Richardson council OKs prospective "resign-to-run" charter amendment after heated public debate

The Richardson City Council voted to place a prospective "resign-to-run" charter amendment on the May 2, 2026 ballot after lengthy public comment and an extended council debate.

Attorney commentary and scores of residents had urged the council not to make the measure retroactive, arguing that applying new eligibility rules to candidates who already declared would be unfair and likely unlawful. "It is illegal," said a member of the public identified in the record as Mr. Herrmann, who cited Texas constitutional provisions and appellate precedent in urging council members to reject retroactivity. Multiple speakers described the proposed retroactive language as targeted and opaque.

Council members debated two central risks: legal vulnerability if the amendment were made retroactive, and practical governance challenges if it were strictly prospective. Councilmember Justice warned that a prospective approach could leave the city in limbo if multiple council members later resign, possibly impairing the council’s ability to reach a quorum. Mayor Pro Tem Ken Hutchenrider, however, emphasized operational predictability and said retroactive application would give staff and the council time to prepare appointment or election processes.

Councilmember Dan Barrios, who has announced a run for Congress and spoke at the meeting, said he would resign if campaign demands made it impossible to fulfill his council duties but opposed a post-facto rule that would remove an official after votes were already cast: "My intention has always been to serve the residents of Richardson... That decision should be guided by my ability to serve as I was elected to do and by the will of the voters, not by a rule changed after the fact," he said.

After debate on several drafting options — retroactive, fully prospective, and hybrid language that would make the rule effective on a specific future date — Councilmember Steve Corcoran moved to order a charter election that would apply the resign-to-run requirement prospectively (i.e., affecting candidates who announce after the canvass date). Councilmember Barrios seconded the motion. The motion passed by a 5–2 vote, with Councilmember Justice and Councilmember Curtis Dorian voting no.

What happens next: The council’s ordinance directs staff to publish ballot language and to contract with county election administrators; if voters approve the prospective amendment on May 2, the new requirement would apply to candidates who become candidates after the canvass date specified in the ordinance. The city attorney noted the council had time that night to finalize draft language and indicated staff would return with precise wording and effective dates for public review.

The council’s action resolved a central procedural question while leaving open operational details that staff said would be worked out before the ballot packet is finalized.