Let’s not kid ourselves: The Home Rule Charter Willow Park voters will consider this November is not simply the natural progression of a growing city, as its proponents suggest.
Before this election you will be seeing many reasons why we should transition from being a General Law City to a Home Rule City. I think most of us agree that it is time for Willow Park to become a Home Rule City. But that does not mean we should automatically approve this first attempt on the November ballot. The question is whether this specific Home Rule Charter proposal is right for Willow Park.
Texas law places important limits on how frequently a city charter can be amended. Article XI, Section 5 of the Texas Constitution and Chapter 9 of the Texas Local Government Code addresses the timing and process for charter amendments. Once voters approve a charter, State law prohibits any city charter from being altered, amended, or repealed more frequently than once every two years and changing the charter requires approval of the voters.
That makes getting the charter right the first time extremely important.
This is not simply the next step in the growth of our city. It is a governing document, our constitution if you will, with significant legal consequences. If you have concerns about any of the provisions of this proposed charter you should reject it.
The controversy surrounding the Squaw Creek Project demonstrates why voters should carefully examine the details of ballot measures and petitions.
Earlier this year, approximately 300 Willow Park residents signed a petition concerning the Certificate of Obligation associated with the Squaw Creek Project. The petition ultimately disrupted the city’s plans and resulted in additional costs and delays.
The exact financial impact is still unknown, but estimates presented before City Council ranged from tens of thousands of dollars to potentially hundreds of thousands of our tax dollars wasted because of the actions of about 300 people in a city of around 7,000.
The larger issue, however, remains important: a relatively small number of voters can have a significant impact on municipal government through petitions, recalls and other mechanisms.
The proposed Willow Park Home Rule Charter would establish or expand several of these mechanisms. Voters should ask whether those provisions provide appropriate accountability or whether they could make it unnecessarily easy to disrupt the operation of city government.
The Home Rule Commission was established in 2025, with its members appointed on Aug. 12, 2025, by Mayor Teresa Palmer.
The process by which the commission was created and its members selected deserves public scrutiny. According to the city’s records, the mayor made the appointments without a formal vote or even input of our elected representatives on the City Council.
The composition of the commission has also generated controversy because of relationships and political affiliations involving some of its members.
Those facts should be evaluated on their own merits. The important question for voters is whether the process produced a charter that reflects the interests of the entire community or those of a particular faction in our city.
One of my greatest concerns with the proposed charter is its treatment of recall elections.
Recall elections are an important tool of direct democracy. But they can also be disruptive if the requirements for initiating a recall are set too low or if there is insufficient justification for bringing about a recall or if safeguards against repeated recall efforts are not in place.
A September 2023 University of Houston study, “Undoing Democracy? Recall Elections in Texas 2004–2022,” examined recall provisions in Texas home-rule cities and discussed known issues and recommended several best practices for cities to adopt.
Among the recommendations identified in the study were:
Establish specific grounds for removal.
The study noted that many city charters do not require a specific justification for a recall. Clear standards with defined justifications for recall can help prevent recalls based solely on minor disagreements or political disputes.
Establish an appropriate signature threshold.
The study discussed higher thresholds for initiating and approving a recall, noting that relatively low requirements can allow a small number of voters to trigger an election. In smaller cities such as ours this could be as few as several hundred signatures to force a recall.
Hold recall elections in conjunction with regular elections when possible.
Municipal special elections often have substantially lower voter participation than regularly scheduled elections. The timing of a recall can therefore have significant consequences for voter participation and are often an unnecessary expense of taxpayer’s dollars.
Limit the timing and frequency of recalls.
Most charters establish a period during which newly elected officials cannot be subjected to recall and limit repeated recall attempts. This is only common sense to allow a cool down period after the election and allow elected officials three to six months to acclimate to the position before being challenged.
Clearly explain the recall process.
Voters should be able to easily understand the requirements, deadlines and procedures involved.
These safeguards and best practices were not included in this charter proposal, and they deserve serious consideration before Willow Park adopts our Home Rule Charter. We have the opportunity in this election to reject this first attempt and go back and learn from the mistakes of others, so that we can do this right the first time.
Since the proposed charter does not adequately address these concerns, voters should reject it and require a new commission to consider these provisions and best practices before bringing it back to the voters.
Another provision deserves particularly close examination: the proposed Board of Ethics. This is unique in Parker County and much more robust than even cities such as Fort Worth. Why is this even necessary and why will it have such specific powers?
The draft charter states:
“The Board, composed of at least five (5) volunteers, shall be established by the City Council to advise the Council on the content and requirements of the ethics policies and ordinances. Board membership shall be established via an unbiased independent selection process.”
That language raises an obvious question: Who conducts the independent selection process, and who ultimately determines who serves on the board?
The proposed charter further states:
“The Board of Ethics shall operate as a quasi-judicial body, separate from and independent of the City Council and City staff, and shall not be subject to their direction or control in the performance of its duties.”
The proposed powers are significant. According to the draft, the board would be authorized to investigate complaints, gather evidence, hear evidence, issue subpoenas, compel witnesses and documents, decide ethics complaints, issue advisory opinions and reprimands, and recommend more serious disciplinary action to the City Council or city manager, including recall, termination, civil litigation or criminal charges.
Those are substantial powers to be placed in the hands of only a few citizens.
For such a unique and powerful body this charter should clearly answer several basic questions:
There is nothing wrong with holding elected officials accountable. In fact, accountability is essential to good government.
But accountability must work both ways.
Willow Park voters elect the mayor and city council to represent them. If an independent body is given significant authority over city government, the charter should establish clear rules defining that body’s authority, membership, qualifications, accountability and limitations.
Creating an independent ethics body without adequately defining those safeguards could create serious unintended consequences for the city.
That is why voters should not be distracted by the broad appeal of Home Rule itself. The question is not whether Willow Park should eventually become a Home Rule city. The question is whether this particular charter is the right charter for Willow Park.
There are other provisions in the proposed charter that deserve careful examination, but these issues alone should cause voters to reject this first attempt.
Willow Park should become a Home Rule city when we have a charter that has been thoroughly reviewed, openly debated and carefully crafted to serve the entire community.
The process should not be controlled by one elected official or by any single faction.
We should start over with a Home Rule Charter Commission selected through a process that includes the consensus and participation of all our elected representatives.
Home Rule may be the right future for Willow Park.
But for something this important we must get our charter right the first time.
Keith O’Donnell is a retired public affairs professional and a 15-year resident of Willow Park.
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here