City Attorney's Ruling Shows Lavon Recall Petitions Named All Six Elected Officials

Lavon residents who wanted to recall city leaders filed six petitions this fall, one for every member of the City Council, including the mayor.

That detail comes from a letter by Lavon's city attorney, released ahead of the council's Nov. 3 meeting. In it, the attorney wrote that the petitions sought "to begin the process to recall all six members of the city council." He also ruled that none of them can move forward, because they don't give a good enough reason for removing anyone.

On Tuesday, the council will decide whether to accept that ruling. To understand that vote, it helps to start with what the petitions actually said.

What The Petitions Said

The six petitions were filed with the city on Sept. 9. Under Lavon's city charter, which works like the city's constitution, a recall starts when five registered voters file paperwork naming the official they want removed and explaining why in 200 words or fewer.

In this case, every petition gave the same reason: "incompetency and misconduct in office regarding the execution of powers vested in the elective council." None of them pointed to a specific vote, action or event. The city has not released any further explanation from the people who filed them.

Each of the six officials had 10 days to respond in writing, and all six did, according to the city attorney. Their responses have not been made public.

Once the officials responded, the petitions went to the city attorney for review.

Why The City Attorney Rejected Them

Lavon's charter requires the city attorney to review every recall petition before anyone can start collecting signatures. If he finds a problem, he has to spell it out.

The problem he found comes down to one word. The charter says the reasons for a recall "should" be about how an official does the job, and should be serious enough to directly affect the public. Lavon Weekly looked at that wording Oct. 30 and noted that "should" could be read as a suggestion rather than a rule.

The city attorney disagrees. In his letter, he wrote that "should" normally describes a duty, and that he does not believe "the charter's drafters or Lavon's voters intended this language to be a mere suggestion." In his view, it's a firm requirement.

He also explained how high he thinks the bar is. Under his reading, an official generally has to break a law, or do something seriously harmful to the public, before a recall can go forward. "Disagreements over policy decisions can never satisfy this standard," he wrote. He added that the rule exists in part "to shield officials from removal for disagreements on policy issues."

Measured against that standard, he concluded, a general claim of "incompetency and misconduct" falls short.

There is another way to read the charter, though. The attorney's own letter notes that "should" can also mean something is a good idea rather than a must. Under that reading, the voters who approved the charter may have meant to leave the decision to residents, who would sign petitions and then vote in a recall election.

Courts in Texas have generally followed whatever a city's charter says. When a charter doesn't give anyone the power to judge a petition's reasons, courts have let recall elections go forward. When a charter requires specific reasons, courts have backed up officials who rejected vague ones.

That leaves the final say in Lavon with the council, which raises a question of its own.

Council Members Deciding On Their Own Recall

Every council member voting Tuesday is named in one of the petitions. Lavon's charter doesn't say whether officials can vote on a recall aimed at themselves, though it does make them subject to state conflict-of-interest laws. In practical terms, if all six stepped aside, there would be no one left to vote.

Other Texas cities have faced similar situations. In Sinton, a small city in San Patricio County, residents tried to recall three council members. The three council members named in the petition voted to let the city attorney file a lawsuit to block the recall. The city later dropped that lawsuit. In 2014, the Texas attorney general weighed in, saying that challenges to a recall petition don't excuse a city council from calling a recall election when its charter requires one, and that a court is the right place to settle those disputes.

Sinton's case differs from Lavon's in one important way. In Sinton, the city had already approved the petition before the council members acted. In Lavon, the city attorney rejected the petitions, and the charter gives him that job.

What Happens Tuesday

On Tuesday, the council has two choices: approve the city attorney's ruling or reject it. Its decision is final at the city level. Because the mayor only votes to break a tie, the decision will most likely come down to the five council members.

If the council approves the ruling, the recall effort ends for now. If it rejects the ruling, organizers can start collecting signatures.

Tuesday is also Election Day, and two of the officials named in the petitions are on the ballot. If either loses, the petition against that person would no longer matter, because an official who leaves office can't be recalled.

The council meets at 6:30 p.m. at Lavon City Hall, 120 School Road.

What This Could Mean For Residents

The outcome will shape how recalls work in Lavon going forward.

If the council approves the ruling, the city attorney's strict reading becomes the working standard. Residents who want to recall an official in the future would need to point to specific conduct, such as breaking a law, rather than general complaints or disagreement with how someone voted. The people behind these petitions could still go to court. They could also file new petitions for the same purpose after one year.

If the council rejects the ruling, residents may be asked to sign recall petitions in the coming weeks. Each petition would need signatures from registered Lavon voters equal to at least 20% of the voters registered at the last city election, and it would have to be turned in within a set window after the original filing. If a petition gets enough valid signatures and the official doesn't resign, the council would have to call a recall election.

Tuesday's election matters too. Anyone who wins a seat Tuesday can't face a recall petition until six months after taking office.

Residents who want to share their views can speak for up to three minutes during citizen comments at Tuesday's meeting. The city attorney's full letter is in the city's Nov. 3 meeting packet, and the recall rules are in Chapter 12 of the Lavon Home Rule Charter.