City Administrator Stan told the City of Bandera City Council that a series of written reprimands, a July 2024 performance-improvement plan (PIP) and a December 23, 2024 final assessment show “a pattern … of insubordination” by Nancy, the City Marshal, and recommended “immediate removal from office due to lack of confidence.”

Why it matters: The council met in public to hear the personnel matter at Nancy’s request after the agenda listed a closed-session deliberation under Texas Government Code §551.074 on personnel. Stan’s presentation summarized complaints from multiple deputies, disciplinary letters, a PIP that began July 8, 2024 and was extended to November 22, 2024, and a final evaluation dated December 23, 2024 that concluded the PIP goals were not met.

Stan, the city administrator, described written documentation he said was collected between January and November 2024 and recounted deputies’ concerns about morale, a recently adopted records/vehicle software (Civic Eye), alleged politically charged conduct, and failures to respond to supervisors. He told the council that deputies reported low morale and that some were considering leaving. Stan read from personnel letters and disciplinary documentation and said the cumulative record led him to recommend removal. He said, “The following action is recommended. Immediate removal from office due to lack of confidence.”

Nancy, the marshal, addressed the council in public and disputed aspects of the investigation and the process used to compile complaints. She said she had not been given copies of signed, written complaints and asserted that, under the Texas Government Code provisions she cited, she had not been served with required complaint documentation. She told the council she moved to Bandera in 2019, described a 26-year unblemished career with the Honolulu Police Department and said, “I am committed to Bandera.” She said some materials referenced in the evaluation were not shared with her at the time the allegations were gathered and questioned the accuracy of memory-based reports taken months after alleged events.

Council members and other speakers pressed both procedural and operational points. Council members said they had previously discussed respect and insubordination with Nancy during earlier reviews and acknowledged accolades for some operational accomplishments, but several council members described recurring problems with communication, responsiveness to supervisory requests and department morale. One council member summarized an anonymous internal survey of five deputies, saying that 80% reported morale below average and 60% rated interactions with the marshal as difficult; another council member said informal outreach to deputies produced different responses and questioned the survey’s validity.

Council members raised examples cited in Stan’s packet: failures to complete evaluations that delayed approved merit raises for hourly personnel, disputes over software choice and training, alleged unscheduled leave without notifying supervisors, refusal to respond to council emails within requested timeframes, and an episode where shelving and court files in a records area were moved during building reorganization; council members said some of those actions had not been approved by the council. Nancy countered that some purchases or repairs were done with recycled materials, that deputies knew her whereabouts when she took leave, and that the nature of law enforcement sometimes requires off-site work or confidential activity.

Evidence and process questions were a central part of the public exchange. Nancy cited Texas Government Code chapter provisions she said govern complaints against peace officers and said she had not been served any signed written complaint; Stan and staff described multiple written reprimands and a PIP with dates and assigned training. The written materials Stan described included: a memorandum dated June 6, 2024; a July 2024 annual performance review and PIP dated July 8, 2024; follow-up checkpoints and an extension dated October 29, 2024 (signed October 27); a written reprimand dated November 27, 2024; and a final PIP assessment dated December 23, 2024.

Public input and support: Council staff said the meeting packet included several emailed letters supporting Nancy; the clerk listed senders including Mark Griffin, Roy Dugash, Donna Vaughn, Susan Junker, Melissa Downey, Cindy Beckham, Laura Thorsal, Kimberly Christiansen and Jane Dan Griffith. Several council members noted that some local business owners had also expressed support for Nancy.

Next steps: The council announced it would return to executive session to receive legal advice before taking further public action. No formal motion or vote on removal was recorded in public during the meeting.

Ending: The personnel matter will continue in executive session; the council has not yet taken a public vote or adopted a final personnel action. The record presented in public includes Stan’s recommendation for immediate removal and Nancy’s public rebuttal and requests for procedural clarity.