Katy council approves ballot language for multiple charter amendments after months of dispute over process

The City of Katy City Council voted on multiple proposed Home Rule Charter amendments on Feb. 10 and directed staff to place the approved propositions on a special charter election ballot for May 3, 2025.

Public comment dominated the meeting’s early hours as more than a dozen residents and former officials urged the council to return proposed changes to the city’s Charter Review Commission before moving them toward an election. Sherry Booth, a member of the commission, called council action “an abuse of power” and asked why the committee’s recommendations were not followed. “Why do we have these committees if it doesn’t matter what we do?” Booth said during public comment. Multiple other speakers, including Lynn Freeman, Skip Connor (immediate past chair of the charter review commission), Don Elder, Duran Dowdle and others, urged the council to respect the commission’s process and to retain term limits.

Council members debated process and substance. Several members acknowledged the commission did regular public meetings and that notices were posted, while others said calendar and election timing motivated bringing certain items forward now. Councilmember Dan Smith, who moved multiple amendments, defended placing measures before voters, saying: “This is about giving voters the final say on their government.” Councilmembers also clarified legal limits: city staff and the city attorney explained the city’s charter language needed alignment with the Texas Constitution for resignation-on-filing rules and that certain changes would restore consistency.

Votes at a glance

- 5A: Amend Article 3, Section 1B — allow mayor pro tem to retain voting privileges and count toward quorum when acting in absence of mayor, but remove mayor pro tem veto. Motion carried (voice vote; approved). - 5B(i): Amend Article 3, Section 5B — remove automatic resignation of mayor upon filing to become a candidate when unexpired term then held does not exceed 1 year and 30 days. Motion carried, vote recorded 3–2 (approved). - 5B(ii): Amend Article 4, Section 4B — same change for council members (no automatic resignation when remaining term ≤ 1 year, 30 days). Motion carried, vote recorded 3–2 (approved). - 5C: Amend Article 3, Section 6 — allow department heads to seek reinstatement appeal to city council through same process available to other employees. Motion carried (voice vote; approved). - 5D(i): Amend Article 3, Section 12 — remove mayor term limits (proposal to eliminate limits). Motion failed (no). - 5D(ii): Amend Article 4, Section 2 — remove council term limits (proposal to eliminate limits). Motion failed (no). - 5E: Amend Article 4, Section 2 — increase council term limit from two consecutive 3-year terms to four consecutive 3-year terms (inclusive of time already served). Motion carried 3–2 (approved). - 5F: Amend Article 3, Section 12 — increase mayor term limits from two to four consecutive 3-year terms (inclusive of time already served). Motion failed (no).

Council also approved an ordinance calling a special election to submit the propositions that received majority support to the May 3, 2025 ballot; the ordinance will include the measures approved by council that night.

What passed and why

Several of the approved measures were framed by council and staff as technical fixes or to bring the charter into alignment with the Texas Constitution. City legal staff explained that the existing charter was stricter than the state constitution on the “resign-to-run” rule; the proposed rewrite for items 5B(i) and 5B(ii) would mirror the Texas Constitution’s holdover/filing threshold: a candidate must resign only if more than one year and 30 days remain in their term when filing.

Item 5C, the department-head appeal change, drew policy discussion. Proponents said the change would not prevent a mayor from hiring or firing, but would give appointed department heads the same procedural recourse currently available to other salaried city employees under Article 3, Section 9 and Article 4, Section 7. Councilmember comments emphasized this was intended as a cooling-off and appeal process, not a removal of executive authority.

Term limits and public reaction

Term-limit proposals generated the strongest public reaction. Several speakers, including former mayors, former charter commission chairs and current commission members, urged the council to retain two-term limits and to route any changes through the charter commission. During debate, council members offered alternatives and explained the tradeoffs: some residents and council members argued the city could face a mass turnover of experienced officials under the current election calendar; others warned that raising or eliminating term limits risks entrenching incumbents.

Councilmembers noted they were not deciding the final outcome on these proposals — voters will — but several members said they wanted the electorate to have the choice this May. At the end of the discussion, the council approved the election ordinance to place the approved measures on the May 3 ballot.

Process notes

Council repeatedly returned to the process question: whether an item should be returned to the Charter Review Commission for additional review or sent directly to voters. Charter commission members in public comment said they had met and recommended no changes; council members said timing and the desire to give voters a choice in May prompted bringing items forward now. Staff confirmed the ballot-calling deadline required action at the Feb. 10 meeting to place measures on the May ballot.