in a few
cases, the council can simply reconsider the action. If it votes
the action again by a majority vote, the mayor has no authority
to veto the item a second time.
Only nine percent of council-manager cities pro-
vide for a mayoral veto. The denial of the veto is a reiteration
of the historic background of the council-manager plan, which
saw the strength of the city in a body of policymakers, not in
a single individual.
Budget role
The mayor in 25 percent of mayor-council cities
prepares the budget and submits it to the city council. In
some small mayor-council cities, the charter says the council
shall prepare a budget.
Budget formulation and submission is one of the
chief differences between the two forms of government. Only
three percent of the cities under the council-manager plan
provide for the mayor to prepare the budget. In the council-
manager plan, the charter directs the city manager to prepare
the budget for the council as a whole. Increasingly, managers
are asking their city councils to give them early policy guid-
ance on the council’s priorities for the coming year. The
mayor obviously can play a lead role in this priority-setting,
but councilmembers are often fond of pointing out that in
adoption of the final budget, the mayor has only one vote–just
as the other councilmembers do. Although it is very rare,
mayors are outvoted on budget matters as they are sometimes
outvoted on other items in council-manager cities.
The Texas practice in both types of government
parallels the national experience.
35
The mayor
Page 33 of 64
City of Georgetown, Texas
Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
S UB J E C T:
Dis cus s ion of possible amendment of C ity C harter provis ions in Article I V related to petition requirements
for S ec tion 4.01, power of initiative; S ection 4.02, power of referendum; and S ec tion 4.07, R ec all of C ity
O ffic ials ; and S ection 4.08, R ecall P etition - S kye Masson, C ity Attorney
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
NA
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mayra C antu, Management Analyst
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Article IV Charter and Recommended Language Exhibit
Item F. Initiative-Referendum-Recall Backup Material
Page 34 of 64
Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter provisions in Article IV related to
petition requirements for Section 4.01, power of initiative; Section 4.02, power of
referendum; and Section 4.07, Recall of City Officials
*This is a follow-up to the discussion on this item at the last meeting.
Current City Charter Language:
Sec. 4.01. - Power of initiative.
The people of the City reserve the power of direct legislation by initiative, and in the exercise of
such power may propose any ordinance, except ordinances appropriating money or levying
taxes, or ordinances repealing ordinances appropriating money or levying taxes, not in conflict
with this Charter, the State Constitution, or the State laws. Any initiated ordinance may be
submitted to the Council by a petition signed by qualified voters of the City, equal in number to
at least fifteen (15) per cent of the qualified voters of the City in the last municipal election, but
not less than two hundred fifty (250) qualified voters of the City.
Sec. 4.02. - Power of referendum.
The people reserve the power to approve or reject at the polls any legislation enacted by the
Council which is subject to the initiative process under this Charter, except that ordinances
authorizing the issuance of bonds (either tax bonds or revenue bonds), whether original or
refunding bonds, shall not be subject to such referendum. Prior to or within thirty (30) days after
the effective date of any ordinance which is subject to referendum, a petition signed by qualified
voters of the City equal in number to at least fifteen (15) per cent of the qualified voters in the
last municipal election but not less than two hundred fifty (250) qualified voters of the City may
be filed with the City Secretary requesting that any such ordinance be either repealed or
submitted to the vote of the people. When such a petition has been certified as sufficient by the
City Secretary, the ordinance specified in the petition shall not go into effect, or if it shall have
gone into effect, then further action thereunder shall be suspended until and unless it is approved
by the voters as herein provided.
Sec. 4.07. - Recall of City Officials.
The people of the City reserve the power to recall any elected officer of the City of Georgetown,
on the grounds of incompetence, misconduct, or malfeasance in office, and may exercise such
power by filing a petition, as described herein, with the City Secretary.
A petition to recall the Mayor only shall be, signed by registered voters of the City equal in
number to at least fifteen (15) percent of the number of all of the registered voters in the City at
the time of the last regular municipal election, demanding the removal of the Mayor. The petition
shall be signed and verified as required by this Charter's provisions and State law.
A petition to recall a Council member shall be signed only by the registered voters of the single
member council district that the Council member represents, and the signatures must be equal in
Page 35 of 64
number to at least fifteen (15) percent of the number of registered voters residing in that council
district at the time of the last regular municipal election, demanding the removal of their specific
Councilmember. The petition shall be signed and verified as required by this Charter's provisions
and State law.
In the case of an election to recall the Mayor, any registered voter residing within the City may
cast a ballot on the issue of the Mayor's recall.
In the case of an election to recall a Council member, only registered voters residing within the
single member council district represented by the Council member sought to be recalled may cast
a ballot on the issue of their Council member's recall.
Discussion:
At the last meeting the Committee requested further discussion on this topic and review of two
options below with regard to initiative and referendum. For the power of recall, staff would
request further discussion and direction regarding appropriate language change.
Proposed Amended language Option A for Initiative and Referendum:.
Sec. 4.01. - Power of initiative.
The people of the City reserve the power of direct legislation by initiative, and in the exercise of
such power may propose any ordinance, except ordinances appropriating money or levying
taxes, or ordinances repealing ordinances appropriating money or levying taxes, not in conflict
with this Charter, the State Constitution, or the State laws. Any initiated ordinance may be
submitted to the Council by a petition signed by qualified registered voters of the City, equal in
number to at least fifteen (15) per cent of the qualified registered voters of the City who voted in
the last municipal general election, but not less more than fifteen thousand (15,000)two hundred
fifty (250) qualified voters of the City.
Sec. 4.02. - Power of referendum.
The people reserve the power to approve or reject at the polls any legislation enacted by the
Council which is subject to the initiative process under this Charter, except that ordinances
authorizing the issuance of bonds (either tax bonds or revenue bonds), whether original or
refunding bonds, shall not be subject to such referendum. Prior to or within thirty (30) days after
the effective date of any ordinance which is subject to referendum, a petition signed by qualified
registered voters of the City equal in number to at least fifteen (15) per cent of the qualified
registered voters of the City who voted in the last municipal general election but not less more
than fifteen thousand two hundred fifty (25015,000) qualified voters of the City may be filed
with the City Secretary requesting that any such ordinance be either repealed or submitted to the
vote of the people. When such a petition has been certified as sufficient by the City Secretary,
the ordinance specified in the petition shall not go into effect, or if it shall have gone into effect,
then further action thereunder shall be suspended until and unless it is approved by the voters as
herein provided.
Page 36 of 64
Proposed Amended language Option B for Initiative and Referendum:.
Sec. 4.01. - Power of initiative.
The people of the City reserve the power of direct legislation by initiative, and in the exercise of
such power may propose any ordinance, except ordinances appropriating money or levying
taxes, or ordinances repealing ordinances appropriating money or levying taxes, not in conflict
with this Charter, the State Constitution, or the State laws. Any initiated ordinance may be
submitted to the Council by a petition signed by registeredqualified voters of the City, equal in
number to at least fifteen (15) per cent of the qualified registered voters of the City who voted in
the last municipal general election, but not less than two hundred fifty (250) qualified voters of
the City.
Sec. 4.02. - Power of referendum.
The people reserve the power to approve or reject at the polls any legislation enacted by the
Council which is subject to the initiative process under this Charter, except that ordinances
authorizing the issuance of bonds (either tax bonds or revenue bonds), whether original or
refunding bonds, shall not be subject to such referendum. Prior to or within thirty (30) days after
the effective date of any ordinance which is subject to referendum, a petition signed by qualified
registered voters of the City equal in number to at least fifteen (15) per cent of the qualified
registered voters who voted in the last municipal general election but not less than two hundred
fifty (250) qualified voters of the City may be filed with the City Secretary requesting that any
such ordinance be either repealed or submitted to the vote of the people. When such a petition
has been certified as sufficient by the City Secretary, the ordinance specified in the petition shall
not go into effect, or if it shall have gone into effect, then further action thereunder shall be
suspended until and unless it is approved by the voters as herein provided.
Power of Recall Discussion.
The current language for recall is tied to voters within a district for individual council
members and city wide for the Mayor. Does the committee wisGiven the limits on recall to
voters in a certain district, can the committee clarify if the language below is desired or if
there should be a number limit as well?h
Sec. 4.07. - Recall of City Officials.
The people of the City reserve the power to recall any elected officer of the City of Georgetown,
on the grounds of incompetence, misconduct, or malfeasance in office, and may exercise such
power by filing a petition, as described herein, with the City Secretary.
Page 37 of 64
A petition to recall the Mayor only shall be, signed by registered voters of the City equal in
number to at least fifteen (15) percent of the number of all of the registered voters in of the City
who voted in at the time of the last regular municipal general election, demanding the removal
of the Mayor. The petition shall be signed and verified as required by this Charter's provisions
and State law.
A petition to recall a Council member shall be signed only by the registered voters of the single
member council district that the Council member represents, and the signatures must be equal in
number to at least fifteen (15) percent of the number of registered voters residing in that council
district at the time of the who voted in the last regular municipal general election, demanding the
removal of their specific Councilmember. The petition shall be signed and verified as required
by this Charter's provisions and State law.
In the case of an election to recall the Mayor, any registered voter residing within the City may
cast a ballot on the issue of the Mayor's recall.
In the case of an election to recall a Council member, only registered voters residing within the
single member council district represented by the Council member sought to be recalled may cast
a ballot on the issue of their Council member's recall.
Page 38 of 64
15 Initiative, referendum, and recall
The words are used so often together, one can almost
see them as one word: initiativereferendumandrecall! They
really are three separate facets of direct democracy or direct
legislation, and you generally find provisions for all three in a
charter. The citizens of California helped make initiative and
recall household words. The public generally hears informa-
tion regarding recalls in relationship to gubernatorial recalls.
California, the most infamous of the recall states, received a
great deal of attention in 2003 when Gray Davis was removed
from office. This led the way for Governor Arnold
Schwarzenegger to be elected to the top spot in California. In
the last few years, members of local governing bodies in Texas
have been the subject of recall elections as well. The trend
has been for a dissatisfied public to utilize their rights as pro-
vided for in the city charter.
Introduction
All three of these actions begin with a citizen petition
to the governing body, and all three can lead to a vote by the
people. An initiative petition asks the city council to act on a
specific issue when it has not done so previously. If the peti-
tion is valid, the council must adopt it or submit it to a vote
of the people. Petitioners welcome council adoption, which
is faster. A referendum petition asks the city council to re-
verse an action already taken or proposed. The council can
rescind the ordinance or submit it to a vote of the people. A
recall petition asks the city council to call an election for a
vote on removal of one or more councilmembers from office.
If the targeted officials resign, an election is unnecessary.
Although an election is the final possibility in all three
situations, petitioners are delighted with any council or indi-
vidual action that avoids an election.
Early history of initiative, referendum
and recall (I R & R)
These three tools for direct citizen participation in
government are residuals of prerevolutionary debates and, par-
ticularly, of the drafting of the federal constitution.34 The de-
bate participants, our founders, argued the merits of “direct”
democracy with maximum citizen participation versus the
merits of “representative” democracy with elected represen-
tatives of the people as the predominant decision-makers.
The direct democracy proponents, led by Benjamin Franklin
and Thomas Jefferson, lost the debate to James Madison and
John Adams. Thus, our U.S. Constitution and our state con-
stitutions are instruments of representative democracy with
periodic elections in which the people name the leaders to
represent their interests.
State constitutions were not submitted to the people
for ratification until early in the nineteenth century. Texas
went directly to the voters in 1845 for a pre-annexation vote
on its draft constitution, and again five years later with a ref-
erendum to determine the location of the capital.
The movement toward greater use of initiative, refer-
endum, and recall (IR&R) at the state level gained impetus
in 1892 when endorsement of initiative and referendum at
the state level was included in the platform of the Populist
Party at its first national convention. In 1898, states began
incorporating these direct methods into law. Oregon was first,
followed during the next ten years by seven more states. By
1912, a total of 15 states had adopted both initiative and ref-
erendum and three more states had adopted one or the other.
The recall also appeared early in America. The 1780
Massachusetts Constitution stipulated that delegates to the
Congress of the United States could be recalled at any time
within their one-year terms, and others could be chosen and
commissioned in their place.35
In the late 1800s, recall was considered to be prima-
rily a weapon against governors and the executive branch gen-
erally; whereas, initiative and referendum were being targeted
to the legislative branch. Since governors at the turn of the
century were more highly thought of than legislators, the recall
movement did not have the impetus that the other two mech-
anisms had. Also, the states could not decide if members of
the judiciary should or should not be included in the list of
officials subject to recall. For these and other reasons, the
move to adopt recall along with initiative and referendum did
not materialize as quickly.
Texas, ironically, has no provision for any of the three
citizen participation methods to be used at the state level, but
about 100 years ago, shortly after the advent of commission
government at the local level in Texas, the legislature began
placing one or more of the three methods in the charters it is-
sued. And to this day, the legislature has not enacted any law
to block or even impede the use of the methods by home rule
cities.
I R & R at the local level
The circumstances surrounding the arrival and instal-
lation in 1901 of the commission form of government in
Galveston may have been the instigating factor for the addi-
tion of one or more of these three “direct” citizen processes
in early Texas charters. The commission form utilized a five-
member elected board that served as both legislative and ex-
ecutive branch and was acclaimed and embraced nationwide.
The short ballot (in Galveston, it was five elected members of
the governing body elected at large who replaced a mayor and
16 aldermen elected by wards) appealed to citizens. Praise
83Page 39 of 64
was widespread for its “businesslike” approach to city gov-
ernment.
To offset the criticism that the new form concentrated
power in too few hands, the Texas Legislature began placing
one or more of three “direct” methods in almost all of the spe-
cial legislative charters issued to cities, beginning in 1907.
All three features were placed in the Dallas and Fort Worth
special legislative charters enacted in 1907, the Amarillo and
Waco charters passed in 1909, and the Austin charter in
1911. Although all five of these cities, plus a host of others,
changed from commission to council-manager forms of gov-
ernment in the next few years, IR&R remained in their char-
ters.
NCL Model Charter
The eighth and latest edition of the NCL model city
charter provides a comprehensive section that addresses a va-
riety of issues regarding IR&R including: general authority,
commencement of proceeding, petitions, procedures for filing,
suspension of effect of ordinance, action on petitions, and the
results of the election. Below is the language provided on
General Authority from the NCL Model Charter:
General Authority for Initiative, Citizen Referendum,
and Recall.
(1) Initiative. The registered voters of the city shall
have power to propose ordinances to the council
and, if the council fails to adopt an ordinance so
proposed without any change in substance, to adopt
or reject it at a city election, but such power shall
not extend to the budget or capital program or any
ordinance relating to appropriation of money, levy
of taxes or salaries of city officers or employees.
(2) Citizen Referendum. The registered voters of the
city shall have power to require reconsideration by
the council of any adopted ordinance and, if the-
council fails to repeal an ordinance so reconsidered,
to approve or reject it at a city election, but such
power shall not extend to the budget or capital pro-
gram or any emergency ordinance or ordinance re-
lating to appropriation of money or levy of taxes.
(3) Recall. The registered voters of the city shall
have power to recall elected officials of the city, but
no recall petition shall be filed against any official
within six months after the official takes office, nor,
in case of a member subjected to a recall election
and not removed, until at least six months after the
election.
Charter provisions today
Today, an overwhelming number of Texas city charters
call for all three, with the recall provision being the most
prevalent; it is found in 93 percent of city charters. The ini-
tiative and referendum are provided for in 88 percent of char-
ters. In virtually every charter, IR&R are the subjects of a
separate article. Several cities make requirements that apply
to all three items. Seguin authorizes the city secretary to use
a sampling to check signatures against the voter registration
list when the petition names exceed 1,000. There must be a
minimum of a 25 percent sample. Several cities have provi-
sions for a minimum turnout before the election will be de-
clared successful, and a couple of cities require a second
petition in the case of initiative and referendum. These pro-
visions state that if the petitioners submit one petition and
the city council fails to act, the petitioners must then go back
and get additional signatures to force an election.
After an initiative or referendum is successful, cities
provide various ways for reversing that decision. A few cities
state that the council, within months, can simply reverse the
decision without an extraordinary vote of any kind. But most
charters provide a waiting period before the council can take
any action to reverse the vote, and several charters require a
majority or greater vote of the total council to reverse the ac-
tion even after a waiting period. Some charters prohibit peti-
tioners from coming forward on the same question more often
than every six months.
Cities are almost evenly split over use of a petitioners’
committee (usually five or ten persons). Proponents of such
a committee argue that requiring a committee places clear re-
sponsibility for the undertaking of initiative or referendum pro-
ceedings. Opponents find fault, however, in the fact that such
a committee is given the authority to speak for hundreds or
thousands of petitioners, and may agree to a city council com-
promise ordinance without consulting with the petition sign-
ers.
In some instances, charter writers have tried to save
a little verbiage by combining petition percentages and other
common language covering all three actions into one section,
stating that it is speaking for all three mechanisms at once.
This can be done if handled very carefully, but several charters
trying to do this have confused the requirements. Even
though it means repeating some requirements, the clearest
and cleanest way to state the charter requirements is to do so
one at a time for each of the three. In this way, there can be
no doubt about meaning.
Finally, when reading the following charts regarding
the percentage of signatures required to file a valid petition,
it should be remembered that many cities, in addition to re-
quiring a certain percentage of voter signatures, require a min-
imum number of signatures. The charter frequently provides
that the petition must contain the greater of these two: a per-
centage or a minimum number.
84
Texas Home Rule Charters
Page 40 of 64
Initiative provisions in charters
Most of the charters that provide for initiative prohibit
petitions being presented to the council that address appro-
priating funds or authorizing the levying of taxes. Occasion-
ally, a charter prohibits other initiated actions that the framers
of the charter felt were inappropriate for citizen initiation.
Requirements on the number of required signatures
vary widely. Some cities appear to purposely make it very dif-
ficult for voters to initiate ordinances; others have made it
fairly easy. The actual requirements reported are:
*Reading the chart: Using line 2 in the left-hand column, the
figure means that signatures representing five percent of the
voters must be secured; six cities require five percent of the
registered voters; one city requires five percent of the last
vote.
Referendum provisions in charters
Many cities and court decisions have declared several
areas “off limits” for referendum petitions. Many charters
prohibit referendum petitions on: (1) levying taxes, (2) ap-
propriating funds, (3) ordinances fixing rates and charges for
utilities, (4) annexations, and (5) ordinances authorizing the
issuance of bonds that have been authorized by a vote of the
people. Some cities prohibit referendum petitions relating to
personnel and administrative matters. The requirements re-
garding the number of signatures is usually the same as for
initiative petitions.
Recall provisions in charters
The recall sections of charters have several provisions
unique to that device. In less than 5 percent of charters, any-
where from one-tenth to one-half of all the petitioners must
swear in the petition that they voted for the councilmember
now the subject of their recall. In even fewer charters, can-
didates to replace the councilmember are listed on the ballot,
so that if the citizens vote to recall the councilmember, the
individual on the ballot with the most votes is elected at that
same election to succeed the recalled individual.
Charters also vary as to whether accusations against
a councilmember in a recall petition can be general or must
list specific causes for action. North Richland Hills’ charter
carries a notation immediately under Article XV on recall stat-
ing, “Note: Recall article of this charter has, by implication,
been held to be invalid by a district court of Tarrant County in
1991.” According to the city attorney of North Richland Hills,
the City of Lake Worth had copied the recall provision of North
Richland Hills. This provision states:
Any city official elected by the people, shall
be subject to recall and removal from office
by the qualified voters of the city on grounds
of incompetency, misconduct, or malfea-
sance in office.
A petition drive attempted to recall a councilmember
in Lake Worth in 1991, and the court ruled that the provision
was vague and unenforceable. This was a state district court
decision that was not appealed. Therefore, the case’s value
as precedent is minimal.
Most charter provisions on recall have a statement
85
Initiative, referendum, and recall
Figure 15-1: Signature requirements for initiative*
Number of cities requiring “X” percent of all registered voters
or of the number voting in the most recent election
Registered Voters Most Recent Election
Percent: 1994 2008 1994 2008
3% .5 1.0 0 0
5% 2.5 2.0 .5 1.0
10% 14.0 18.0 4.0 3.0
15% 9.0 8.0 3.5 3.0
20% 7.0 9.5 15.0 13.0
25% 6.0 2.0 19.0 20.0
30% 2.5 3.0 10.0 9.0
33/33.3% 0 .5 1.0 .5
35% 1.0 .5 0 0
40% 0 .5 1.5 1.0
50% 0 .5 2.5 2.0
51% .5 1.0 0 .5
60% 0 .5 0 0
Figure 15-2: Signature requirements for referendum*
Number of cities requiring “X” percent of all registered vot-
ers or of the number voting in the most recent election
Registered Voters Most Recent Election
Percent: 1994 2008 1994 2008
3% .5 1.0 0 0
5% 2.0 1.5 .5 1.5
10% 13.5 16.0 3.0 3.0
15% 9.0 7.0 3.0 3.0
20% 6.0 11.0 16.0 12.5
25% 7.0 3.0 21.0 21.0
30% 3.0 3.0 10.0 10.5
33/33.3% 0 .5 1.0 .5
35% 1.0 .5 0 0
40% 0 0 0.5 1.0
50% 0 .5 2.5 2.0
51% .5 1.0 0 0
60% 0 0 0 0
*See explanation under Initiative for example of
using this figure.
Page 41 of 64
Figure 15-3: Signature requirements for referendum*
Number of cities requiring “X” percent of all registered vot-
ers or of the number voting in the most recent election
Registered Voters Most Recent Election
Percent: 1994 2008 1994 2008
3% 0 1.0 0 0
5% 1.5 2.0 0 1.0
10% 9.0 18.0 1.0 3.0
15% 5.0 8.0 .5 2.5
16% 0 0 .5 .5
20% 6.0 9.5 7.5 13.0
25% 6.0 2.0 10.0 20.0
30% 8.0 3.0 20.0 9.0
33/33.3% .5 .5 1.0 .5
35% 2.0 .5 2.0 0
40% 2.5 .5 2.5 1.0
50% 1.0 .5 5.0 2.0
51% .5 1.0 8.0 .5
60% 0 .5 0 0
*See explanation under Initiative for example of
using this figure.
86
that if the mayor or city council does not call a recall election
when presented with a valid petition, the county judge shall
discharge these duties. Still other charters attempt to place
this duty on the district judge. These requirements also pres-
ent problems because a city does not have the authority to
prescribe duties for a county or district judge. The better rem-
edy may be for the charter to provide that any citizen could
file with the appropriate court for a writ of mandamus to force
the city to call the election.
Finally, charters with recall provisions do have some
restrictions on use. First, 55 percent of charters give a newly
elected mayor or councilmember a few months on the job be-
fore they can be the subject of a recall petition. Our survey
showed this grace period generally to be six months.
Similarly, 26 percent of charters provide that after
having weathered a recall election, a councilmember may not
be subjected to another recall election within a certain period
of time. Our review of the charters showed an array of “wait-
ing periods.” Again, six months was the norm, but the time
frames ranged anywhere from one month to one year.
To save money on an election, 12 percent of charters
make a specific provision that recall petitions will not be hon-
ored within a specified period before the person in question
will come up for election. These times range anywhere from
three months to one year, with three months being the most
common, followed by six months.
Finally, there are Texas charters which provide that a
councilmember will not be subject to a recall election more
than once during a term of office. The survey results in this
regard are:
I R & R in action
Our survey (Appendix A), which was sent to key offi-
cials in every Texas home rule city, asked how many times
each of the three provisions had been used in the last five
years. We chose five years because we felt institutional mem-
ory in most cities might not extend back beyond that period
of time.
Initiative results from the survey
The initiative was reported to be used in 24 cities, a
total of 41 propositions were presented to the voters, resulting
in 31 propositions being approved by voters, seven being
turned down by the voters, and three petitions being found
invalid. The subject of the measures presented by the citizens
varied widely–from an ethics ordinance to no smoking ordi-
nances, as well as funding for facilities. But the largest num-
ber of petitions dealt with freezing property taxes for senior
citizens and disabled veterans (authorized by separate state
law), all of which were approved.
Referendum results from the survey
Eleven cities reported use of the referendum in the
past five years. A total of 15 propositions were placed on the
ballot with 10 being approved, three failing, and two instances
where the city council took action, thereby removing the issue
from the election process. We attempted to eliminate all char-
ter and bond issue votes; our interest was in the traditional
use of the referendum petition. Here again, the diversity in
subject matter represented all sorts of issues, such as the sale
of alcoholic beverages in city parks.
Recall results from the survey
Twelve cities reported recall elections in the past five
years, with disappointing results for petitioners. Of the 28 in-
dividuals that were subject to recall, only twelve recall elec-
tions resulted in turning out the individual involved; whereas,
the remaining 16 elections resulted in a failure to recall. One
city reported that while the recall election may have failed,
none of the candidates subject to the recall vote were elected
in subsequent elections.
Summary of survey results
Clinton Rogers Woodruff wrote words in 1911 that are
still being used by advocates of the three mechanisms. He
said there had been too few IR&R elections up to that time to
justify a sound conclusion, and then added, “it may, however,
be fairly argued that their existence constitutes a substantial,
and on the whole, an effective safeguard. Their value rests in
their existence, rather than in their use.”36 This appears to
be the case in Texas today, with only 14 percent of all home
rule cities being forced into IR&R elections in the last five
years.
Texas Home Rule Charters
Page 42 of 64
City of Georgetown, Texas
Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
S UB J E C T:
Dis cus s ion of possible amendment of C ity C harter to appoint a C ity Auditor – S kye Masson, C ity
Attorney
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
NA
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mayra C antu, Management Analyst
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Internal Auditor-Benchmark Cities Backup Material
Internal Auditor-Charter Language from Benchmark Cities Exhibit
TML - Auditor Exhibit
Page 43 of 64
City Population Form of Government City Auditor (if Yes, who do they report to)
El Paso 679,813 Council-Manager Yes; CMO and Council
Round Rock 124,434 Council-Manager No
Cedar Park 74,817 Council-Manager No
New Braunfels 79,438 Council-Manager No
Sugar Land 118,709 Council-Manager No
Fort Worth 874,401 Council-Manager Yes; Council
Carrollton 135,834 Council-Manager Yes; CMO; ACM
Richardson 116,432 Council-Manager Yes; CMO
Page 44 of 64
Cover Sheet
Item G. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter to appoint a City Auditor – Skye
Masson, City Attorney
As background:
Fort Worth
From City Charter
CHAPTER XXVIII: DEPARTMENT OF INTERNAL AUDIT
Section
1 Established
2 City internal auditor-Appointment; qualifications; compensation
3 Term, removal, absence or disability of city internal auditor
4 Powers and duties of department of internal audit
5 Appointment of employees
6 Independent audit
§ 1 ESTABLISHED.
There shall be a department of internal audit which is charged with conducting financial, fiscal
compliance, and financial procedure audits of all city departments, offices, agencies and
programs.
(Ord. 10272, § I(XI), 3-16-1989, approved 5-6-1989)
§ 2 CITY INTERNAL AUDITOR-APPOINTMENT; QUALIFICATIONS; COMPENSATION.
The department of internal audit shall be under the direction and control of the city internal
auditor, who shall be recommended by the manager and appointed by the City Council. The city
internal auditor must be a person knowledgeable in public financial and fiscal theory, municipal
accounting and auditing, and public administration. The city internal auditor’s compensation
shall be fixed by the City Council.
(Ord. 10272, § I(XI), 3-16-1989, approved 5-6-1989)
§ 3 TERM, REMOVAL, ABSENCE OR DISABILITY OF CITY INTERNAL AUDITOR.
The city internal auditor shall not be appointed for a definite fixed time but shall be
removable at the will and pleasure of the City Council by a vote of not less than a majority of
the entire council. If removed after serving six (6) months, the city internal auditor may demand
written charges and the right to be heard thereon at a public meeting of the City Council prior
to the date on which the city internal auditor’s final removal shall take effect, but pending such
hearing the City Council may suspend the city internal auditor from office. The action of the City
Council in suspending or removing the city internal auditor shall be final. In case of the absence
Page 45 of 64
or disability of the city internal auditor, the City Council may designate some qualified person to
perform the duties of the office.
(Ord. 10272, § I(XI), 3-16-1989, approved 5-6-1989)
§ 4 POWERS AND DUTIES OF DEPARTMENT OF INTERNAL AUDIT.
Consistent with other provisions of this Charter, the City Council shall by ordinance provide
for the powers and duties of the department of internal audit.
(Ord. 10272, § I(XI), 3-16-1989, approved 5-6-1989)
§ 5 APPOINTMENT OF EMPLOYEES.
Within the budget approval process and personnel procedures established by the City Council
for all departments, the city internal auditor shall have the power to appoint, employ and
remove such assistants, employees and personnel as he may deem necessary for the efficient
administration of the affairs of the department of internal audit and to prescribe and fix their
duties, scope of authority and qualifications.
(Ord. 10272, § I(XI), 3-16-1989, approved 5-6-1989)
§ 6 INDEPENDENT AUDIT.
This chapter shall not be deemed to repeal or amend Chapter X, section 11, of this Charter.
(Ord. 10272, § I(XI), 3-16-1989, approved 5-6-1989)
El Paso
From City Charter
Section 3.20 - ETHICS AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
SHARE LINK TO SECTIONPRINT SECTIONDOWNLOAD (DOCX) OF SECTIONSEMAIL
SECTIONCOMPARE VERSIONS
A. Ethics Review Commission. The Council shall, by ordinance, establish an independent ethics
review commission to administer and enforce the ethics section of the City Code. To the extent
permitted by Texas law, the Council shall authorize the commission to issue advisory opinions,
conduct investigations, request witness testimony and production of evidence, and make
determinations on whether a violation has occurred, and issue decisions and appropriate
sanctions. The commission shall have the power to enforce its decisions by assessing civil fines
and other sanctions as authorized by ordinance. The Council shall provide sufficient resources
to the commission to enable it to perform the duties assigned to it under the Charter and City
Code.
B. Internal Audit Function.
1. The Council shall establish and create an internal audit function to ensure that appropriate
internal audits will be performed in accordance with professionally
recognized auditing standards of the operations of all City departments, offices, agencies and
programs.
Page 46 of 64
2. The function shall be staffed by a Chief Internal Auditor and such other appropriate positions
as are authorized by the Council who shall report to the Chief Internal Auditor.
3. Consistent with the provisions of this Charter, the Council shall by ordinance or resolution
provide for the powers and duties of the Chief Internal Auditor as needed for the performance
of the function.
4. The Financial and Audit Oversight Committee shall maintain legislative oversight over the
internal audit function as provided in Section 3.6 B.
5. On and after the effective date of this amendment, the Chief Internal Auditor shall be
appointed and removed by the City Manager subject to the approval of the Council. The City
Manager shall maintain operational oversight over the internal audit function and be
responsible for the implementation of any audit recommendations for changes to City
administrative procedures and operations as requested by the Council.
Carrollton
Included in Internal Audit Charter (FULL TEXT):
https://www.cityofcarrollton.com/home/showdocument?id=15579
The City’s Internal Audit Department has been granted the unrestricted authority to audit all City
functions by City Management and the City Council. However, the Internal Auditor has no
authority or responsibility for any of the activities she audits.
Richardson
Included in Richardson’s Financial policies
https://www.cor.net/home/showdocument?id=1029
XV. Internal Audit
A. The function of internal audit shall be an assignment of the City Manager’s Office. The
administrative support may occur through directly assigned personnel or contractual professional
services.
B. The City will annually identify appropriate operations and practices to be reviewed in
developing an annual Internal Audit Workplan. Other projects may be added or amended as
needs arise.
C. Reviews of operation on the identified topics will be conducted, examining for all fiduciary
and financial controls, compliance, risk minimization, and general operational integrity.
D. Recommendations and findings will be submitted for each workplan element, with the City
Manager’s Office responsible for implementation of proposed improvements.
Page 47 of 64
fied city employee, and must be made available for public in-
spection no later than 120 days after the close of the city’s
fiscal year. Although state law allows the audit to be con-
ducted by a city employee, virtually all cities require an out-
side firm or individual who has no connection with the city
whatsoever.
The audit involves examination of three aspects
of the city’s financial operations: (1) internal controls; (2)
statements, records, and accounting transactions; and (3)
compliance with statutory and budgetary requirements. Prop-
erly conducted, the audit provides a double check on the city’s
financial status, a method for communicating with the citi-
zenry, and a bona fide statement of the city’s financial condi-
tion.
The provision for the audit can sometimes be
found in the finance article of the charter. There are charters
that have no provisions for an annual audit. It could be ar-
gued this is irrelevant because state law controls. Most char-
ter observers suggest, however, that this is a place where state
law should be repeated in the charter or listed in an appendix,
providing the citizen reading the charter with a greater sense
of security.
A few cities have a limit on the numbers of con-
secutive years that one individual or firm can audit the city.
Most cities leave it up to the governing body to decide whether
to employ a different firm after a period of time. The Texas
City charter is representative of what charters generally con-
tain on the audit:
Sec. 13. Annual audit.
As soon as practicable after the close of each fiscal
year, an independent audit shall be made of all ac-
counts of the city government and corporations estab-
lished by the city. The certified public accountants,
appointed by the commission, shall have no personal
interest, directly or indirectly, in the financial affairs of
the city or any of its officers. The scope of the audit
shall require a limited review of city-owned property
and the results shall be reported with each annual au-
dited financial report. Upon completion of the annual
audit, the combined balance sheet thereof shall be
published in the official newspaper of the city within
thirty (30) days of commission acceptance of such
audit. Copies of all audits shall be placed on file with
the city’s public library, the director of finance and the
city secretary.
Internal auditor
Three large cities have provisions in the charter
for council appointment of an internal auditor. In Dallas, the
individual is appointed by council and “shall hold the office
for a two year period” at which time council can make a de-
termination whether to renew the individual for another two
year term. In Austin, the auditor is appointed directly by the
city council. The charter provision is brief and utilizes an or-
dinance to clarify the auditor’s duties and relationships with
the council, audit committee, and city manager. In Fort Worth,
the charter was recently changed from the person being rec-
ommended by the city manager and appointed by the council
to the auditor “shall be selected by the Council and shall be
responsible to the Council.”
Absences from council meetings
Over 50 percent of charters have provisions for re-
moving a councilmember who regularly misses council meet-
ings. Most of them state “absence from three consecutive
regular meetings” is grounds for removal. Of course, illness
or other compelling reasons relieve the councilmember from
this requirement, but excuses are expected to be filed ahead
of time except in emergencies. The “absence” language
comes from state law governing Type A general law cities.
Other charters include a variety of phrases regu-
lating council attendance. The Alpine charter states that a
member forfeits one-half monthly salary for each council
meeting missed without excuse. Colleyville requires a mini-
mum of 75 percent attendance during a year, and Mansfield
requires 80 percent during a year. Others mandate a maxi-
mum number of meetings that can be missed in a six-month
period.
Curious as to whether this requirement was en-
forced even when the charter states “the councilmember shall
be removed from the council,” (emphasis supplied), we con-
tacted city officials of cities in which these provisions exist.
Although the great majority of cities indicated councils were
reluctant to enforce these provisions, even to the extent of
granting excused absences “after the fact,” we did find sev-
eral cities that had followed through with removal action. Both
Mercedes and The Colony have the “three consecutive regular
meetings” phrase, and both cities have ousted councilmem-
bers who failed to attend the requisite number of meetings.
In one city, a councilmember was indicted for a felony and
jailed. The member had not yet been convicted of the felony
that would meet the requirements for disqualification under
state law. However, the member was not able to attend meet-
ings because of his incarceration, and the council took action
under the absence phrase in the charter. The individual re-
moved did not pursue the matter. Huntsville reported that a
councilmember did resign from the council because of the
same absence provision in its charter. A San Marcos official
said the provision was in its charter now because of a previous
problem before the provision was inserted. And finally, two
other cities indicated that they had “come close” to invoking
this charter provision, but had not to this date. It does appear
that a statement on attendance is helpful in the charter; it
gives the council some authority to urge regular attendance
by members.
52
Texas Home Rule Charters
Page 48 of 64
City of Georgetown, Texas
Charter Review Committee
April 20, 2021
S UB J E C T:
Dis cus s ion of possible amendment of C ity C harter regarding the organizational reporting s tructure of the
C ity Attorney, C ity S ecretary, and Munic ipal Judge – S kye Masson, C ity Attorney
IT E M S UMMARY:
F IN AN C IAL IMPAC T:
NA
S UB MIT T E D B Y:
Mayra C antu, Management Analyst
AT TAC H ME N T S:
Description Type
Reporting Structure - Benchmark Cities Exhibit
Reporting Structure - Charter Language from Benchmark Cities Exhibit
TML - Appointments Exhibit
Page 49 of 64
Reports to:
City Population Form of Government City Type CAO CSO CMO
El Paso 679,813 Council-Manager Home Rule Council CMO; ACM Council
Round Rock 124,434 Council-Manager Home Rule Council CMO; CM Council
Cedar Park 74,817 Council-Manager Home Rule Council CAO Council
New Braunfels 79,438 Council-Manager Home Rule Council CMO; ACM Council
Sugar Land 118,709 Council-Manager Home Rule CMO; CM CMO; ACM Council
Fort Worth 874,401 Council-Manager Home Rule Council Council Council
Carrollton 135,834 Council-Manager Home Rule Council CMO; ACM Council
Richardson 116,432 Council-Manager Home Rule Council Council Council
Page 50 of 64
Cover Sheet
Item H. Discussion of possible amendment of City Charter regarding the organizational reporting
structure of the City Attorney, City Secretary, and Municipal Judge – Skye Masson, City Attorney
Current Charter:
Sec. 5.08. - Judge of the Municipal Court.
The Municipal Court shall be presided over by a magistrate who shall be known as the Judge of the
Municipal Court. The Judge shall be appointed by the Council for a term of two (2) years, from June first
in even years until May thirty-first two (2) years later, or for the portion of such term unexpired at the
time of his appointment. Except as hereinafter provided, the Judge of the Municipal Court shall be a
competent attorney who at the time of the appointment has practiced law for at least two (2) years and
who is a resident of the City of Georgetown; if a suitable resident of Georgetown cannot be found, the
Council shall have the power to appoint a practicing attorney in the City of Georgetown who resides in
the extraterritorial jurisdiction of said City. In the event an attorney with the above qualifications is not
available, a citizen of this City considered qualified shall be appointed by the Council as the Judge of the
Municipal Court. The Judge of the Municipal Court may be removed in accordance with State law.
In the event the Judge of the Municipal Court is temporarily unable to act for any reason, the Council
shall appoint a qualified person to act in the Judge's place. The Judge, or anyone acting in the Judge's
place, shall receive such compensation as may be set by the Council.
(Res. No. 050603-B, 5-3-03; Ord. No. 86-12, Amend. No. 20, 2-25-86)
Sec. 5.09. - Clerk of the Court.
The Municipal Judge shall appoint, with the approval of the City Manager, a City employee to serve as
Clerk of the Municipal Court. The Clerk of the Municipal Court shall have the power to administer oaths,
make certificates, affix the seal of said Court thereto and generally do and perform any and all acts usual
and necessary by Clerks of Courts in issuing processes of said Court and conducting the business thereof.
(Ord. No. 86-12, Amend. No. 20, 2-25-86)
Sec. 5.06. - City Attorney.
The City Council shall appoint a competent attorney who shall have practiced law in the State of Texas
for at least two (2) years immediately preceding the appointment. The City Attorney shall be the legal
advisor of, and attorney for, all of the offices and departments of the City, and shall represent the City in
all litigation and legal proceedings. The City Attorney shall draft, approve, or file written objections to
every ordinance adopted by the Council, and shall pass upon all documents, contracts and legal
instruments in which the City may have an interest.
There shall be such assistant City Attorneys as may be authorized by the Council and appointed by the
City Attorney with the approval of the City Council, and such assistant City Attorneys shall be authorized
to act for and on behalf of the City Attorney. The City Attorney(s) and any assistant City Attorney(s)
serve solely at the will of the Council.
Page 51 of 64
(Res. No. 050603-B, 5-3-03)
Sec. 2.07. - City Secretary.
The Council shall appoint the City Secretary, who shall serve at the pleasure of the Council. The City
Secretary shall keep the records of the Council, and shall have such other duties and responsibilities as
may be assigned by this Charter and the Council. The City Secretary shall appoint such assistants as may
be authorized by the Council.
As background:
Richardson
Section 7.03. - Municipal court judge.
The judge of the municipal court, while in office, shall be a bona fide resident of the City of Richardson, a
duly licensed, practicing attorney in the State of Texas, and shall be appointed by the city council for a
term of two (2) years, subject to removal by the city council by a vote of two-thirds of the total
membership of the city council.
(Ord. No. 4144, § 2(exh. A, 11-16-15)
Section 7.04. - Alternate municipal court judge.
The city council may appoint an alternate judge or judges of the municipal court, who need not be a
resident of the City of Richardson, but must be a duly licensed, practicing attorney in the State of Texas,
who shall be appointed by the city council for a term of two (2) years, subject to removal by the city
council by a vote of two-thirds of the total membership of the city council.
(Ord. No. 4144, § 2(exh. A, 11-16-15)
Section 7.05. - Compensation.
The judge, alternate judge, prosecutor and alternate prosecutor shall receive compensation as is
approved by the city council.
(Ord. No. 4144, § 2(exh. A, 11-16-15)
Sec. 2.12. - Municipal judge.
Qualifications. The council shall appoint magistrates of the municipal court to be known as the municipal
judge and assistant judges, who shall be appointed for a term of two years. The judges shall be members
of the State Bar of Texas, a qualified voters who have been a resident of the State of Texas for at least
one year; and hold no other elected public office except that of a notary public or member of the
National Guard or armed services; and not in arrears in payment of any taxes or other liability due the
city. During the tenure of office, the municipal judge, but not the assistant judges, shall reside in the city
of Carrollton.
Removal. The municipal judge and any assistant judge, may be removed by the affirmative vote of a
majority of the full membership of the council, or in the manner prescribed for the removal of a county
court at law judge or should he/she cease to possess the qualification for office.
Page 52 of 64
Candidacy for other office. If the municipal court judge, or any assistant judge, shall announce
candidacy, or shall in fact become a candidate in any general, special or primary election, for any office
of profit or trust under the laws of the state or the United States, such announcement or such candidacy
shall constitute an automatic resignation of the appointment, effective with the date of such
announcement or candidacy.
Vacancy and compensation. The municipal judge and each assistant judge shall receive such salary as
may be fixed by the council. All costs and fines imposed by the municipal court shall be paid into the city
treasury for the use and benefit of the city.
(Adopted by electorate, 9-19-61; Am. Ord. 1361 passed 4-7-87; Am. Ord. 2364 passed 8-11-98, effective
10-1-98)
Section 7.01. - City attorney.
The city council shall appoint a competent attorney licensed and practicing law in the State of Texas who
shall be the city attorney. The city attorney shall receive for services such compensation as may be fixed
and approved by the city council, and shall hold office at the pleasure of the city council.
The city attorney, or other duly licensed practicing attorneys in the United States selected by
the city council, shall represent the city in all litigation and shall serve as the legal advisor of
and attorney and counsel for the city. The city attorney may serve as the municipal court prosecutor or
may provide a municipal court prosecutor and alternate municipal court prosecutor. The city council
may contract with an attorney or with a firm of attorneys who may designate one (1) member of said
firm to serve as city attorney.
(Ord. No. 4144, § 2(exh. A, 11-16-15)
Section 3.15. - City secretary.
The council shall appoint a city secretary and prescribe the duties and compensation of said officer.
The city secretary shall hold office at the pleasure of the council.
(Ord. No. 4144, § 2(exh. A, 11-16-15)
Carrollton
Sec. 2.13. - City attorney.
The council shall appoint a city attorney, chosen on the basis of his/her qualifications as a competent
and practicing attorney. The city attorney shall receive such compensation as may be fixed by the
council. The council may remove the city attorney, upon the affirmative vote of a majority of full
membership of the council. The action of the council in suspending or removing the city attorney shall
be final, it being the intention of the Charter to vest all authority and fix all responsibility for such
suspension or removal in the council.
The city attorney shall be the legal advisor of and attorney and counsel to the city and all officers and
departments including the city council or any committee thereof, the city manager and all official boards
and commissions with respect to any legal question involving an official duty or any legal matter
pertaining to the affairs of the city. The city attorney, or such other attorneys recommended by him/her
Page 53 of 64
and retained with the approval of the council, shall represent the city in all litigation and controversies,
and to that end shall have the power to fulfill such responsibilities in such a manner as he/she deems to
be necessary or desirable on behalf of the city.
There shall exist an attorney-client relationship between the city attorney and the city of Carrollton,
Texas, and the city council of the city of Carrollton, Texas. The privileged nature of communications
between attorney and client as established and recognized by the common law, statutes and rules of
the State Bar of Texas shall apply.
The city attorney shall appoint such assistants as shall be provided for in the budget. Any such assistant
may be discharged at any time by the city attorney. All responsibilities imposed on the city attorney may
be performed by any assistant city attorney, as designated by the city attorney.
(Adopted by the electorate 8-8-98, effective 10-1-98)
Sec. 3.06. - City secretary.
The city manager shall appoint an official of the city, who shall have the title of city secretary.
The city secretary shall give notice of the council meetings, shall keep minutes of its proceedings, shall
authenticate by signature and record all ordinances and resolutions, in full, in a book kept for such
purpose. The city secretary shall also perform such other duties as shall be required by this Charter or by
the city manager.
(Adopted by electorate, 9-19-61; Am. Ord. 1361 passed 4-7-87)
Forth Worth
§ 3 APPOINTMENT AND REMOVAL OF MUNICIPAL JUDGES.
The chief judge and associate judges shall be selected and appointed by majority vote of all the
members of the city council to serve specified terms. Initial appointment and reappointment to any
term is at the sole discretion of the city council.
The chief judge and associate judges may be removed during their term of office by a majority vote of
all members of the city council. Removal may include any one or more of the following grounds:
dereliction of duty, incompetency, incapacity to serve, misconduct or conduct discrediting the position.
(Ord. 22081-02-2016, § 2(VII), 2-2-2016, approved 5-7-2016)
Chapter VI: Department of Law
§ 1 [APPOINTMENT, QUALIFICATIONS, GENERAL DUTIES, RESIDENCE OF DIRECTOR].
There shall be a department of law, the director of which shall be the city attorney, whose
appointment shall be recommended by the city manager and approved by the council and who is a
competent practicing attorney, duly licensed, and who shall have practiced law for at least five (5) years
immediately preceding his appointment. The city attorney shall serve as chief legal advisor to the
council, the city manager and all city departments, offices and agencies, and the city attorney shall
represent the city in all legal proceedings, and draft, approve or file his written legal objections to every
ordinance before it is acted upon by the council, and prepare or endorse his written approval or file his
written legal objections to all documents, contracts and legal instruments in which the city may have an
Page 54 of 64
interest, and perform any other duties prescribed by this Charter or by ordinance. During his term of
office, the city attorney shall be a resident citizen within the City of Fort Worth.
§ 2 [APPOINTMENT OF ASSISTANTS; COMPENSATION].
The city attorney shall serve as the director of the department of law, and shall have power to appoint
such assistants as may be deemed necessary to assist in performing the duties of the applicant; such
assistants to serve in that capacity as long as their services are satisfactory to
the city attorney. The city attorney and assistants shall receive such compensation as may be fixed by
the council.
§ 2A [ASSISTANTS TO HAVE ALL POWERS AND DUTIES OF CITY ATTORNEY].
All powers and duties imposed on the city attorney may be exercised and performed by any
assistant city attorney under his direction.
§ 3 [OUTSIDE COUNSEL].
No extra outside counsel shall be retained to assist the city attorney or his assistants, save and except
in cases of extraordinary importance and emergency, approved and adopted by the council. In such
contingency, the council shall fix in advance, as far as practicable, the compensation to be allowed such
extra or outside counsel by resolution spread upon the minutes.
§ 4 [TERM, REMOVAL, ABSENCE OR DISABILITY OF CITY ATTORNEY].
The city attorney shall not be appointed for a definite fixed time, but shall be removable at the will and
pleasure of the council by a vote of not less than a majority of the entire council. If removed after
serving six (6) months, he may demand written charges and the right to be heard thereon at a public
meeting of the council prior to the date on which his final removal shall take effect; but pending such
hearing the council may suspend him from office. The action of the council in suspending or removing
the city attorney shall be final. In case of the absence or disability of the city attorney, the council may
designate some qualified person to perform the duties of the office.
§ 7 CITY SECRETARY.
The City Council shall appoint a city secretary and prescribe the duties and compensation of said
officer, and shall provide him with such assistance as it may deem necessary. He shall hold office during
the pleasure of the City Council. During his term of office, the city secretary shall be a resident citizen of
the City of Fort Worth.
Sugar Land
Sec. 2-143. - Appointment of judge.
The municipal court of record will be presided over by a municipal judge appointed by city council in
accordance with the city charter and city ordinances.
(Ord. No. 2194 , § 1, 4-7-2020)
Page 55 of 64
Sec. 4.03. - City Attorney.
The city manager shall, with the city council's consent, appoint a city attorney who shall serve at the
pleasure of the city manager and may, with the city's council's consent, be dismissed by
the city manager, with or without cause. The city attorney shall provide legal services to the city.
Although the city attorney shall report to the city manager, the city attorney shall exercise his or her
independent professional judgment on legal matters as required by the rules of the legal profession.
(Ord. No. 1178, § 1, 6-15-99; Ord. No. 1810, § 3(Exh. A), 2-15-2011; Ord. No. 1820, § 6(Exh. A), 5-24-
2011)
Sec. 4.02. - City Secretary.
The city manager shall, with the city council's consent, appoint a city secretary who shall serve at the
pleasure of the city manager and may, with the city council's consent, be dismissed by the city manager,
with or without cause.
(Ord. No. 1178, § 1, 6-15-99; Ord. No. 1810 , § 3(Exh. A), 2-15-11; Ord. No. 1820, § 6(Exh. A, § 3), 5-24-
11)
New Braunfels
Sec. 8.02. - Judge of the Municipal Court.
The judge of said court shall be a licensed, resident attorney of the City of New Braunfels, appointed by
the City Council and shall receive such salary as may be fixed by the City Council. In case of the disability
or absence of the judge of the Municipal Court, the City Council shall appoint a temporary municipal
court judge who shall also be a licensed, resident attorney. The judge of said court shall hold his or her
office pursuant to the laws of the State of Texas.
(Amdt. 9, Ord. No. 74-17, § 1, 5-28-74, approved 7-9-74; Amdt. 21, Ord. No. 2005-45, § I, 5-7-05,
approved 5-16-05)
Sec. 8.04. - City Attorney.
The City Council shall appoint a licensed attorney of the State of Texas to be the City Attorney. He shall
receive for his services such compensation as may be fixed by the City Council for regular and special
duties and shall hold his office at the pleasure of the City Council. The City Attorney or such other
attorney selected by him with the approval of the City Council shall represent the City in all litigations
and prosecutions in Municipal Court. There may be such Assistant City Attorneys as may be authorized
by the City Council. Such Assistant City Attorneys shall be authorized to act for and on behalf of the City
Attorney, including representing the City in all litigations and prosecutions in Municipal Court. The City
Attorney shall reside within the City Limits of the City of New Braunfels.
(Amdt. 23, Ord. No. 2005-45, § I, 5-7-05, approved 5-16-05)
Sec. 7.02. - City Secretary.
Page 56 of 64
The City Secretary shall also be the City Clerk, and the City Secretary and such assistant secretaries as
the City Council shall deem advisable, shall be appointed by the City Manager, and may be removed
from office by the City Manager.
The City Secretary, or Assistant City Secretary, shall give notice of City Council meetings, keep the
minutes of the proceedings of such meetings, and shall perform such other duties as the City Manager
shall assign to the City Secretary, and those elsewhere provided for in this Charter.
(Amdt. 7, Ord. No. 74-17, § 1, 5-28-74, approved 7-9-74; Amdt. 16, 17, Ord. No. 2005-45, § I, 5-7-05,
approved 5-16-05)
Cedar Park
Section 4.02 Municipal Court
(a) There shall be established and maintained a court, designated as a “Municipal Court” of the City
for the trial of misdemeanor offenses, with all such powers and duties as are now, or may hereafter be
prescribed by laws of the State of Texas relative to municipal courts.
(b) The City Manager shall appoint the Presiding Municipal Judge and any Associate Judges and
recommend their compensation subject to Council approval. The Judges shall possess a current license
in good standing with the State Bar of Texas.
(c) There shall be a clerk of said court appointed by the City Manager.
(d) The clerk of said court and deputies shall have the power to administer oaths and affidavits, make
certificates, affix the seal of said court thereto, and perform any and all acts usual and necessary to be
performed by the clerks of courts and conducting the business thereof.
(e) All costs, fees, special expenses and fines imposed by the Municipal Court shall be paid into the
City Treasury for the use and benefit of the City except as otherwise required by State Law.
(f) The Municipal Judge and all additional Judges shall be bonded for no less than one hundred
thousand dollars ($100,000.00) and the cost thereof shall be borne by the City.
(Amended May 8, 2010)
Section 4.03 City Attorney
The Council shall appoint a competent and duly licensed attorney practicing law in the State of Texas,
who shall be the City Attorney. They shall receive for their services such compensation as may be fixed
by the Council and shall hold their office at the pleasure of the Council. The City Attorney, or such other
attorneys selected by them with the approval of the Council, shall represent the City in all litigation.
They shall be the legal advisor and attorney for the Council, the City and its Officers, and all of its
Departments, Boards, and Commissions in all matters involving City business. The City Attorney may
employ consultants on legal matters as necessary and may employ outside legal counsel subject to
ratification by the Council.
(Amended May 8, 2010)
Page 57 of 64
Section 4.04 City Secretary
The City Manager shall appoint or remove the City Secretary, subject to the approval of the Council; and
shall appoint or remove such Assistant City Secretaries as the Council shall deem advisable.
The duties of the City Secretary, or an Assistant City Secretary, shall be as follows:
(a) To give notice of the Council and Board and Commissions meetings.
(b) To keep the minutes of Council meetings.
(c) To authenticate signature and record in full, in a book indexed for this purpose, all ordinances and
resolutions.
(d) To perform such other duties as the City Manager shall assign and as elsewhere provided for in this
Charter.
Round Rock
Sec. 4.03. - Municipal Court.
a) There shall be established and maintained a court, designated as a "Municipal Court" for the
trial of misdemeanor offenses, with all such powers and duties as are now, or may hereafter be
prescribed by laws of the state of Texas relative to municipal courts.
b) The judge of said court shall be appointed by the City Council to serve at the discretion of the
City Council. The judge shall be an attorney licensed and practicing in the state of Texas and
shall receive such salary as may be fixed by the City Council.
c) There shall be a clerk of said court appointed by the City Manager.
d) The clerk of said court and deputies shall have the power to administer oaths and affidavits,
make certificates, affix the seal of said court thereto, and generally do and perform any and all
acts usual, and necessary to be performed, by the clerks of courts, in issuing process of said
courts, and conducting the business thereof.
e) The City Council shall have the power to create and appoint additional judges as provided by
law.
f) All costs and fines imposed by the Municipal Court shall be paid into the City Treasury for the
use and benefit of the City.
(Charter amendment approved by voters January 20, 1996)
State Law reference— Municipal courts, V.T.C.A., Government Code ch. 29.
Sec. 4.04. - City attorney.
The City Council shall appoint a competent and duly licensed attorney practicing law in the state of
Texas, who shall be the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall receive for his or her services such
compensation as may be fixed by the City Council and shall hold office at the pleasure of the City
Council. The City Attorney, or such other attorneys selected by the City Attorney with the approval of
the City Council, shall represent the City in all litigation. The City Attorney shall be the legal advisor of,
and attorney and counsel for, the City and all elected officials, employees and departments thereof.
Page 58 of 64
(Charter amendment approved by voters January 20, 1996; May 6, 2017)
Sec. 4.05. - City Clerk.
The City Manager shall appoint the City Clerk and such Assistant City Clerks as the City Council shall
deem advisable. The duties of the City Clerk, and Assistant City Clerks, shall be as follows:
a) to give notice of City Council meetings;
b) to keep the minutes of the proceedings of such meetings;
c) to authenticate by his or her signature and record in full a book kept and indexed for the
purpose, all ordinances and resolutions; and
d) to perform such other duties as the City Council shall assign, and those elsewhere provided for
in this Charter.
(Charter amendment approved by voters January 20, 1996; November 8, 2011)
El Paso
2.44.030 - Judges.
A. In addition to the qualifications prescribed in the City Charter, the presiding
municipal judge shall be a licensed attorney at law who has practiced law in Texas at least five
years prior to his or her election by a majority of the municipal judges.
B. The term of office for the elected judges shall be as provided in the City Charter.
C. The city council may appoint one or more substitute associate municipal judges to sit for the
regular judge of any municipal court when such regular judge is temporarily unable to act for
any reason. Such substitute associate municipal judge shall possess the same qualifications
required of the regular municipal judges and shall have all the powers and duties of
the judge for whom such substitute associate municipal judge is sitting while so acting.
D. The term of office for the substitute associate municipal judges is four years. The term of office
for any substitute associate municipal judge appointed by the council for a term beginning in
June 2003, and who was automatically reappointed in 2005 by operation of law, shall expire in
June 2007. Thereafter, appointments to the positions with terms expiring in June 2007 shall be
for four-year terms. The term of office for substitute associate municipal judges appointed by
the council for a term beginning in June 2005 shall be for four years.
E. When a vacancy arises in a position of municipal court judge or substitute associate municipal
court judge, or new appointments of judges are necessary, the following selection process will
be utilized.
a. The municipal clerk will notify the city manager of the vacancy or need for the council to
make appointments.
b. The city manager will post a public notice in the same manner as city council agendas
are posted, announcing the acceptance of resumes of interested candidates requesting
to be considered in the selection process and will set a deadline for candidates to
submit those resumes to the members of the city council.
c. Each member of the city council may submit the names of one or more candidates to
the city manager for consideration in the selection process no later than ten days after
the deadline set for the submission of resumes.
Page 59 of 64
d. The city manager will compile a list of the candidates and as soon as practicable, place
an appropriate item on the city council agenda to enable the city council to make the
appropriate appointments.
F. Any substitute associate municipal judge appointed pursuant to subsection C of this section may
be assigned to serve as night magistrate under the supervision of the presiding municipal judge.
The duties of the night magistrate shall be those prescribed by the laws of the state, particularly
the Code of Criminal Procedure, at the discretion of the presiding judge.
G. A vacancy in the office of elected judge is filled by appointment by the city council and the
person appointed serves until the next regular municipal election, at which time his successor
shall be elected. An appointee may succeed himself or herself.
H. A vacancy in the office of substitute associate judge is filled by appointment by the city council
and the person appointed serves the remainder of the expired term.
(Ord. 16274 § 1, 2006: Ord. 14172 § 3, 1999: Ord. 12403, 1995: prior code § 7-3)
Section 3.7 - APPOINTMENTS.
Appointment and Removal of the City Attorney.
The City Council by a majority vote of its total membership shall appoint a City Attorney and fix
the City Attorney's compensation. The City Attorney shall be appointed solely on the basis of legal
experience and qualifications. The City Attorney may be removed by a resolution approved by a majority
vote of the total membership of the City Council. Assistant City Attorneys shall be appointed by, and will
report to and work at the direction and under the supervision of the City Attorney.
Page 60 of 64
13 Departments, offices, and boards
The title of this chapter is the same as that used
in a number of Texas charters as well as in the NCL model
city charter. However, the predominant title in Texas charters
for the subject matter covered in this chapter is either “Ad-
ministration” or “Administrative Departments.” In smaller
cities, this charter article typically includes the city manager
as well as other departments and offices. Other charters de-
vote separate articles to each department or officer. This
chapter will discuss the following:
• Creation of departments
• City attorney
• City secretary
• Municipal court judge
• Planning function
• Personnel and civil service
• Health function
• Other departments and officers
• Boards and commissions
Creation of departments
The Marble Falls charter has a clear statement on
the creation of administrative departments in a council-man-
ager city:
Section 4.02 Administrative Departments
There shall be such administra-
tive departments as are established by
this Charter and may be established
by ordinance and, excepting as other-
wise provided in this Charter, these
administrative departments shall be
under the direction of the City Man-
ager.
The Council shall have power by or-
dinance to establish administrative de-
partments or offices not herein provided
by this Charter. The Council may dis-
continue, redesignate, or combine any of
the departments and/or administrative
offices. No changes shall be made by
the Council in the organization of the ad-
ministrative service of the City until the
recommendations of the City Manager
thereon shall have been heard by the
Council.
The head of each department
shall be a director who shall have de-
partmental supervision and control.
Two (2) or more departments may be
headed by the same individual and
the City manager may head one (1) or
more departments.
In most charters, three offices are specified by
name: the city attorney, the city secretary, and the municipal
court judge. An administrative code adopted by the council
is the appropriate place for establishing the other departments
or defining their departmental organization and operating
rules and regulations. In fact, many aspects of the internal
organization of departments or divisions should be governed
by administrative order rather than by council action.
City Attorney
Each city should have either a full-time or part-
time legal officer, depending on the size of the city and the
volume of legal problems. Many small towns contract with a
legal firm or with an individual. Some city councils prefer to
contract with a firm, while others prefer to have an attorney
full-time on the city staff. Very small cities have little choice
if they do not have enough work for a full-time employee.
Some slightly larger cities have a full-time employee because
they want their own lawyer immediately available. Other cities
can afford and have enough work for a full-time employee but
contract with a firm because of its variety of expertise.
Charters frequently provide that the city attorney,
with council approval, can bring in special counsel when the
need to do so for a particular court case or other problem
arises.
The West University Place charter has a typical
section on the city attorney:
The Council shall appoint an attor-
ney, licensed by the State of Texas, to be
the City Attorney. The City Attorney shall
be entitled to compensation for services
as established by the Council and shall
serve at the pleasure of the Council. The
City Attorney shall draft or approve as to
legal form or file written objections to
every ordinance proposed by the Council
and shall review all contracts and other
documents in which the City has an in-
terest. The City Attorney, or other attor-
neys selected by the City Attorney with
the approval of the Council, shall repre-
sent the City in all litigation. The City At-
torney shall be the legal advisor to the
City and counsel for the City and all its
officers and departments in the conduct
of City business.
65Page 61 of 64
Survey Results
Our survey of the state’s charters produced the
following figures in regard to selection of the city attorney:
The large figures for “appointment by the city
council” are a little misleading since they include the con-
tracts with firms or individuals entered into by the council.
For cities over 50,000, the figures look like this:
The six largest cities in the state have an interest-
ing mix of appointment methods. In Houston and El Paso,
the mayor appoints the city attorney with approval of the city
council; in Dallas, the appointment is by the council; in Fort
Worth, the attorney is appointed by the city council on rec-
ommendation of the city manager; and in San Antonio and
Austin, the city manager appoints the attorney, and no council
confirmation is required. Various arguments are made for and
against the council appointing the attorney. Some contend
that legal questions are so crucial that the city council needs
to be sure that the attorney’s opinion is not “laundered” in
any way by the manager before it gets to the council. On the
other hand, having both the manager and the attorney report
to the council can be divisive, particularly if the attorney has
a disposition to mix some policy advice with legal advice.
There is no single best answer to the question. Whatever the
policy, the key is that all the players should be guided by an
open, trusting relationship.
City Secretary
The term “city secretary” is used intentionally
here. Survey results showed this title to be heavily preferred
by 90 percent of Texas cities over the title “city clerk.” The
city secretary, like the city attorney, is frequently the subject
of a separate article in the charter. The establishment of this
position is also found in the city council article, and some-
times within the mayor or city manager section of the charter.
Wherever it is, the job is a critical one.
Although a few charters do not establish this po-
sition, the overwhelming number do. Those charters also stip-
ulate responsibilities for the city secretary. Several charters
include lengthy detail, but the Hurst charter really says all
that is necessary:
The city manager shall employ a city secretary and
such assistant city secretaries as the city manager
shall deem necessary. Such persons shall report to
the city manager who shall establish their compensa-
tion and duties. The city secretary or an assistant city
secretary shall give notice of the city council meet-
ings, take the minutes of such meetings, authenticate
ordinances and resolutions by his or her signature and
shall index and keep such minutes, ordinances and
resolutions.
Over the years, the duties of the city secretary/city
clerk position have grown in scope in all cities, but particularly
in small cities. In response to this expanded role, many mem-
bers of the profession are members of the Texas Municipal
Clerks Association (TMCA), which is a TML affiliate that is
housed at The University of North Texas. To meet the profes-
sional responsibilities of the position, a certification program
for city secretaries and clerks was established. According to
the TMCA website, over 500 Texas Municipal Clerks have
completed the extensive three-year certification program.
TMCA also has several reference tools for all city officials, in-
cluding the Texas Municipal Election Law Manual (4th Edi-
tion) written by Analeslie Mancy, the Texas Municipal Law and
Procedures Manual (5th Edition) written by Alan Bojorquez
and the Texas Municipal Clerks Handbook (8th Edition) writ-
ten by the TMCA. More information on TMCA and the certi-
fication program can be found at http://municlerks.unt.edu.
Survey results
Our survey of the state’s charters produced the
following figures in regard to selection of the city secretary:
66
Texas Home Rule Charters
Figure 13-1: Selection of City Attorney
1994 2008
By City Manager: 6% 2%
By City Manager with City Council Approval: 9% 8%
By City Council: 73% 72%
By City Council on recommendation of City Manager: 3% 8%
By Mayor with City Council Approval: 7% 9%
Other: 2% 1%
TOTAL 100% 100%
1994 2008
Appointed by city council –
manager not involved: 64% 80%
Appointed by the city
manager or manager involved: 36% 20%
Figure 13-2: City Secretary/Clerk
1994 2008
By City Manager: 24% 28%
By City Manager with City Council
Approval: 15% 20%
By City Council: 35% 33%
By City Council on recommendation
of City Manager: 12% 11%
By Mayor with City Council Approval: 7% 6%
Other: 7% 2%
TOTAL 100% 100%
Page 62 of 64
The majority for council appointment of the sec-
retary is consistent with the widespread opinion of city offi-
cials that this position is one that “belongs” to the city
council.
Judge of the
municipal
court
State law estab-
lishes a municipal
court in every city in
the state. It estab-
lishes the specified ju-
risdiction for the court
and allows the home
rule city charter to es-
tablish the method of
selection of the judge.
Although state law has preempted the majority of matters that
might otherwise be included in a city charter, a city does have
some authority and flexibility remaining. The charter may:
• provide for the manner in which the judge is to be cho-
sen–by appointment or election. If the judge is chosen
by appointment, the appointing authority must be speci-
fied in the charter. If a municipal court of record is es-
tablished, selection is handled differently.
• provide for the judge’s term of office. This can be for a
specified number of years or “at the pleasure of the city
council” or other appointing authority.
• provide for the appointment of associate judges and tem-
porary judges.
• state whether the judge(s) must be an attorney.
• provide for a clerk of the court.
Texas charters formerly were very detailed regard-
ing the court; today, this is unnecessary. The Mission charter
as amended in 1987 contains the essence of what a charter
might address. Several cities in the state devote only one
paragraph to the court and the judge (see Paragraphs A and
B of the Mission section below):
Section 4.05 Municipal Court
A. There shall be established and main-
tained a court designated as a municipal court
for the trial of misdemeanor offense, with all
such powers and duties as are now or hereafter
may be prescribed by the laws of the State of
Texas relative to municipal courts.
B. The judge or judges of said court shall
be a qualified voter or voters of the City of Mis-
sion, shall be appointed by the City Council,
shall hold his office at the pleasure of the City
Council, shall receive such salary as may be
fixed by the City Council, shall be under the ad-
ministrative direction of the City Manager, and
said judge shall not be an elected official. The
City Secretary or an assistant City Secretary shall
be ex officio clerk of said court.
C. The Clerk of said court and his deputy
shall have the power to administer oaths and af-
fidavits, make certificates, affix the seal of said
court thereto; and generally do and perform any
and all acts usual and necessary by the Clerk of
courts in issuing process of said courts and con-
ducting the business thereof.
D. The City Council by ordinance may pro-
vide for the appointment of one (1) or more
judges to serve if the regular judge, the presiding
judge, or an associate judge is temporarily un-
able to act.
E. Each judge of said court shall be a duly
licensed attorney if some such suitable attorney
is available and provided that this shall not be a
disqualification of the person serving in such ca-
pacity at the time of the adoption of this Char-
ter.
The phrase in Paragraph B above that the judge
“shall be under the administrative direction of the city man-
ager…” is an unusual, but not rare arrangement. Cities, large
and small, regardless of form of government, seem to have
continual problems with the reporting relationship of the judge
and the clerk of the court. Mayors, city councils, and city
managers want the court to be “administratively efficient,”
but must tread softly since they are dealing with a separate
and independent branch of city government. Judges are con-
cerned with the “administration of justice” and usually do not
have the time nor skill to worry about the “administration of
the court” as a department of the city. Cities have tried a
wide range of mechanisms to meet this challenge. It would
be confining and inflexible if the city tried to dictate admin-
istrative arrangements in the charter. Hence, most of these
“solutions” have been left to ordinance or administrative
order.
67
Departments, offices, agencies, and boards
HEAR HEAR - HERE!
“Sec. 5.04 City Secretary
The council shall appoint a city
secretary. The city secretary shall
be provided an office in the city
hall sufficient to maintain the
records entrusted to the city sec-
retary’s care and shall be entitled
to a seat at the council table at all
official meetings.”
Page 63 of 64
Survey results
Our survey of the state’s charters produced the
following figures in regard to selection of the municipal court
judge:
We tabulated the term of office for the judge.
Fifty percent of the charters do not address the term of office
for the judge. Of those charter that do specify the judge’s
term, the overwhelming choice (86 percent) was for the judge
to serve at the “pleasure of the council.” In the remaining
cities, the judge served a specified numbers of years, any-
where from one to four years (six percent) or noted the term
was stipulated in some other manner (eight percent), such as
at the pleasure of the city manager.
Influence of form of government on
selection of officers above
Most of the cities that call for appointment by the
city council of the city attorney, city secretary, and judge are
council-manager cities. Most of the cities that call for ap-
pointment by the mayor with approval of the city council are
mayor-council cities.
Planning function
A number of Texas charters address the planning
and zoning function. Some actually mandate a planning de-
partment and a director of planning. In the most recent survey,
34 percent of charters now require the establishment of a
comprehensive master plan, up from 20 percent in 1994 that
established a master planning process. Many charters do not
mandate a comprehensive plan with the legal phrase, “the
city council shall adopt a plan.” Without this charge, the city
council may, instead, reject all or part of the plan. Below is
a typical section from one of the charters that exemplifies the
loophole through which many a master plan falls:
Section 4. The Master Plan.The Master
Plan for the overall physical development of the City
shall contain the (Planning) commission’s recom-
mendations for growth, improvement and beautifi-
cation of the City. A copy of the Master Plan, or any
part thereof, shall be forwarded to the City Manager
who shall thereupon submit each plan or part
thereof to the Council with the City Manager’s rec-
ommendations thereon. The Council may adopt this
plan as a whole or in part, and may adopt any
amendment thereto, after at least one public hear-
ing on the proposed action. The Council shall act
on such plan, or part thereof, within sixty (60) days
following its submission by the City Manager. If
such plan, or part thereof, should be rejected by the
Council, the Planning Commission may modify such
plan, or part thereof, and again forward it to the City
Manager for submission to the Council. All amend-
ments to the Master Plan recommended by the
Planning Commission shall be submitted in the
same manner as that outlined above to the Council
for approval, and all recommendations by the Coun-
cil from any City Department affecting the Master
Plan must be accompanied by a recommendation
from the Planning Commission.
The quoted wording does not prohibit a council
from adopting a master plan, generally considered a valuable
asset to a city, and some of these cities have adopted a plan.
No legal requirement, however, prompted their action. Under
the wording above, the council could continue rejecting the
plan forever. There is no clear-cut statement that “the council
shall adopt a plan.”
Once a master plan or comprehensive plan is
adopted, a city may have language such as the following to
put “teeth” into the plan. This is from the Mansfield charter:
Section 10.4 Legal Effect Of The Masterplan
Upon adoption of a Master Plan by the Council, no
subdivision, street, park, or any public way, ground
or space, public building or structure, or public util-
ity, whether publicly or privately owned, which is in
conflict with the Master Plan shall be constructed
or authorized by the City until and unless the loca-
tion and extent thereof shall have been submitted
to and approved by the (Planning) Commission. In
case of disapproval, the Commission shall commu-
nicate its reasons to the Council, which shall have
the power to overrule such disapproval, and upon
such overruling, the Council shall have power to pro-
ceed. The widening, narrowing, relocating, vacating
or change in the use of any street, alley, or public
way or ground, or the sale of any public building or
real property shall be subject to similar submission
and approval by the Planning and Zoning Commis-
sion, and failure to approve may be similarly over-
ruled by the Council.
The preparation and adoption of such a plan has
been mandated by 38 percent of home rule cities, up from
ten percent reported in the 1994 survey. The strongest lan-
68
Texas Home Rule Charters
Figure 13-3: Municipal Court Judge
1994 2008
By City Manager with City Council Approval: 3% 6%
By City Council: 79% 74%
By City Council on recommendation
of City Manager: 3% 7%
By Mayor with City Council Approval: 6% 8%
Elected: 5% 3%
Other: 4% 2%
TOTAL: 100% 100%
Page 64 of 64