Charter review committee presents 18 proposed charter amendments; council debates city manager residency, term limits and transparency measures

The Charter Review Committee chair, Elise Chacon, presented roughly 18 proposed charter amendments during the Council—s Dec. 17 workshop and answered council questions about specific language changes.

Why it matters: the proposed amendments would change governance rules in the City of Aransas Pass on matters ranging from residency requirements for appointed city managers, to transparency practices (video and publication of ordinances), to term limits for elected officials. Many proposals would require voter approval if the council places them on the ballot.

City manager residency and employment terms

The committee proposed replacing the charter—s current vague requirement that an appointed city manager become a resident within a "reasonable period of time" with a firm six-month residency requirement. Committee members said six months is common in neighboring cities and argued it would strengthen civic accountability; opponents on the council and several speakers said six months may be too short and noted potential legal and recruitment implications. Council members raised alternatives such as one year, residence within a geographic radius, or addressing the timeline in the employment contract rather than the charter.

City Attorney Mister Asasi cautioned that state law can limit local residency requirements for employees and that some cities have struggled to recruit city managers when residency provisions are strictly enforced. Supporters of a residency requirement cited past problems with a prior city manager who did not reside in Aransas Pass and, they said, spent locally earned income elsewhere.

Inventory, audit and fixed-asset language

Committee language would require the city manager or finance director to maintain an inventory of fixed assets and to provide written inventories of real property and permanent equipment at the end of each fiscal year. Audit and finance staff said audits are performed annually and that capitalized assets are included in audit schedules; council members asked staff to confirm whether department-level inventories are consistently maintained and suggested clarifying the level of granularity (capital items vs. consumables).

Transparency, video and publication

The committee proposed charter language requiring video recording of council meetings and posting the recordings to a publicly accessible website. City staff and council members said the city currently streams and posts council meetings to YouTube and provides links on the city website; they noted the cost and logistics of expanding mandatory video-archiving to all boards and committees and said that could also be handled by ordinance or council policy rather than charter amendment.

The committee also proposed requiring that ordinances published in the official newspaper also be posted on the city website and that titles or captions be recorded in meeting minutes; staff said many ordinances are already posted to the city—s online code (Municode) and that the website can be improved for clarity.

Mayor pro tem selection, term limits and other governance changes

The committee proposed annual selection of a mayor pro tem by council vote immediately after each regular city election, with a limit prohibiting consecutive mayor pro tem terms. The committee also proposed a three-term (consecutive) limit for mayor and council members, with a two-year ineligibility period after three consecutive full terms. Council members discussed how traditions have rotated the pro tem role historically and how a charter change would formalize rotating service or might instead be handled by council policy.

Recall petition threshold and bonds

The committee proposed lowering the petition-signature threshold required to trigger a recall from a formula tied to 50 percent of votes cast to a lower threshold in some proposals; several council members opposed lowering the standard, saying a high threshold reduces frivolous recall attempts. The committee also proposed sending to voters any bond authorization above $8,000,000; some council members supported that as a voter-protection measure.

Committee-to-ballot process

Committee members said some proposals were intended to go directly to the voters, and the council considered whether every committee recommendation should automatically be placed on the ballot. Council members and staff cautioned that bypassing council review of committee recommendations would circumvent elected officials— role in agenda-setting; attorney guidance and council practice noted that citizen-led initiatives or petitions can still place items on the ballot under state law.

Public comment and tone of debate

The charter discussion generated strong remarks from the public and from committee members. Elise Chacon defended the committee—s work and urged the council to place the items on the ballot; other residents urged that the council retain authority to vet proposed changes before sending them to voters. City staff and the city attorney repeatedly advised that some items could be achieved through ordinance or policy rather than charter change.

Ending: Council did not adopt any charter amendments at the workshop; members directed staff to continue review and to return refined language and legal guidance for future council consideration and possible placement on the ballot. Several council members suggested some items would be better handled by ordinance or contract terms rather than charter language.