Brittany Kelley
KYLE — Kyle City Council held a special meeting July 24 to discuss the recommendations made by the 2025 Charter Review Commission.
City attorney Aimee Alcorn-Reed began the presentation by noting there were 26 suggestions made throughout the past six months when the commission met.
Mayor pro-tem Bear Heiser stated that he didn’t “love” the idea of the first proposition, which imposed term limits. The new language allowed a maximum of three consecutive regular terms as a council member, mayor or any combination of the two.
“I think that it’s discouraging somebody or someone who could come in with experience to serve,” he said. “We’re basically taking away the decision from the voters who continue to elect somebody. In this instance, if someone is elected three times in a row, we’re now taking away that opportunity for the voters, if they’re happy with that person.”
“I think by doing this, it may be a way that the committee is not just saying that the person wasn’t doing a good job, it’s saying that you want to be able to allow newer ideas [for the city],” said council member Michael Tobias.
Council member Robert Rizo stated that having someone who has served on council for three terms could actually be a benefit for the mayoral position, but he does feel that it’s important that someone cannot serve on council after being mayor.
Ultimately, council decided to not move forward with this suggestion, as council member Lauralee Harris echoed Heiser’s statement that this would negate the voters’ voice.
The second proposition dealt with vacancies less than one year. The commission suggested to add the following language: “If a vacancy occurs for an office with a remaining term that will expire within 12 months, then a special election to fill that office will be held no later than the first uniform election date after the vacancy occurs and for which there is sufficient time to call and give notice of the election as required by law even if such election date does not occur within 120 days after the vacancy.”
Tobias was concerned that if a seat remained vacant until the election, difficulties could arise when it comes to votes that require a certain amount of council members, such as approving the tax rate.
To fill this void, an option was presented to the committee that would allow council to appoint an individual to the seat, but both the public and the committee were in agreement that this was not the best path forward, which is why they suggested keeping the seat vacant instead.
“I’m a little worried about appointing someone,” said Rizo. "The optics of it, maybe someone’s thinking that we’re trying to give somebody that seat … I’ve served on a six person council before and we were able to do quite a bit. It didn’t really slow us down, so I don’t know; I’m kind of okay with this one.”
Proposition E clarifies how council expenses will be covered, either through reimbursement or through some form of direct payment, such as city credit cards.
Harris commented that this was a helpful amendment, which Tobias agreed with.
He stated that, “Our seats will eventually be vacated with new council members and a new mayor eventually in time … So, [let’s] not look at it as just for us, but for future councils to help, so that way they don’t have problems years from now.”
Regarding the change that would require five affirmative votes to appoint or dismiss the finance director, Heiser stated that council shouldn’t have control over “something so integral to the functionality of government.”
“That’s why we have city managers. That’s why we have assistant city managers,” stressed Tobias.
The council chose to not move forward with this change.
Proposition H was related to one-reading approvals. The recommendation was to allow the approval of ordinances calling and canvassing elections on a single reading and allowing emergency ordinances to pass one the first reading, as long as it receives five votes.
Council requested Alcorn-Reed to come back at the next meeting with more information about potential restrictions to these to prevent it being taken advantage of.
More information was also requested to be provided on polling locations in Proposition J.
The commission also recommended the option to have an internal auditor, Proposition O, to which council member Marc McKinney stated that he doesn’t see the benefit of having both an internal and an external position: “I feel like if we need two separate auditors to keep us in check, then we’ve got much bigger problems than an auditor.”
Heiser agreed that he did not see any need for the proposition because any council member can place a request for an audit on the agenda at any time.
Council did not move forward with this item.
Proposition P recommended that no member of the Planning and Zoning Commission may have more than two consecutive, two year terms, but council moved forward with three, two year terms, for a total of six years.
It also suggested adding requirements for an ethics compliance officer: “Let’s remember that when we went out and looked for a compliance officer, only one person applied,” said Heiser.
Rizo suggested that this item stay as it currently is written and the rest of council agreed.
Although multiple residents discussed that they were unhappy with council members nominating members of the Ethics Commission, Proposition S does not remove this, it instead sets the commissioners terms to three years, so it would not be coterminous with the council member.
Proposition T would require council to define “nominal value” in reference to accepting gifts, along with a gift limitation and annual limitation from a single source to be adopted by an ordinance.
Council member Miguel Zuniga stated that they should leave this as written, which Rizo agreed with, stating that he has “never received a gift over $100.”
Harris also suggested leaving it as is, since council is required to report anything more than $100 anyway.
“This proposal is to add section 12.06 to the city charter, which would prohibit any former council member from accepting employment with the city for two years after the end of their last term,” said Alcorn-Reed about Proposition V. “The change would avoid any appearance of impropriety related to the hiring of a council member shortly after they leave council; however, it could also, in theory, prohibit the city from hiring the most qualified candidate, if that candidate happened to be a former city council member.”
Rizo stated — after confirming that a council member would be required to go through the same hiring process as another individual — that he is not in favor of this change.
“I think you do have to be careful because we approve multi-million dollar projects here. Positions get created in the budget, so we have to be careful that that’s not just being designed for someone leaving their term of office,” explained Zuniga.
Instead of two years, Tobias suggested one, which Zuniga liked, as well.
“You’d rather us have the second best applicant,” said McKinney.
“You don’t know if we’re going to get the second best applicant. We could get the best applicant from any other [person]. Anybody’s free to apply,” replied Zuniga. “I don’t want all of us to have a job with the city right after we stop serving. I don’t want to see that. I think that that is just not the way that we have trust in our city and in our community.”
Heiser clarified that he was not in favor of this and that the council shouldn’t make “fear-based decisions because there’s some people who wanted to cry foul in something there was no evidence of,” referencing a former council member that now works for the Kyle Police Department.
“How I look at it, you[‘d be] punishing council members for saying yes, that they want to serve their community and, now, you’re going to be punished,” said Rizo. “Are we going to do the same thing with our boards and commission? … Where do we draw the line? When do we stop punishing people for wanting to serve?”
Zuniga was firm on his stance, stressing that a council member would gain confidential information while serving that others would not have access, so there should be a one-year safeguard.
Because four council members — Mayor Travis Mitchell was not in attendance — were in favor of not moving forward with this item, as opposed to the two who wanted to do a one-year gap, the proposition did not move forward.
Other propositions that council elected to accept the commissions recommendations for are as follows:
• Proposition C: Provides clarity on meeting attendance
• Proposition G: Provides clarity on the role of the city manager versus the council in determining job duties of specific employees
• Proposition K: Specifies that a single member district representative must live in that district while they are serving, only those that live within a district can vote in that single member district election and that only residents in that district can recall the member
• Proposition L: Streamlines the process of petitions, as the city attorney would determine a petition’s legality prior to the signatures being collected, rather than after
• Proposition M: Decreasing the number of recall petitions from three to two
• Proposition N: Consistently makes the number of votes to appoint and remove the city manager five
• Proposition U: Adds language allowing a city employee to enter into contracts under certain conditions, as well as clarify that contracts that violate the conflict of interest provisions would be void
• Proposition W: The Charter Review Commission will meet every six years, rather than every five, to line up with the review process by council, as well as shortening long, wordy requirements to simply reference state and federal law
Additional propositions that council chose to leave as originally written are:
• Proposition D: As suggested by Alcorn-Reed, since the original language works just as well upon review
• Proposition I: Alcorn-Reed stated the clarification wasn’t necessary
• Proposition Q: Specifies that the commission can make comments to the city manager on any proposed development agreements
• Proposition R: Moving sections 11.11 and 11.12 to Article 13 General Provisions
• Proposition Y: Would have changed the number of votes needed to call an election on a non-binding proposition from six to five
• Proposition Z: Requiring all boards and commissions hold all meetings in accordance with the requirements of the Texas Opens Meetings Act
Alcorn-Reed will next put together an ordinance calling an election to be presented at the Aug. 5 meeting, along with a public hearing.
To listen to the discussion, visit bit.ly/4fbF04E.
