GRANBURY — Months of political and legal conflict over an effort to recall Granbury’s mayor and four City Council members reached the council chamber Monday night.
Residents confronted elected officials over Project Patriot, transparency, public trust and the recall effort itself.
Then the targeted officials got their turn to answer.
Mayor Jim Jarratt was unequivocal:
“I intend to serve my entire term. I will not resign.”
Councilman Gary “Skip” Overdier followed with the same conclusion:
“I will not resign.”
The September 28th, 2026AD special meeting concerned recall petitions against Jarratt, Mayor Pro Tem Bruce Wadley and council members Overdier, Zeb Ullom and Greg Corrigan.
Wadley was absent on what Jarratt described as an excused, previously scheduled family trip.
But before the council members responded, Granbury residents took the microphone — and the room revealed just how complicated the recall fight has become.
PUBLIC TRUST TAKES CENTER STAGE
Andy Wolford argued that city leaders had placed too much emphasis on securing Project Patriot and asked council members to consider whether the controversy itself was damaging Granbury economically.
“What is the most important economic component for development for Granbury?” Wolford asked.
“The answer is its citizens.”
Rachel Jacobson delivered one of the strongest arguments for the recall, accusing city leadership of losing the community’s trust and calling on the targeted officials to resign.
“Resign, stand down, and let the voters of Granbury decide the future of this city,” Jacobson said.
Jacob Herbold also focused on transparency and trust, while Craig Jackson — who said he lives in Granbury’s ETJ — spoke about the long-term consequences of the city’s development decisions for families and children.
Dave Eagle offered a different view, defending portions of Jarratt’s record and raising questions about what would happen to the council if multiple officials were ultimately removed.
Then came testimony that shifted attention from the allegations against City Hall to the recall petitions themselves.
“I SIGNED ONE PETITION”
Sally Walther told the council she believed she had signed a petition seeking more information about data centers.
She said she did not knowingly sign petitions seeking to recall five elected officials.
“I signed one petition,” Walther said.
“I did not sign five petitions.”
Walther said she would not have knowingly signed a recall petition and subsequently learned her signature appeared on what she believed were five petitions.
Her account establishes only what she says happened with her own signature. It does not establish how other signatures were collected.
But her testimony became significant when several council members later raised similar questions about the petition process.
JARRATT CHALLENGES THE RECALL
Jarratt defended citizens’ right to petition their government — but challenged both the allegations against him and aspects of the way the petitions were handled.
He disputed accusations that he violated the Texas Open Meetings Act and said the petition failed to identify a specific incident he could answer.
Jarratt also questioned what he described as identical signature pages appearing among multiple recall petitions and raised concerns about whether some residents understood what they were signing.
Then came his answer to the question hanging over the meeting:
“I will not resign.”
OVERDIER: LET A COURT DECIDE
Overdier likewise rejected the allegations against him, including an accusation that he violated the Texas Open Meetings Act.
But he also made an important distinction.
Overdier said the City Council itself does not have the authority to determine whether his recall petition is legally valid.
“Only a court of law can make that determination,” he said.
Overdier also said he would not resign.
ULLOM ANSWERS ALLEGATIONS ONE BY ONE
Councilman Zeb Ullom delivered the evening’s most extensive defense.
He challenged allegations involving the Texas Open Meetings Act, Knox Ranch rezoning, contract zoning, public notice requirements and claims that private development interests had been placed ahead of public health and welfare.
Ullom argued repeatedly that the allegations lacked enough specificity or evidence for him to defend himself against a particular act of wrongdoing.
He also disputed the characterization of the Knox Ranch zoning action, arguing that it increased the city’s ability to regulate potential future development rather than simply authorizing construction of a data center or power plant.
Those were Ullom’s arguments in his defense. Monday’s hearing did not independently decide those legal and land-use questions.
CORRIGAN: SERVING UNTIL NOVEMBER
Councilman Greg Corrigan said he had initially intended to resign when the recall effort began.
But Corrigan’s current council term expires in November, and he said he intends to continue doing the job until his service ends.
Corrigan also said some residents whose names appeared on the petitions told him they understood what they had signed, while others told him they thought they were supporting greater transparency or information about data centers.
He stopped short of accusing anyone of misconduct without direct evidence.
Corrigan rejected the allegations against him and argued that disagreement with an elected official’s decisions is not, by itself, evidence of malfeasance or misfeasance.
THE FIGHT HAS CHANGED
Project Patriot may have helped ignite this political fight.
But Monday night showed that Granbury’s recall controversy is now about much more.
Recall supporters say the issue is accountability, transparency and lost public trust.
The targeted officials deny wrongdoing and are now challenging significant aspects of the recall effort itself.
The city previously declined to certify the petitions following review by the City Secretary and City Attorney. Recall organizers challenged the city’s handling of the petitions, and the dispute moved into the courts before reaching Monday night’s public hearings.
The hearings did not determine whether the allegations against the officials are true.
They also did not settle the competing claims over the validity of the petitions.
But Granbury finally heard directly from most of the officials whose removal is being sought.
Jarratt: Not resigning.
Overdier: Not resigning.
Ullom: Allegations rejected.
Corrigan: Continuing through the end of his term.
Wadley: Absent with an excused absence.
After the responses were complete, Jarratt asked whether the council had any additional business.
There was none.
The mayor closed the hearings and adjourned the special meeting.
No resignations.
No resolution.
And a recall fight that began largely around Project Patriot now centers on an even larger question:
What happens next?
The Hood County Express will continue following the recall proceedings, any further court action, City Council developments and the possibility of a recall election.
Follow Hood County Express for continuing coverage as this story develops.
