Fate Walkout Stops City Manager Power Moves

Fate, TX – Sometimes the most consequential thing that happens at a city council meeting is what doesn’t happen. That was the case Monday night in Fate, Texas, where Mayor Andrew Greenberg, Councilman Mark Hatley, and Councilman Rick Maneval walked out before the City Council could conduct any business…and stops a power move by the City Manager.

Hiding on the November 9 “Consent” agenda was a collection of proposed resolutions and ordinances that, taken together, would have changed how Fate operates during the politically sensitive period surrounding the November 3 recall election. Among them were measures concerning the transfer of council authority, suspension of existing city policies, purchasing approvals, development matters, and election administration.

The question residents should be asking is straightforward: Who was going to exercise the authority of their elected representatives if those representatives were removed or unable to assemble a quorum?

And why was City Manager Michael Kovacs preparing to have so much of that authority placed in his hands? The same man who kick started the entire recall saga by the termination of police chief, Lyle Lombard.

A Power Shift Hidden in the Consent Agenda

The most consequential proposals were buried in Items 5H and 5I of the consent agenda, where routine business is generally approved with a single vote.

Item 5H proposed Resolution R-2026-092, a measure titled Special Transition Provisions, Delegations of Council Authority, and Deemed Approvals of Certain Matters During Time Periods Where a Quorum of the City Council Cannot Assemble Under Texas Law.

That is quite a mouthful. The contents were even more interesting.

The October 29 staff memorandum identifies City Manager Michael Kovacs, Assistant City Manager Omar Williams, and City Attorney David Overcash as the officials preparing the continuity-of-operations proposal.

The accompanying resolution proposed automatically suspending certain existing council policies if vacancies prevented the remaining members from assembling a quorum. It would allow the longest-serving councilmember present to preside in certain circumstances, but it went considerably further.

Under Section 2, Kovacs would have authority to designate remaining officials to temporarily assume certain appointments previously held by recalled councilmembers.

Section 3 addressed development matters. Final plats approved or conditionally approved by the Planning and Zoning Commission could receive the equivalent of City Council action during a period when the council could not assemble a quorum.

The proposal also authorized a City Manager’s designee to execute certain easement and property dedication documents, subject to subsequent council ratification.

Then came purchasing.

Section 4 proposed treating certain purchasing and contracting approvals as provisionally authorized, including budgeted expenditures up to $100,000 that otherwise required council approval or ratification.

There was even an exception specifically addressing Flock Safety camera expenditures.

This wasn’t simply a plan to keep the lights on. It proposed changing who could make decisions, approve transactions, and exercise powers normally subject to elected council oversight.

Item 5I, Ordinance O-2026-079, proposed amending or suspending city code provisions involving those same special transition arrangements and delegated authority.

The city was essentially preparing two legislative vehicles to implement an extraordinary administrative arrangement.

The Election Agenda Raised More Questions

Items 5K and 5L concerned elections.

Item 5K proposed a December 12 runoff election for the already-vacant Place 1 council seat. According to the accompanying staff memorandum, the November 3 unofficial results indicated that no candidate had received the majority required by the City Charter. The runoff will be between Stephanie Adams and Joshua Martin. However, you can’t call for an election before the seats are actually vacated…which they are not, until the election is canvased.

That election is separate from the recall controversy.

Item 5L, however, proposed conditionally ordering special elections for seats potentially vacated by the November 3 recalls. The resolution included the mayor’s office and Places 4, 5, and 6.

The proposed election would only proceed if the recall canvass established a removal and the resulting vacancy could not lawfully be filled by appointment. It set March 15, 2027, as the outside election deadline.

The city cited Article XI, Section 11 of the Texas Constitution as its legal basis. But this is just smoke and mirrors. It is a theory proposed by the City Attorney … we could find no precedent that this situation has ever occurred, or resolved in the manner proposed. The actual text of Article XI, Section 11 reads:

• 
  (c) Filling Vacancies
• A city charter may provide a different method for vacancies with 12 months or less remaining in the unexpired term.
• Vacancies on the governing body cannot be filled by appointment.
• They must be filled by majority vote at a special election held within 120 days of the vacancy.

Whether the council should have approved such a sweeping conditional arrangement before knowing the official recall results is a legitimate question. So is whether the proposed delegation of election-related authority was appropriately limited.

There Was More Waiting in the Wings

Item 5J proposed authorizing continued litigation challenging Senate Bill 2038, directing the City Attorney and City Manager to take related actions. Our sources say the Kovacs is concerned about the legislation that would allow residents in the ETJ to tell the city to go pound sand. He wants to keep spending taxpayer money to lobby against this.

Texas Senate Bill 2038 (effective September 1, 2023) creates a legal process allowing residents or landowners to petition for release from a municipality’s extraterritorial jurisdiction (ETJ), either directly or by election, significantly limiting city regulatory authority over ETJ areas.

Other consent agenda items included proposed confidentiality agreements governing certain public information requests submitted by councilmembers, a designated email address for public information requests, multiple development agreements, and a proposed real estate marketing agreement involving city-owned property.

These were not insignificant housekeeping matters.

The agenda also included additional action items involving the Fate Yards development, automated license plate reader procedures, downtown parking regulations, and regulation of civic and religious assembly uses.

All of it was waiting for council consideration… but it didn’t happen.

The Voters Have Not Had Their Final Say

The November 9 walkout came just days after Fate voters cast ballots in four recall contests. The official canvass was scheduled for November 16, according to the proposed election resolution.

The council’s failure to conduct business Monday meant these proposals were not approved at that meeting. It also meant the proposed administrative transition package did not become effective through that meeting’s action.

There is no question that cities need continuity plans. Essential services must continue, payroll must be met, and existing contractual obligations must be honored.

But continuity of government is not a blank check for administrative government. It is also not an excuse for bureaucrats to seize power.

The City Charter establishes a system of elected representation. The Texas Constitution places limits on municipal authority and protects the framework through which citizens exercise control over their local government.

If a councilmember is recalled, that decision belongs to the voters. If vacancies occur, the law governs how they are filled. And if the council cannot assemble a quorum, the resulting inconvenience does not automatically transfer legislative authority to the city manager.

Michael Kovacs along with sitting council members Allen Robbins and Ashley Rains, spent a considerable amount of time prior to the recall election trying to convince the public that there would be no adverse implications if the council was recalled. Last night, they tried to cover up the true ramifications of those results by stealing power from the Council.

The real issue isn’t whether Kovacs and city staff can keep city operations moving. It’s whether the people of Fate are going to retain meaningful control over decisions made in their name.

---

Questions & Answers

1. What happened at the November 9, 2026, Fate City Council meeting?

Mayor Andrew Greenberg, Councilman Mark Hatley, and Councilman Maneval walked out before the council conducted business. Consequently, the scheduled agenda items were not approved at that meeting.

2. What were Items 5H and 5I on the Fate City Council agenda?

Item 5H proposed Resolution R-2026-092, establishing temporary administrative procedures and delegating certain council authority during periods when a quorum could not assemble. Item 5I proposed Ordinance O-2026-079, amending or suspending city code provisions to implement similar transition arrangements.

3. What powers would the proposed continuity resolution have given City Manager Michael Kovacs?

The proposed resolution included authority for the City Manager to designate temporary replacements for certain council appointments, execute specified property and easement documents through a designee, and carry forward certain previously approved or budgeted expenditures, including qualifying purchases up to $100,000. These provisions were conditional on the council being unable to assemble a quorum.

4. Was Fate attempting to order elections for council seats that were not yet vacant?

Item 5L proposed a conditional special-election order covering the Mayor and Places 4, 5, and 6. The resolution expressly conditioned those elections on the recall canvass establishing a removal, a resulting vacancy, and the inability to fill that vacancy through a lawful appointment. Whether the proposed arrangement was legally appropriate has not been established by a court ruling in the documents reviewed.

5. What are the sources for this reporting?

The primary sources are the November 9, 2026, Fate City Council meeting agenda; the October 29, 2026, continuity-of-operations resolution and staff memorandum prepared by Michael Kovacs, Omar Williams, and David Overcash; the November 3, 2026, proposed conditional special-election resolution; and the proposed Place 1 runoff election resolution. These are original City of Fate agenda and supporting documents.