Pilot Point sues, settles with resident who tried to recall city council member
PILOT POINT – The city of Pilot Point settled out of court this week with a resident it had named as a defendant in a lawsuit after she started a recall effort to remove a city council member from office.
The city, which had argued in its petition that a special election cost of up to $40,000 would come at taxpayer expense, will now pay up to $14,000 in legal fees for the woman it sued.
The issue has been divisive in the small city near Lake Ray Roberts in Denton County, with the impact spilling over into other venues, including the school district.
City council members explained that while they denied the recall and didn't believe it was valid, they also thought the city charter prevented them from making the decision and that a judge needed to weigh in. They didn't understand, they said, the move would result in a lawsuit against a citizen.
Kelley Burgess, who as part of the settlement with the city agreed to abandon her recall effort, does not believe the action was unintentional.
"It did feel like they were coming after me," she said. "It was an act of intimidation."
Council member Elizabeth Jones first caught Burgess's attention during city council meetings in April.
She started going to meetings with concerns about the police force but found Jones' remarks and disposition in the meeting "ridiculous and offensive," according to the recall petition.
After asking for public records showing any connections between the city and an event venue Jones owns, Lizzy Gator, she turned up receipts for use of the property.
Alleging conflict of interest and misconduct, Burgess had help from others collecting signatures in support of a special election to recall Jones. In May, the city secretary verified 105 signatures, presenting them to the council as enough to trigger a recall.
Jones did not reply to a request for comment and has abstained from voting on the issue when it has come up at city meetings.
The other council members, however, didn't order an election. Over the next month, the petition was scrutinized.
It didn't state the grounds for recall on every signature page. It wasn't specific. Pages had different wear and tear. More than one person collected signatures, but only Burgess had sworn to their accuracy, and before the dates of some signees.
"That doesn't smell right to me," council member Ray Dane said.
Mayor Elisa Beasley thought if the signatures were there, they needed to just send it to voters.
"I believe in the citizen's rights," she said. "There was a recall petition put forth. They got the signatures. Put it through. Let the citizens decide."
In late June, though, the council voted to deny the recall.
At that point, the city didn't need to do anything, Burgess' attorney Timothy Davis argued in a plea in her defense.
After the vote, "nothing is prompting the city to hold the recall election," he wrote. Any fear of incurring costs for an election then would be "hypothetical, intangible, in no way imminent—not to mention totally dependent on the city's own actions."
Council members, though, were focused on a paragraph in their charter that said if they failed to call an election, a district judge could do it.
Dane said he thought the petition couldn't be ignored.
More than a month after denying the recall, the council acted again, laying out their reasoning for denial in a three-page resolution and hiring an outside law firm.
Dane and Beasley said they understood the issue would be put in front of a judge. Neither, however, believed the council understood that Burgess would be named as a defendant in the matter.
City Attorney Brenda McDonald explained that timing factored into the decision to pursue the case in the manner the city did.
The state deadline to put a special election onto the November ballot is Aug. 19. By asking for an injunction, they were able to get onto a judge's docket within 14 days. Although, the city's suit was making the case an injunction should be issued "preventing a recall election."
Another request, that "reasonable and necessary attorney's fees" be awarded to the city, was also a surprise to both Dane and Beasley.
It was later explained to them as a standard, boilerplate language, necessary if the legal fight went longer.
"Standard pleading practice, bumped up against a highly politically charged community," McDonald said when asked about the item.
After months of debate, public comment sessions, and social media posts about what was going on, the friction in the community started to spread outside of city hall.
Amy McEvoy says she was one of the residents of Pilot Point who had not signed the recall petition but was vocal about the right of voters to pursue it.
McEvoy, a board member for Pilot Point ISD, said she didn't stand at the podium in that capacity at city council meetings, nor did she represent the board when posting on her private social media platforms.
When the agenda for the school board's Aug. 14 meeting came out, McEvoy said no one warned her she would be the subject of one of the items of business for the night. The board planned to deliberate and evaluate her, first in the executive session, then possibly take action in the open session.
The previous week, McEvoy said, a city code officer issued her two warnings for violations at her two-year-old home. One warning was for a gate leaning against the house, which she said was waiting to be installed by a work crew.
"Absolutely retaliatory," she said. "It would make me think twice about whether I would want to deliver my opinion to the council anymore."
During public comment at the meeting Wednesday, people referenced McEvoy as a bully, and an agitator, and called on her to resign. After the meeting, McEvoy asked CBS News Texas if it would consider leaving her interview about what had happened out of the reporting.
While Burgess is now free of the lawsuit, the settlement, she said, makes her sad. It will cost the city money, which means it will cost taxpayers.
A middle school teacher, just starting a new year, she agreed to give up the recall to focus on her work.
Beasley said that agreement made her sad, but she voted for the settlement with the rest of the council.
"I wasn't going to be a dissenting vote over what everyone had agreed to," Beasley said. "And this is a sad thing for our community, and we need to move forward."