The Charter Review Commission for the City of Stafford elected Greg Holzapel as chair and Clint Mendonca as vice chair and set three initial meeting dates to begin reviewing the city’s home-rule charter.

The commission’s first meeting focused on organization and process, including the commission’s duties under Section 10.15 of Stafford’s Code of Ordinances, the statutory six-month term for the commission’s work (with possible extension by city council), and a January deadline window if members want charter amendments placed on the May ballot.

AJ Honorary nominated Greg Holzapel for chair; the nomination was seconded and approved by voice vote. A separate nomination was made for Robert Sorbet, which prompted a brief procedural dispute about whether all nominations should be taken before voting. The commission proceeded with a voice vote and carried the nomination for Holzapel. Following that vote, the body elected Clint Mendonca as vice chair by voice vote.

The city attorney read aloud the commission’s statutory duties under Section 10.15, noting the panel’s powers to hold public hearings, compel attendance by city officials and require submission of city records when conducting its inquiry. The attorney summarized the duties as: "to inquire into the operation of city government under charter provisions and determine whether any such provisions require revision," and described the commission’s responsibility to "report its findings and present its proposed amendments, if any, to the city council." Those remarks were recorded during the commission’s discussion of duties.

City staff and commissioners emphasized the schedule pressures facing the commission. The city secretary told members they had been emailed the ordinance materials in advance. Commissioners were told the body operates on a six-month clock unless city council grants an extension, and that the window to put charter items on a May ballot is narrow and generally falls in January.

Commissioners also discussed how to structure the work. Several members recommended beginning with a full, front-to-back review of the charter with members marking up sections in advance to streamline meetings. Suggested first topics included the charter’s election provisions (Article V) and the process used by planning-and-zoning and other commissions for selecting officers. One commissioner asked members to consider whether council overrides of planning-and-zoning recommendations should require a supermajority; that idea was offered as a subject for future review, not as an adopted change.

On scheduling, the commission set the following meeting dates and times by consensus: November 10 at 6:30 p.m., December 4 at 6:30 p.m. and December 18 at 6:30 p.m. Members agreed to hold public comment both at the start and at the end of meetings and to permit three minutes per speaker (with the possibility of granting extensions by vote).

Staff reminded commissioners that open-meetings and public-records training is required and available through the Texas attorney general’s website; staff said the training is typically a one-time requirement. The city attorney also noted that city council may accept commission recommendations in full, in part, or not at all and that any council action to place charter amendments on a ballot would follow the council’s separate procedures.

The commission closed the meeting after adopting the officer slate and scheduling the next meetings, and members tasked themselves to read and mark up the charter in preparation for substantive review at the November meeting.