The Charter Review Commission met Monday (Jan 14) night to continue its review of the City of Brady Home Rule Charter. They initiated a systematic review of the charter to consider changes and corrections to the current charter. Some changes were as simple as grammatical errors; others amended the charter to agree with current Texas law. For Brady voters, the most important change being considered was a change in the number of registered voter required to initiate a recall of the Mayor and Council.

The meeting began with comments by an unhappy Mayor Gail Lohn directed to Commission Chairman Shelly Perkins. Mayor Lohn told the Commission they were asked to review very few provisions and were not to review the entire charter. Among the items mentioned specifically were requirements related to recall elections and responsibilities assigned to the Mayor and City Manager.

In a City Manager style of government, the City Manager acts as both the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating Officer. As such, the City Manager is normally responsible for signing contracts, regulatory filings, invoices and bills, etc. The Mayor said the current city manager “signs nothing”. She wants to retain those responsibilities for herself. The Commission explained they were trying to provide Charter changes that fit with the City Manager-type of City government.

Prior to last night’s meeting, the Commission planned to recommend a change to the charter recall article that would raise the number of voter signatures on recall elections from 20% to a super majority of 66.7%. The Commission demonstrated a clear understanding of the issues surrounding this charter provision. Balancing the need for government continuity with the electorate’s need to recall Mayor and Councilmen when necessary is not easy. Residents attending the meeting asked the Commission to consider a simple majority of registered voters voting in the last municipal election or 250 voters, whichever is greater. Others noted the Commission represents all the people of Brady, not a particular group. The Commission voted to keep the provision as it is currently written.

Municipal Judge Gary Schroeder was also angry when he came to the meeting. His behavior and temperament did not seem at all judicious. He noted he was in charge of the City Court system and expected to OK any changes in the charter related to Municipal Court. He said proposed changes were not reviewed with him prior to the meeting. When the Commission tried to explain their work process, Mr. Schroeder initiated a sharp exchange with Commission member Jo Ann Coffey. He referred to her as “Lady” a couple of times. She responded that her name was Jo Ann and she would appreciate Mr. Schroeder referring to her in that manner. The upshot was that Mr. Schroeder left the meeting while Mrs. Coffee continued with the business at hand.