Petro-Hunt and Stillwater Capital Unveil Apartments & Commercial Development Plans in Fate
Public Expresses Concerns Over Lack of Details and Impact on City Services
FATE, TX – Last night, October 5, 2023, the Chamberlain Amenity Center played host to a presentation by Petro-Hunt in association with Stillwater Capital regarding their proposed development project. The developer seeks a Planned Development (PD) designation, which would grant them significant autonomy in setting their own development rules. However, concerns have emerged over the vagueness of their presentation and the potential consequences for the Fate community.
The key highlights of the presentation are as follows:
- Mixed-Use Development: The project is anticipated to comprise a three story apartment building with approximately 375 apartments, though the exact number remains uncertain. It will also include townhouses, though specifics were not provided. Additionally, the apartments will feature business storefronts or “Live/Work” units with 10 ft. high ceilings. The developer was unconvinced even in their own presentation that “Live / Work” units were even in demand….they ‘think’ so… but there is always the option to convert those units entirely into ordinary apartments.
- Retail and Commercial Areas: The project’s retail and commercial areas were described as placeholders, with the developer not committing to a timeline for their construction. These undeveloped “pads” could remain vacant for an indefinate period.
- Trail to Nowhere: The developer plans to install a trail between their property and the creek that runs to the north, which connects to nowhere except the public sidewalk at the intersection of 551 & Greenbrier Road, across from the Fresh market. Concerns were raised by citizens about the developers lack of a maintenance plan. It appears maintance of the trail will be at the responsibility and cost to the city (ie: taxpayers).
- Financial Contributions: Critics pointed out that the project appears to contribute little to the community beyond some additional tax revenue. There were no commitments to funding parks, police, fire services, or schools. The possibility of contributing to a traffic light was mentioned, but “only if deemed necessary by TXdot”. They presented that they would be widening the road, as if that was a benefit to the town. However it was quickly pointed out by the Fate Tribune that the widening of the road was for the developers own benefit because without this development, there would be no need to widen the road.
- School Impact: The developer did not offer any solice for how their project would impact local schools, leaving many residents worried about potential overcrowding.
- Housing and Pricing: The project is not receiving Housing and Urban Development (HUD) funding or loan guarantees, and the anticipated market rate for the apartments is approximately $1800 per month.
- Retail uncertain: The types of businesses for the retail spaces remain uncertain, including whether any might feature live music. They ‘hope’ there will restaurants … but they don’t know.
- Retail Pad Sizes: The retail pads in the development are expected to range from 6000 to 10000 square feet. One set of retail pads will have a green space connecting them. They ‘hope’ that this will encourage restaurants.
- PD Design Documents: While the developer claimed to have PD design documents ready for submission, these documents were not presented to the public during the forum. The type of exterior materials that will be mandated by the PD (if any) are unknown. The design criteria is unknown. The parking requirements are unknown. Signage unknown. Yet, supposedly the documents are ready to submit…it should be interesting to see what they contain.
- Parking: The developer stated that the parking provided is based on their own assessment of the parking that would be needed and not upon any instruction from city staff.
- Increase in Crime: Citizens proposed that history has shown that apartments increase crime in the area. The presenters listened to the publics concerns, however they had no rebuttal to offer.
Notably absent from the presentation was information regarding any potential incentives the developer might be receiving from the city. Unfortunately, we failed in our regard to pose this question. We appologize to our readers for this oversight but we will find out before the issue comes before council.


Councilman Mark Harper and P&Z Councilmember Karen Kiser were present at the meeting, and it was revealed that the development will be presented to the P&Z Board on October 19, 2023. If it secures approval at that stage, it will then proceed to the City Council for a vote. It should be noted that the previously stated date of November 13, 2023, for City Council consideration is now uncertain. The Fate Tribune will continue to closely monitor this development as it progresses through the approval process, and we encourage citizens to engage with their local representatives to seek clarity on the various concerns raised during the presentation.
Council
Ethics Fight Ends in Censure of Councilman Mark Hatley
FATE, TX — The Fate City Council voted last night to censure Councilman Mark Hatley following a contentious ethics hearing that exposed deep divisions among elected officials.
The censure stems from two ethics complaints alleging Hatley improperly disclosed confidential information tied to internal discussions about the potential firing of former Department of Public Safety Chief Lyle Lombard. According to testimony, Hatley shared details with local journalist Michael Pipkins of PipkinsReports.com, including references to recorded conversations with City Manager Michael Kovacs.
The complaint was filed by outgoing councilman Scott Kelley, who played a central role throughout the proceedings and ultimately did not recuse himself and voted in favor of censure.
Monday’s meeting included a formal evidentiary hearing where Hatley, represented by attorney David Dodd, presented a defense and attempted to question fellow council members. The process, however, was repeatedly constrained by legal warnings from City Attorney Jennifer Richie, who advised council members not to answer questions related to Lombard’s termination due to ongoing litigation. That guidance, issued numerous times during the hearing, limited testimony and narrowed the scope of cross-examination.
The council ultimately split along familiar lines. Kelley was joined by outgoing councilman Mark Harper and recalled councilwoman Codi Chinn in supporting the censure. Mayor Andrew Greenberg and Councilman Rick Maneval opposed it, creating a 3–2 divide before the deciding vote was cast. Councilwoman Martha Huffman ultimately sided with the majority, breaking what would have otherwise been a tie, and would have quashed the censure.
Under Texas municipal norms, a censure is a formal statement of disapproval by a governing body against one of its own members. It carries no direct legal penalty, meaning Hatley retains his elected position and voting authority. However, such a reprimand can damage political standing, limit influence within the council, and shape future electoral prospects…if the electorate so decides.
The underlying controversy traces back to the dismissal of Lombard, which has since evolved into a broader legal dispute involving claims of wrongful termination. During Monday’s hearing, repeated references to that litigation underscored the complexity of the case and the limits placed on public disclosure. Richie’s guidance, aimed at protecting the city’s legal position, effectively curtailed testimony that might have clarified key details. Critics argue this dynamic left Hatley unable to fully defend himself against the allegations.
The political context surrounding the vote is difficult to ignore. This was Chinn’s last meeting, as she was recalled from office by the voters, in part due to her involvement in the Lombard matter. Kelley, who initiated the ethics complaint, participated fully in the decision-making process knowing that this was his last meeting. Harper has also been linked in prior discussions about leadership conflicts within city administration, and for he as well, this was his last meeting. Meanwhile, all three have supported recall efforts targeting Hatley, Greenberg, Maneval, and Huffman, for additional recall, along with two new councilmen who will take their seats at the next meeting.
From a procedural standpoint, the meeting reflected a council operating under significant strain. Testimony was fragmented, legal cautions were frequent, and the final vote appeared to follow established political alliances rather than shifting based on evidence presented during the hearing. Even Hatley’s legal representation struggled to gain traction within the constraints imposed by the city’s legal posture.
Opinion
The battle for power in Fate is very real. What unfolded Monday night was not merely an ethics hearing; it was the visible culmination of an ongoing political battle inside Fate’s leadership. When a complainant votes on his own accusation; when key witnesses are effectively shielded from cross examination; when you have councilmen under recall by the very people bringing charges against their opponents; the process begins to look less like a search for truth and more like a managed outcome. It’s cut-throat politics at its worst.
What’s changed due to this Hearing? Essentially, nothing. Hatley gets a political black eye, but that’s about it. The sides were already defined, and the votes exactly as expected. Councilmen whose terms were ending anyway are now gone after delivering one last poke in the eye to their opponents. And the City Manager, who is at the heart of this debacle because of his employee decisions, and his inability to stand up to influence from Council Members… is still employed.
For residents of Fate, the final result is an up-close view into how dirty local politics can get. It diminishes the desirability of the city to new residents, hurts economic growth, and the entire process gives citizens the perspective that their city government is completely dysfunctional.
Disclosure
The author of this article was referenced during the hearing as a recipient of information discussed in the ethics complaints. The reporting above is based on observations of the public meeting and review of the proceedings.
Election
Fate Voters Go Familiar: Robbins Edges McCarthy in Tight Place 3 Race
FATE, TX — Allen Robbins defeated newcomer Melinda McCarthy for Place 3 on the Fate City Council in the May 2, 2026 election, signaling that a slim majority of voters preferred experience over change.
The seat, previously held by Scott Kelley, was open after Kelley declined to seek reelection, setting up a direct contest between Robbins’ prior service and McCarthy’s outsider campaign.
Unofficial results show Robbins winning with 52.22% of the vote, 883 votes, to McCarthy’s 47.78%, 808 votes, out of 1,691 ballots cast. The margin reflects a divided electorate, with nearly half backing a first-time candidate.
Robbins campaigned on experience, but his record on the council became a central issue. Public records show he supported a roughly 5.96 percent property tax rate increase, higher solid waste fees, and a $3 monthly road fee applied broadly to residents.
He also backed zoning changes and approved a 179-unit townhome development, decisions that critics argue contributed to rapid growth and increased density. Some residents have tied those policies to worsening traffic and a perceived decline in quality of life in Fate.
McCarthy’s campaign focused on transparency, responsiveness, and reevaluating growth decisions. Her message resonated with a significant share of voters but fell short against Robbins’ name recognition and governing background.
The results remain subject to canvassing, but Robbins is expected to return to the council as debates over growth, taxation, and infrastructure continue.
Analysis and Commentary
This race underscores a familiar tension in local politics. Voters often voice frustration with growth and rising costs, yet still choose candidates they believe understand the system.
Robbins’ win suggests that, for now, experience outweighs dissatisfaction. But the narrow margin tells a different story beneath the surface.
Nearly half the electorate signaled a desire for change, and those concerns are unlikely to fade. If anything, they will follow Robbins back into office, where the consequences of past decisions, and future ones, will be closely watched.
Election
Knockout! Rains Beats Grove for Fate City Council – Place 2
FATE, TX — In a decisive and unexpected outcome, Ashley Rains defeated Lorna Grove for Fate City Council Place 2, delivering a clear upset against a candidate backed by a unified slate of local Republican leadership.
Unofficial results from May 2 show Rains winning with 56.38% of the vote (945 votes) to Grove’s 43.62% (731 votes). The margin, more than 200 votes, signals a strong voter preference that defied expectations heading into election night.
The seat opened after Councilman Mark Harper declined to seek reelection, setting up a race that quickly became a referendum on the direction of city leadership.
Establishment Support Falls Short
Grove entered the race with significant political backing, including endorsements from State Senator Bob Hall, Jace Yarbrough, John Stacy, Dennis London, and Darcy Gildon. Fate Mayor Andrew Greenberg and every Republican precinct chair in Rockwall County also supported her candidacy, forming a rare, consolidated front in a local race.
Despite that support, voters broke the other direction.
Rains positioned herself as a grassroots alternative, emphasizing accountability and independence from what some voters viewed as coordinated political influence. The result suggests that message resonated more strongly than institutional endorsements.
Recall Effort Played a Key Role
A secondary, but important, factor in the race was Rains’ leadership role in the ongoing recall effort targeting three council members and the mayor. The effort will likely be placed on the November election ballot, giving Rains elevated visibility and an engaged base of supporters.
While she did not run solely on the recall, her involvement helped frame her candidacy as part of a broader push for change at City Hall. That connection likely contributed to turnout among voters already invested in the issue.
What It Means Going Forward
Rains’ victory may serve as an early indicator of voter sentiment ahead of the November recall election, though the two contests are not perfectly aligned.
With 1,676 total votes cast, turnout was solid for a municipal race, and the nearly 13-point margin suggests a clear mandate—at least in this contest.
The results remain unofficial pending canvassing, but the outcome is unlikely to change.
For now, the takeaway is straightforward: Fate voters rejected a unified political slate and elevated a candidate tied to grassroots activism, signaling a shift in the city’s political landscape with more tests to come this fall.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login