Bandera’s City Council heard from two frustrated citizens at its regular meeting on Jan. 28 regarding the Cowboy Christmas resolution and its funding.
Although the issue was not on the meeting’s agenda—which covered affirming Bandera as the Cowboy Capital of Texas, appointing a city marshal, adjusting employee compensation, and protesting increased rates from Atmos Energy—funding the $60,000 Christmas event became a heated topic for some residents.
“I am here as a disturbed citizen,” Bandera local and former councilmember Darcy Hasty said during the public forum. “It seems there are at least three of you that are missing the point of what is upsetting most of the city’s taxpayers. You didn’t bring this [Cowboy Christmas funding] before the citizens.”
The Cowboy Christmas resolution was introduced to the council as early as Oct. 22, 2023, when discussions were held regarding the source of funds if the EDC did not reimburse the city for the $60,000 expense— approximately $32,000 for a 26-foot Christmas tree in the park and $26,000 for a 50-foot drive-through tunnel of lights.
At the time, councilmembers acknowledged “rumblings” among residents about the cost.
City Treasurer Allyson Wright stated that if the EDC did not fund the event, money would have to come from the city’s general fund and possibly the utilities budget.
Although the resolution passed through the EDC—despite one member being absent and another voting against it—the process required two additional readings before final approval.
If 10% or more citizens protested the resolution, it could be overturned.
Despite concerns, councilmembers Lynn Palmer and Brett Hicks noted that local businesses were willing to donate toward the event, with Hicks confirming that some monetary donations had already been received at the time of discussion.
“Yes, this is a big expense up front,” Hicks said at the Oct. 22 meeting, “but that would not be an ongoing charge.”
The motion ultimately passed unanimously, to the frustration of Bandera resident Tammy Morrow.
“They knew there was a possibility that they weren’t going to get the funding from the EDC, but they passed it anyway,” Morrow said. “They were more concerned about who signed the petition.”
A petition, which Hasty says was initiated by the Bandera County Conservative Coalition PAC in January, was signed by approximately 100 residents in an effort to prevent the EDC from granting the $60,000 in funding.
Hicks explained that the city’s involvement was necessary because, in previous years, local businesses were responsible for holiday decorations, which were not always displayed due to time or financial constraints.
By handling the project directly, he said, the city could ensure that the lights and tree were installed annually.
However, some residents had concerns beyond the financial aspect.
“Two council members [Debbie Breen and Lynn Palmer] sit on both the council and the Economic Development Corporation,” Hasty said. “There’s a serious conflict of interest there; the EDC is forced to do the council’s bidding.”
Additionally, some questioned whether the event justified the expense.
“This past Country Christmas in the Park event [2024], we had around 500 people attend,” Hicks said. “My goal was to create a family- friendly event in a town that often has events for adults only, at local bars. I know there was frustration about the funding, but the council made the best decision at that time to meet a deadline. In the end, we were able to reach our financial goal with donations from about 25 local businesses.”
Hicks also addressed claims that he had contacted individuals who signed the petition.
“I had not heard a lot of negative feedback about the event,” Hicks said. “When I heard about the petition, I wanted to do my due diligence and hear from everyone and see if there were any misunderstandings— and I found that some people had been misinformed. A few people told me that they felt forced to sign the petition, while others were under the assumption that we were purchasing a real Christmas tree that would die at the end of the year, leading to another purchase the following year.”
Hasty and Morrow clarified that most of the opposition was not against the event itself but rather the “lack of transparency” surrounding its funding.
