New Braunfels City Council Executive Session and Termination of City Attorney, May 11, 2026

The New Braunfels City Council met in executive session on Monday, May 11, 2026, at 5:02 p.m. to discuss pending litigation and legal matters regarding a conflict between the city charter and the Texas Constitution on majority and plurality voting requirements for mayoral elections, and to deliberate the removal of the City Attorney. After a closed session from 5:04 to 5:59 p.m., the council reconvened in open session at 5:59 p.m. Following presentations, public testimony, and debate, the council voted 4‑3 to terminate City Attorney Val Acevedo effective immediately.

Executive Session Item (Discussed in Closed Session)

• The council discussed the conflict between the city charter's plurality‑vote provision for mayor and the Texas Constitution's requirement for a majority vote when terms exceed two years. No action was taken in open session on this item.

Discussion Items

• Charles Zech (outside counsel) detailed how he discovered the discrepancy on May 4, 2026. While reviewing the charter after seeing a social media post, he found the mayoral election had been called based on plurality, contrary to the Texas Constitution. He reported the issue to the city attorney. Zech explained that the Texas Constitution is highly complex and that the charter's plurality provision had been in effect since 1995 but had not previously triggered problems.
• Val Acevedo provided a lengthy statement. She acknowledged that she had reviewed the charter in March 2026 at the request of the city secretary, but she did not identify the constitutional conflict because she consulted only the election code, not the Texas Constitution. She stated she was not asked to do a full charter review in 2021 and that her office is understaffed (three attorneys for a city of over 110,000 residents). She expressed regret but maintained that she acted correctly once she learned of the conflict.
• Gail Wilkinson (city secretary) explained that she noticed the 2023 order used "majority" while the charter said "most votes," and in January 2026 she asked Acevedo whether to make the order match the charter. Acevedo said yes. In March, Wilkinson confirmed the definition of plurality with Acevedo.
• Council members questioned Acevedo about why she did not consult outside counsel, why she signed the election ordinance, and why she had not flagged the issue earlier. Acevedo responded that she considered the charter language clear and that she had not been directed to compare it against the constitution.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Frank Onion (former city employee) delivered a strong defense of Acevedo, calling her "the finest most ethical talented lawyer" and criticizing the mayor for scapegoating her. He noted that terminating her would cost taxpayers approximately $100,000 in severance.
• David Warmke (District 5 resident) urged the council to act with honor and wisdom, and warned against "inflammatory provocatory rhetoric."
• Michael Murphy (non‑resident) said mistakes were made and argued that the mayor should concede and that the city manager should resign.
• Angela Allen (mayoral candidate) complained that she had been misled by the city secretary about the voting standard and asserted that Acevedo was being made a scapegoat.
• Stacey Clifford (resident) stated that the Texas Secretary of State's website clearly explains the majority‑plurality issue and called the failure to check it "incompetence."
• Gabriel Castro (District 3 resident) praised Charles Zech, supported charter review, and urged the council to keep perspective.
• Rick Smith (District 6 resident) said he is "embarrassed" by the situation and argued that the city attorney should not bear sole responsibility.

Key Outcomes

• Motion to terminate City Attorney Val Acevedo carried by a vote of 4‑3 (Councilmembers Capizzi, Edwards, Spradley, and Linnartz voting in favor; Councilmembers Ryan, Carter, and Labowski opposed). The termination is effective immediately, subject to contractual obligations.
• The council took no formal action on the charter conflict itself; however, it was acknowledged that a runoff election for mayor would be ordered later.