Minutes Charter Review 10/28/2019 TOWN OF TROPHY CLUB
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSION MINUTES
MONDAY,OCTOBER 28,2019 7:00 P.M.
LOCATION: 1 TROPHY WOOD DRIVE,TROPHY CLUB,TEXAS
COUNCIL CHAMBERS
The Charter Review Commission of the Town of Trophy Club,Texas, met in a Regular Session on Monday, October
28, 2019.The meeting was held within the boundaries of the Town and was open to the public.
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Dennis Sheridan Chairperson, Place 3
Rhylan Rowe Vice Chairperson, Place 5
Dave Edstrom Commissioner, Place 1
Timothy Patterson Commissioner, Place 2
Bruce Dale Commissioner, Place 4
Louis Opipare Commissioner, Place 7
Danny Mayer Commissioner, Place 8
Jared King Commissioner, Place 9
CHARTER REVIEW COMMISSIONERS ABSENT:
Kevin Carr Commissioner, Place 6
COUNCIL AND STAFF PRESENT:
Philip Shoffner Council Member, Place 6-Council Liaison
Wade Carroll Acting Town Manager
David Dodd Town Attorney
Holly Fimbres Town Secretary/RMO
Chairperson Sheridan announced the date of October 28, 2019, called the Charter Review Commission to order
and announced a quorum at 7:00 p.m.
CITIZEN PRESENTATIONS
This is an opportunity for citizens to address the Commission on any matter whether or not it is posted on the
agenda. The Commission is not permitted to take action on or discuss any presentations made to the Commission
at this time concerning an item not listed on the agenda. The Commission will hear presentations on specific
agenda items prior to the Commission addressing those items.
There were no citizen presentations.
1. Consider and take appropriate action regarding the October 15,2019 Charter Review Commission Minutes.
Motion:
Motion made by Commissioner Mayer, seconded by Vice Chairperson Rowe, to approve the October 15, 2019
Charter Review Commission minutes.
Motion carried unanimously 8-0-0.
2. Receive an update from the Staff Liaison,Town Manager Norwood, regarding direction from the Council at
their October 22,2019 Council meeting.
Acting Town Manager Carroll stated that no action was taken at the October 22, 2019 Council meeting. The
Charter Review Council Liaison, Council Member Shoffner, notified the Council that it required a majority vote of
the Council to instruct the Commission to undertake a review of specific topics or Charter provisions. The Council
was made aware that a Council Member also had the ability to request their appointee on the Charter Review
Commission to discuss any potential topics.
Chairperson Sheridan noted that it was briefly discussed by the Council to appoint someone to a vacant Council
seat verses holding a special election. Since there was no majority vote on any topic, a Council Member could
request their appointee to bring up a topic to discuss or there was the ability for a Council Member to speak to the
Commission during one of their meetings.
3. Discussion of previous Charter Elections.
Chairperson Sheridan introduced this item and stated that the purpose of this item was to allow the ability to
review previous Charter Elections. He preferred to have the actual ballot language as opposed to the information
that was provided in the agenda packet,which included the ordinances that canvassed each past Charter Election.
Commissioner Edstrom remarked that he had information on prior Charter Elections and would distribute copies at
a later time.
4. Discussion of and take appropriate action regarding Article I, Form of Government & Boundaries, of the
Town of Trophy Club Charter.
Town Attorney Dodd advised that the annexation portion of the Charter did not need to be changed because it
already had the following language, pursuant to any law of the State of Texas now or hereinafter enacted. The
portion in Article II specific to eminent domain did not require any changes either.
Commissioner Opipare inquired who would be verifying that the Charter was in compliance with State law. Town
Attorney Dodd responded that he would do a broad scope review and then review the individual Articles as they
came up for discussion.
Chairperson Sheridan requested that future agenda packets have each Article broken out individually as opposed
to the entire Charter be attached to each Article discussion.
Motion:
Motion made by Vice Chairperson Rowe, seconded by Commissioner Opipare, to move Article I without any
recommended changes.
Motion carried unanimously 8-0-0.
5. Discussion of and take appropriate action regarding Article II, Powers of the Town, of the Town of Trophy
Club Charter.
Chairperson Sheridan acknowledged that Town Attorney Dodd previously mentioned that there was no need to
change eminent domain. He commented that he did not like eminent domain without restrictions.
There was no further discussion on this Article.
Motion:
Motion made by Commissioner Mayer,seconded by Commissioner Dale,to approve Article II with no changes.
Motion carried unanimously 8-0-0.
Charter Review Commission Minutes October 28,2019 Page 2 of 9
6. Discussion of and take appropriate action regarding Article Ill, The Council, of the Town of Trophy Club
Charter.
Commissioner Mayer brought up Section 3.05, Compensation,and mentioned there have been past discussions on
this topic. If this item was an area of concern to anyone, it could be possible to pay the Council $1 per year in
order to address this conflict that comes up from time to time. He mentioned that there was a previous
movement to remove Greg Wilson from the Economic Development Corporation (EDC)4B because he was elected
to serve on the Trophy Club Municipal Utility District (TCMUD) No. 1 Board of Directors, but since neither was a
paid position, the State allowed him to remain on EDC 4B. He was unaware of any requirement that would
prevent a Council Member from also sitting on the TCMUD No. 1 Board of Directors.
Town Attorney Dodd remarked there could be a conflict in that situation because those were both elected
positions and could potentially deal with the same issues. There was a prohibition if one position was paid verses
the other and if they were dealing with the same issues.
Vice Chairperson Rowe mentioned that Number 7 within Section 3.02, Qualifications, identified that "If any sitting
Council Member files to become a candidate for another public office, he shall resign his current seat upon filing
for the new office."
Commissioner Edstrom commented that if they considered compensation, they should not consider paying the
Council a great deal, but it was worthwhile to give some kind of a token payment for their attendance at each
Council meeting.
Commissioner Mayer remarked that as a previous Council Member, he felt it was a volunteer service and added
that the TCMUD No. 1 Board of Directors received opposition for being paid$100 for each meeting.
Commissioner Opipare cautioned that paying a Council Member per meeting could become costly if a situation
arose where multiple special sessions were called because of litigation matters, but he did feel that the Council
puts forth a great deal of time.
Commissioner King inquired if there were statistics for what percentage of cities paid their Council's in Texas.
Acting Town Manager Carroll responded that Staff did not have that information in hand if it existed.
Chairperson Sheridan asked if any of the surrounding towns or cities paid their Council. Town Attorney Dodd
responded that he was not aware of any and that typically a city the size of Dallas and Fort Worth would pay their
Council.
Vice Chairperson Rowe commented that based on principle, he would be opposed to compensation because it
could create additional misconceptions about Town government. He reminded the Commission that any of their
recommendations would have to pass through Council and then be sent to the voters.
Commissioner King inquired if there was a way to reimburse Commissioners for having to use their personal data
plan to open and view the agenda packet, with the current agenda packet having a file size of 25 MB. Council
Member Shoffner responded that incurred expenses could be reimbursed and he added that he would not want
compensation to serve on Council.
Commissioner Mayer brought up subsection (b) of Section 3.20, Conflict of Interest and Abstention, which
addressed that if a Council Member abstained from voting it would be recorded as a negative vote in the minutes.
He believed that it should be recorded properly as an abstention in the minutes and not as a negative vote.
Vice Chairperson Rowe agreed with Commissioner Mayer. He mentioned that if this subsection were struck,then
there would be no specificity for how it would be reflected in the minutes. Town Attorney Dodd responded that
was correct unless it were addressed in the Meetings and Rules of Procedure.
Charter Review Commission Minutes October 28,2019 Page 3 of 9
Chairperson Sheridan inquired if this was required from State law. Town Attorney Dodd responded that it was not
required according to State law. He advised that it could read that Council shall adopt Meetings and Rules of
Procedure;therefore leaving out the specifics in the Charter.
Vice Chairperson Rowe pointed out that as the Commission moves through each Article, there may be sections
that are more granular than they should be and it may be appropriate to make those sections more general.
Commissioner Edstrom understood why a person with a conflict would abstain but he did not understand what
kind of circumstances there would be that a Council Member could not vote on a measure.
Vice Chairperson Rowe provided an example that when the State Highway 114 sound wall was being finalized,the
Texas Department of Transportation came before the Council with options. There were several residents that
were not happy with any of the options so he abstained.
Chairperson Sheridan added that the Town had guidelines that defined a conflict of interest. He gave an example
that when he served on the Planning and Zoning, he was upfront when Mehrdad was developing the Highlands
because he had previous dealings with Mehrdad's company since he had been a real estate broker.
Commissioner Edstrom wanted to better understand why someone would abstain and what the purpose was.
Commissioner Mayer remarked that he has seen Council Members abstain because they did not want to be on
record voting for or against a hot topic.
Vice Chairperson Rowe pointed out that the issue being discussed was how an abstention vote was being recorded
in the minutes.
Commissioner Opipare supported removing subsection(b)within Section 3.20.
Commissioner Mayer moved on to Section 3.19, Investigative Powers of the Council, and stated that the portion
that read "The Council, by the affirmative vote of a quorum," was in conflict with another portion of the Charter
that says to approve anything, it required a majority of the Council to approve and not the majority of the quorum.
In his opinion, if a hot topic were presented a Council Member may not attend because they did not want to be
recorded with a positive or negative vote. The rule that required four votes to approve something should be
amended that an item could be approved by the majority of the quorum.
Council Member Shoffner agreed that this was an item that should be reviewed because of Council resignations.
There was a point where the Council was down by two Council Members; therefore four out of the five Council
Members had to vote affirmatively for an item to pass.
Town Attorney Dodd stated that based on the conversation, it appeared that Section 3.12, Quorum,where it read
"no action of the Council shall be valid or binding unless adopted by the affirmative vote of four (4) or more
members of the Council"would need to be amended if that was the direction of the Commission.
Vice Chairperson Rowe cautioned that an unintentional consequence to this change could be running a risk to
manipulate a discussion or decision. While he was on Council,there was a point the Council was united and there
was a sensitive item where a Council Member wanted to pick the item up at the next meeting but was unable to
make that meeting due to family concerns. Enough Council Members were able to place the item on the agenda
and that Council Member was consciously left out of the discussion. If that type of situation occurred on a united
Council it could occur on a divided Council.
Acting Town Manager Carroll pointed that pursuant to Section 3.10, Special Meetings, only three members of the
Council could call a special meeting.
Charter Review Commission Minutes October 28,2019 Page 4 of 9
Commissioner Mayer added that now, any Council Member could be video conferenced into the meeting if they
were not able to physically attend a meeting. He strongly urged the Commission to consider amending Section
3.12 to require a majority of the quorum attending verses requiring four affirmative votes.
Commissioner King agreed with Commissioner Mayer to remove the required four affirmative votes because there
could be items that were time sensitive and need to be considered in a timely manner.
Commissioner Opipare brought up Section 3.02,Qualifications,specific to Number 7,to make it gender neutral.
Chairperson Sheridan commented that a gender neutral definition could be added to the beginning of the Charter.
Town Attorney Dodd remarked that he would have to review appropriate examples to be used.
Commissioner Patterson suggested using broad terms such as"this member".
Commissioner Opipare believed that the brackets should be removed from the title for Section 3.03, Number,
Selection,Term[,] Council Judge of Election of Members." Town Attorney Dodd responded that could be treated
as a scrivener's error to remove the brackets. Additionally, he would review the ability to use the scrivener's error
exception to change the masculine words to gender neutral,such as"he"to"member".
Commissioner Opipare suggested adding "the current code" in subsection (g) of Section 3.08, Powers of the
Council, instead of just stating "Adopt and modify the zoning plan, and a building code, including electrical and
plumbing codes,of and for the Town; and to require building permits". Town Attorney Dodd responded that could
potentially remove the ability to make amendments to the codes where needed, which usually the North Central
Texas Council of Governments provides the Town with recommended amendments to current codes.
Vice Chairperson Rowe reiterated his support for how an abstention vote should be recorded. Regarding the
discussion on the number of votes required for Council, he could see both sides, but his intuition and preference
would be to stay with the four affirmative votes. His pause would be how the ballot language would be worded
because to the voters it could appear to be a change to require a fewer number of votes to get something passed.
Commissioner Dale inquired about an evaluation of the long term goals referenced in subsection (d) of Section
3.08, Powers of the Council, "Develop long term goals for the Town and strategies to implement goals".
Council Member Shoffner believed that the accountability would be at the polling site.
Commissioner Edstrom remarked that it was difficult to effectively communicate the goals to the residents.
Commissioner Mayer commented that when he was on Council,each year they reviewed and updated the strategy
map with accomplishments and goals,which would be recorded in the minutes and captured in the Council videos.
He felt that the current Council did an excellent job of setting, measuring,and recording the goals.
Acting Town Manager Carroll stated that the Town Manager reports those goals each year at the Council Retreat in
January and the communication piece could be addressed with the Communications and Marketing Manager to
increase resident awareness.
Vice Chairperson Rowe added that the Mayor has an annual State of the Town Address, which captures the goals
for the Town,given during a Council meeting.
Commissioner Dale asked it was required to have an official newspaper as referenced in subsection (v) of Section
3.08, Powers of the Council. Town Attorney Dodd responded that State law required the Town to have an official
newspaper for publishing purposes.
Charter Review Commission Minutes October 28,2019 Page 5 of 9
Commissioner Dale inquired about the remedy if a Council Member did not follow Section 3.13, Interference in
Town Manager Appointments and Removals or Duties.
Vice Chairperson Rowe commented that for him, he viewed Section 3.13 as how the Town Manager determines to
do his job. The Town Manager should know how to handle a situation like that and how to properly address or
deal with an issue
Commissioner Mayer remarked that a strong Town Manager would protect their people. The Town Manager he
worked with while serving on Council, did not want the Council communicating with staff without going through
the Town Manager. The Council could always communicate with the Town Manager, Town Attorney, or Town
Secretary.
Discussion took place among the Commission that an experienced Town Manager would know the difference
between a conversation and direction.
Town Attorney Dodd advised that Section 11.14, Code of Ethics and Conduct; Ethics Commission, would address
the question specific to the remedy.
Acting Town Manager Carroll added that there was also protection through subsection (b)of Section 4.05, Powers
and Duties,that spell out that the Town Manager was the only one authorized to remove an employee.
Commissioner Edstrom stated that the Town Manager's protection would also be in their contract.
Commissioner Patterson brought up Section 3.04, Vacancies, Forfeiture of Office, Filling of Vacancies, and stated
that there was no direction with respect to a short term vacancy. He was an attorney and had worked with
respected Town boards in Tennessee and Indiana and those entities allowed for a vacancy to remain vacant for a
certain amount of months before the next election. He was mentioning this because of recent concerns and this
could possibly help with unnecessary special elections and associated costs. Town Attorney Dodd responded that
there was a wide range on how to fill the position.
Vice Chairperson Rowe remarked that the 120 days to hold a special election after a vacancy occurs appeared to
be in accordance with the Texas Constitution.
Town Attorney Dodd added that a process could be created for procedures to fill vacancies. There were different
requirements for holding an election, such as resign-to-run versus a resignation. A process could be created to
allow for appointments to be made to fill a vacancy for an unexpired term of 12 months or less.
Vice Chairperson Rowe was not in favor of making appointments but he would be in favor of making sure
vacancies were filled on a uniform election date in May or November,except where State law prohibited.
Commissioner King brought up that subsection (7) of Section 3.02, Qualifications, was less restrictive than the
Texas Constitution dealing with a resign-to-run because the Charter bases it off when a Council Member files to
become a candidate for another public office and the Texas Constitution was when that person announces for
another public office.
Town Attorney Dodd advised that he would review subsections(c)and (d)of Section 3.04,Vacancies, Forfeiture of
Office, Filling of Vacancies, for the ability to change 120 days to 200 days in order to allow a vacancy to be placed
on the next uniform election date.
Town Secretary Fimbres explained that elections were a shared cost between the entities holding an election in
May and November. Most municipalities hold their general elections in May;therefore November elections could
potentially be more costly when there were no Constitutional amendments,etc.
Charter Review Commission Minutes October 28,2019 Page 6 of 9
Commissioner Mayer was strongly opposed to appointing a Council Member and believed that decision needed to
be sent to the voters. A person who was appointed could potentially have a leg up at the next election.
Council Member Shoffner added that there were Council Members that did not agree to appointments when it
was discussed at their October 22,2019 meeting.
Commissioner Edstrom brought up the statement under number 4, within subsection (b), of Section 3.04,
Vacancies, Forfeiture of Office, Filling of Vacancies. He inquired if the Council Member forfeiting office was a
voting member specific to where it states"The Council shall, by an affirmative 3/4 vote of the entire membership,
be the judge in matters involving forfeiture of office by a Councilmember or the Mayor." Vice Chairperson Rowe
responded that he would assume that the Council Member would still have the ability to vote.
Commissioner Edstrom requested the Commission to consider eliminating subsections (i) and (k) of Section 3.08,
Powers of the Council. He commented that the Town did not have slum districts or blighted areas as mentioned in
subsection (i): Adopt, modify and carry out plans proposed by the Town Planning and Zoning Commission for the
clearance of slum districts and rehabilitation of blighted areas.
Commissioner Mayer commented that it could be beneficial for the Planning and Zoning Commission to review
opportunities to present to Council areas of Town that could be rejuvenated and offer those residents a tax credit
to help update their homes.
Commissioner Edstrom commented that there may be an opportunity for that in the future. He believed that was
a separate issue and not related to blighted areas.
Vice Chairperson Rowe agreed with Commissioner Edstrom because this subsection did not limit or grant anything
that State law did not already cover.
Commissioner Edstrom requested to delete subsection (k), Regulate, license and fix the charges or fares made by
any person,firm or corporation owning,operating or controlling any vehicle of any character used for the carrying
of passengers for hire or the transportation of freight for hire on the public streets and alleys of the Town. His
reasoning was that this was not something the Town could control and there was no way to locate those
individuals transporting people.
Town Attorney Dodd remarked that he would need to research if there was any use to this from the stand point of
Uber services or party buses,etc.
Commissioner Edstrom discussed subsection (m) of Section 3.08, Powers of the Council, regarding sanitary sewer
and water system. This appeared to be in conflict with the TCMUD No. l's responsibility. He commented that the
TCMUD No. 1 had$15 million in debt to be paid off in 2035 and the Town needed to absorb the TCMUD No. 1.
Chairperson Sheridan was not in favor of delimiting the TCMUD No. 1 and was in favor of keeping this subsection
for enforcement purposes.
Commissioners Opipare and King agreed to keep subsection(m).
Commissioner Mayer commented that the Town provided sanitary sewer and water service for the Public
Improvement District (PID) residents through a PID tax, but this service was contracted to the TCMUD No. 1. The
TCMUD No. 1 would eventually be absorbed by the Town once the TCMUD No. 1 debt was paid.
Chairperson Sheridan brought up Section 3.06, Mayor, and asked if the Mayor needed the right to vote, except in
cases of a tie vote.
Charter Review Commission Minutes October 28,2019 Page 7 of 9
Vice Chairperson Rowe and Commissioners Mayer, Opipare, and Edstrom agreed that the Mayor should have the
right to vote.
Chairperson Sheridan brought up subsection (u) of Section 3.08, Powers of the Council, that gives the Mayor or
their delegate the extraordinary and total executive powers during any public disaster. He asked if there was a
definition for a major public disaster. Acting Town Manager Carroll responded that the State of Texas defined
what a major public disaster would be.
Commissioner King mentioned that if the Commission proceeded with amending Section 3.12, Quorum,to be able
to approve items by a majority vote of the quorum, then subsection (b) of Section 3.16, Procedure for Enacting
Ordinances and Resolutions; Publications,should be reviewed to mirror the same change.
Chairperson Sheridan remarked that if they changed the wording in one section then they would have to be aware
that it could require changes in other sections dealing with similar matters.
Commissioner Edstrom brought up Section 3.22,Term Limits,and stated that this takes away a voter's right to vote
for an individual. In a small community like Trophy Club there was not a value to have term limits.
Vice Chairperson Rowe commented that those were the same principles he based the removing term limits in
2015, but based on the votes this appeared to be an item the residents did not want removed.
Commissioner King agreed with moving forward with changing Section 3.12, Quorum,to be able to approve items
by a majority vote of the quorum because there could be instances in the future where an important decision
would need to be made promptly. Additionally, he would not recommend removing term limits.
Vice Chairperson Rowe commented that a review needed to be done on items that required a super majority vote
and whether those items were mandated by State law or local government law.
Motion:
Motion made by Chairperson Sheridan, seconded by Commissioner Patterson, to consider further discussion on
Article III specific to Section 3.05, Compensation; Section 3.20(b), Abstention; Section 3.19, relating to a quorum;
add a gender neutral phrase at the beginning;Section 3.04(c)and(d)relating to timing;and Section 3.08(i)and(k)
to delete.
Motion carried unanimously 8-0-0.
7. Discussion of and take appropriate action regarding future agendas.
• Article IV-Administrative Services
• Article V-Nominations and Elections
• Article VI-Recall
• Article VII-Legislation By The People,Initiative and Referendum
• Article VIII-Municipal Planning and Zoning
• Article IX-Budget,Finance and Taxation
• Article X-Franchise and Public Utilities
• Article XI-General Provisions
• Article XII-Transitional Provisions
Chairperson Sheridan advised that this item was to allow discussion of items on future agendas.
Charter Review Commission Minutes October 28,2019 Page 8 of 9
ADJOURNMENT
Motion:
Motion made by Vice Chairperson Rowe,seconded by Commissioner King,to adjourn the meeting at 8:56 p.m.
Motion carried unanimously 8-0-0.
16014 • ROP >,G'rry � 1,(,r,�✓�-(�A r�to els 6,J
Holly Fimbre.,Town Secretar tj y Dennis Sheridan,Chairperson
Town of Trophy Club,Texas . Town of Trophy Club,Texas
* 7\
cb
v9�(JAW����
Charter Review Commission Minutes October 28,2019 Page 9 of 9