Charter Committee President Disputes Hicks’ Voting Claim

By Greg Ritchie

Messenger Reporter

CROCKETT — Jim Turner, president of Crockett’s charter committee, says every proposal the committee forwarded to city council received unanimous approval, directly disputing Councilwoman NaTrenia Hicks’ statement that some had not.

Turner said in an interview with The Messenger Thursday, Oct. 8, “Every provision that we presented to the council was approved unanimously by all of the charter commission members.”

Turner’s comments follow a disagreement during the Monday, Oct. 5, council meeting, when Hicks questioned the committee’s votes and said she had not received charter documents and supporting records she had requested. She also cited her earlier service on the charter commission.

City Administrator John Angerstein confirmed that Hicks had been a commission member, but disputed her account of the votes and said he had shown her the original charter and amendment-election records during visits to his office.

The council ultimately approved moving forward with 22 proposed charter amendments in a 3-2 vote. Dennis Ivey and Hudson Duren voted in favor, while Hicks and Roy Simon voted against. Christopher Price was absent, leaving Mayor Ianthia Fisher to break the tie in favor of proceeding.

The action allows preparation of ballot language and an election ordinance for council’s later consideration. Adoption of the amendments would require voter approval.

During the meeting, Hicks said the commission had agreed to send council only recommendations supported by every member.

“We voted that we would bring no amendment or no proposed amendments back to the council unless they were unanimously voted upon by all members,” Hicks said.

She said several commission members had told her some proposals did not meet that standard.

“I was advised by several of the members of that commission that some of those proposed amendments were not unanimously voted upon,” Hicks said.

Angerstein challenged that statement during the meeting, saying the proposal that failed to receive unanimous support had been excluded.

“All the propositions that were brought to council were voted on unanimously,” Angerstein said. “The only one that was not voted on unanimously was not included in our discussions and workshop.”

After the meeting, The Messenger asked Angerstein for the original charter, records of the current committee’s votes and confirmation of Hicks’ previous membership.

In his written response, Angerstein again said all 22 propositions forwarded to council had received unanimous commission approval.

“After many meetings of input and review, all 22 propositions that were presented to council had been approved unanimously by the Charter Commission,” Angerstein wrote.

The committee’s recommendations were subsequently reviewed and revised during council workshops before Monday’s vote.

Angerstein also supplied background on Hicks’ involvement.

“Councilwoman Hicks was appointed in 2023 to the initial charter commission and served until she was elected as councilmember,” Angerstein wrote.

Sources told The Messenger that Hicks continued attending and speaking at committee meetings even after she was elected to council.

The dispute over access to the charter involves a different question: what Hicks requested and what the city provided.

At the council meeting, Hicks said she had sought the original charter, other documents from the committee chairman and records identifying dates when earlier amendment elections occurred.

“None of the information that I’ve asked for has been provided to me,” Hicks said.

She said she had been told she would receive the information and could not support the amendments without supporting documents.

Angerstein described in-person visits during which he said Hicks had examined the same historical records supplied to The Messenger.

“She has personally come to my office and requested to see the charter and records of elections to amend the charter and I have shown her the same documents I just sent to you,” Angerstein wrote.

He said the disagreement also involved whether those records established that previous amendment elections had occurred.

“She contends that is not proof of an election and does not believe that elections took place,” Angerstein wrote. “I have told her multiple times that I don’t know how else to prove that an election took place other than council minutes and election register documents.”

In her meeting remarks, Hicks said she had not seen the election information she sought.

The Messenger obtained a copy of the original charter following an email request. Angerstein said producing that copy required carefully scanning the fragile original, which had previously been available for in-person viewing.

“The original charter is typed on very thin, onionskin-type paper from 1964 and has only been available for in-person viewing,” Angerstein wrote. “I took the time to carefully unbind and scan them so that we now have a digital copy.”

His account describes showing Hicks documents in his office, while her statement concerns information she says she requested and never received. Correspondence documenting those requests and any responses has not been provided to The Messenger.

The charter proposals address city management, council investigations, qualifications for office, firearms authority and a range of financial and election procedures. Many expressly seek consistency with state law.

Greg Ritchie can be reached at [email protected]