Mark Hatley - Fate Council Member, Place 5

10/14/2026

🐾 MEET SUGAR! 🐾

Sweet as her name, Sugar is a beautiful 2-year-old Australian Kelpie mix weighing 35 pounds who is searching for her forever family! ❤️

Sugar came to us as a stray and was never reclaimed. Now, she's hoping to find someone who will give her the love and security she deserves!

This affectionate girl forms strong bonds with her people and thrives on companionship, reassurance, and attention. Sugar would do best in a home where someone is around most of the time, as she truly loves being close to her humans and being part of their everyday lives.

If you're looking for a loyal, loving companion who will happily be your little shadow, Sugar might just be your perfect match!

🐶 Adoption Fee: $125
❤️ Spayed and microchipped
💉 Current on annual boosters
🐾 Heartworm negative

Ready to give Sugar the forever home she's been waiting for? Submit your adoption application today! Link is in the bio!

📍 Rockwall Adoption Center
1825 Airport Rd., Rockwall, TX 75087

Please help us share Sugar so her forever family can find her! ❤️

10/14/2026

🐾 MEET ECHO & ELLIS! 🐾❤️

Two sweet sisters looking for a little patience, a lot of love, and a forever home! 🐱💕

Echo and Ellis are adorable 12-week-old short-haired kittens who came to Rockwall Adoption Center after being found outside with their siblings. Unfortunately, their uncertain start to life left them frightened and under-socialized, but these little girls are slowly learning that people aren't so scary after all!

Since arriving in our care, both girls have been making progress! They are becoming more comfortable with gentle handling and are beginning to understand that human interaction can be a positive experience.

While Echo and Ellis are still shy and aren't quite ready to seek out affection on their own, they have so much potential! They just need someone willing to give them the time, patience, and encouragement they deserve.

🏡 What these girls need most:
💕 A patient, understanding family
🐾 A calm environment where they can build confidence
💕 Consistent, gentle handling and positive socialization
🐾 Someone who understands that trust takes time

Not every kitten starts out as a cuddly little lap cat, and that's okay! Sometimes the most rewarding relationships are the ones that take a little extra time to build. ❤️

🐱 Adoption Fee: $75 each
Both girls are spayed, microchipped, and current on their rabies vaccinations and FVRCP boosters!

Echo and Ellis are ready for their fresh starts! They do not have to be adopted together, but both deserve families who will love them for who they are and help them continue to blossom.

📝 Apply to adopt! Link is in our bio!

📍 Rockwall Adoption Center
1825 Airport Rd., Rockwall, TX 75087

❤️ Please share Echo and Ellis! Let's help these sweet sisters find the patient, loving homes they've been waiting for!

10/09/2026

In response to Codi Chinn’s video she has posted.


I will concede a small point in the larger argument: drug-seizure assets were mentioned as the funding source for the purchase. However, Codi you had several opportunities to make a motion to stop the purchase.

So she is choosing to nitpick on a small point of funding, but missing the bigger point which will be explained below.

Several of us had questions, and answers were promised but never delivered to anyone except Mr. Harper by the City Manager.

No purchase date was given, and the camera purchase was never brought up again. It was only when the cameras started showing up on installations, and The showed the new cameras rather than the previously owned cameras being placed on those poles, that questions began to be asked and we started seeking answers.

Virtue signaling by saying, “I warned people a car was coming,” while doing nothing to pull them out of the way of that vehicle, does not make you a hero. If you were as emphatic about your knowledge as you now claim to have been, your failure to act raises serious questions about your judgment.

It makes one wonder whether you were being coached by an outside source regarding the cameras, especially when you did not even follow up on your own, despite what you now describe as very serious concerns.

Did those concerns change?

In fact, you voted in March to put them on the poles alongside the license plate readers. That item was on the consent agenda, and you voted in favor of it, just as we all did.

If you were so opposed to these cameras, why didn’t you or Mr. Harper make a motion at that time to stop the purchase? What you’re leaving out is that we all had questions, and what we’ve learned since then is that these cameras do far more than simply read license plates.

I’ve stated this over and over again. You can focus on the smaller points, but the fact remains that you did not make a motion to stop the purchase. If you believed at the time that these cameras were as problematic as you now claim, you had an opportunity to act on that belief and bring the issue before the Council.

Codi, if you knew then what you now claim you knew, you had an obligation to the citizens of Fate to raise those concerns and push to stop the purchase that night. You didn’t.

Instead, you voted to approve placing them on the poles associated with the license plate readers, on the consent agenda, just as the rest of us did. At that point, we did not know that additional cameras had been purchased or fully understand their capabilities.

And if you recall, one of the existing license plate readers had helped law enforcement catch a fleeing s*x offender. And we were just coming off a success of a public-safety benefit that we had seen firsthand, which is part of why these systems were not viewed in the same light by everyone at the time.

In the previous months, nationwide, additional concerns and examples of misuse have come to light as many now, and many cities now are turning them off or removing them completely.

So let’s not pretend you were clairvoyant or that you were the only one who understood the potential concerns. You did not make a motion to stop the purchase, and you never made a motion to remove those cameras.

The cameras were ultimately turned off by a vote of five members of the current Council. Mayor Greenberg placed the agenda item, made the motion to turn them off, and I seconded it.

Those are the facts. We can debate what we know now, but we should also be honest about the decisions each of us actually made at the time.

Please note the hypocritical vote a former council woman on March 23 on the consent of an agenda to allow these cameras on the city of Fate and it’s multiple user agreement with TXDOT allowing the camera to be put up.
Please note the word New does not appear anywhere. Does they put up install.

Please notice councilman Mark Harper was absent as he was frequently during this period so his vote was not there.

It’s important to tell the entire truth.

Not just picking shoes.
Above I have acknowledged that drug seizure money was mentioned and I missed that on the video.

If there is an error that’s pointed out to me that I’ve made. I do concede those.

10/07/2026

Let’s clear up the misinformation about my position—and the positions of several other Council members—regarding Flock cameras.

The November 10, 2025 meeting involved a discussion of license plate readers. It was not a Council vote approving the purchase of Flock cameras.

At that time, my understanding of the technology was limited. These systems were being described to us as cameras that read license plate letters and numbers. A neighborhood HOA was even considering purchasing similar cameras and seeking advice about them.

Based on that description, the concept sounded straightforward. Yes, I nearly made a motion to approve them. But we were told Council approval was not required because the purchase would use asset-forfeiture funds restricted to law-enforcement purposes.

Several of us asked for additional information. We were told our questions would be answered. My questions were not adequately answered before the purchase proceeded.

The Flock system purchase was dated February 20, 2026.

In March, Council unanimously approved a consent-agenda item involving a Texas Department of Transportation agreement for placing the cameras within state highway rights-of-way, with Councilman Harper absent. That placement agreement was a separate action from approving the purchase itself.

Former Council members Codi Chinn and Mark Harper now emphasize their opposition. Their positions deserve to be judged by the complete meeting record, just as mine does. Asking questions, expressing reservations, approving a placement agreement, and voting to purchase a system are different actions.
Let’s clear up the misinformation about my position—and the positions of several other Council members—regarding Flock cameras.

The November 10, 2025 meeting involved a discussion of license plate readers. It was not a Council vote approving the purchase of Flock cameras.

At that time, my understanding of the technology was limited. These systems were being described to us as cameras that read license plate letters and numbers. A neighborhood HOA was even considering purchasing similar cameras and seeking advice about them.

Based on that description, the concept sounded straightforward. Yes, I nearly made a motion to approve them. But we were told Council approval was not required because the purchase would use asset-forfeiture funds restricted to law-enforcement purposes.

Several of us asked for additional information. We were told our questions would be answered. My questions were not adequately answered before the purchase proceeded.

The purchase was dated February 20, 2026. In March, Council unanimously approved a consent-agenda item involving a Texas Department of Transportation agreement for placing the cameras within state highway rights-of-way, with Councilman Harper absent. That placement agreement was a separate action from approving the purchase itself.

Former Council members Codi Chinn and Mark Harper now emphasize their opposition. Their positions deserve to be judged by the complete meeting record, just as mine does. Asking questions, expressing reservations, approving a placement agreement, and voting to purchase a system are different actions.

I was not notified when the February purchase occurred. When installation became apparent that summer and citizens began raising concerns, I studied the technology more closely. Mayor Andrew Greenberg and Councilman Rick Maneval were also researching it.

What I learned raised serious questions.

Calling these systems “license plate readers” does not fully explain their capabilities. Flock advertises the ability to identify vehicles by make, color, type, and distinguishing features such as bumper stickers and roof racks. My concern is what searchable records of vehicle locations can reveal about the movements of ordinary citizens.

Residents deserve clear answers:

• What information is collected, and how long is it retained?
• Who can access it?
• Which outside agencies can search it?
• Can information be downloaded or retained elsewhere?
• What safeguards prevent misuse?
• Who audits searches, and what happens when someone abuses access?

I have also spoken with attorneys with criminal-defense and prosecution experience, as well as former judge with a pellet court experience, who expressed serious Fourth Amendment concerns about this type of technology. Those concerns deserve careful consideration.

Mayor Greenberg brought the issue back before Council. After public discussion, Council voted 5–1 to discontinue use of the cameras. What councilman Allen Robbins voting to keep them on.

That vote reflected members listening to residents, reviewing additional information, and exercising oversight. In other words doing our job.

Let me make something abundantly clear: no police officer or agency should have to apologize for requesting a tool they believe could help solve crimes. These systems have success stories, and law enforcement deserves the opportunity to explain their benefits.

But elected Council members also have a responsibility to protect citizens’ rights, demand transparency, and weigh those benefits against the potential for misuse.

I am deeply concerned that a surveillance system with these implications was purchased and installed without our unanswered questions being brought back for a full public discussion.

My position developed as I learned more. Being initially receptive to a tool does not obligate me to support its continued use after additional information raises serious concerns.

Calling that political ignores the substance of the issue and the residents who asked us to act.

The meeting recordings, purchasing documents, placement agreement, and recorded votes provide a timeline residents can examine for themselves. I encourage everyone to review the complete record.

Public safety matters. So do privacy, constitutional rights, and accountable government.

Thank you for your attention.
I was not notified when the February purchase occurred to my knowledge no council member was. When installation became apparent that summer and citizens began raising concerns, I studied the technology more closely. Mayor Andrew Greenberg and Councilman Rick Maneval were also researching it.

What I learned raised serious questions.

Calling these systems “license plate readers” does not fully explain their capabilities. Flock advertises the ability to identify vehicles by make, color, type, and distinguishing features such as bumper stickers and roof racks. My concern is what searchable records of vehicle locations can reveal about the movements of ordinary citizens.

Residents deserve clear answers:

• What information is collected, and how long is it retained?
• Who can access it?
• Which outside agencies can search it?
• Can information be downloaded or retained elsewhere?
• What safeguards prevent misuse?
• Who audits searches, and what happens when someone abuses access?

I have also spoken with attorneys with criminal-defense and prosecution experience, as well as former judges, who expressed serious Fourth Amendment concerns about this type of technology. Those concerns deserve careful consideration.

Mayor Greenberg brought the issue back before Council. After public discussion, Council voted 5–1 to discontinue use of the cameras.

That vote reflected members listening to residents, reviewing additional information, and exercising oversight.

Let me make something abundantly clear: no police officer or agency should have to apologize for requesting a tool they believe could help solve crimes. These systems have success stories, and law enforcement deserves the opportunity to explain their benefits.

But elected Council members also have a responsibility to protect citizens’ rights, demand transparency, and weigh those benefits against the potential for misuse.

I am deeply concerned that a surveillance system with these implications was purchased and installed without our unanswered questions being brought back for a full public discussion.

My position developed as I learned more. Being initially receptive to a tool does not obligate me to support its continued use after additional information raises serious concerns.

Calling that political ignores the substance of the issue and the residents who asked us to act.

The meeting recordings, purchasing documents, placement agreement, and recorded votes provide a timeline residents can examine for themselves. I encourage everyone to review the complete record.

Public safety matters. So do privacy, constitutional rights, and accountable government.

Thank you for your attention.

10/05/2026

City council meeting tonight! 6 PM City Hall.

REGULAR
CITY COUNCIL MEETING

OCTOBER 5, 2026
6:00 P.M.

FATE CITY HALL
1900 CD BOREN PARKWAY

NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF FATE WILL HOLD A REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AT 6:00 P.M. ON MONDAY, OCTOBER 5, 2026 AT FATE CITY HALL, 1900 CD BOREN PARKWAY, FATE, TEXAS, FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:

1.
CALL TO ORDER AND CONFIRM A QUORUM
2.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE AMERICAN AND TEXAS FLAGS
3.
PRESENTATIONS
A.
Domestic Violence Awareness Month Proclamation
Documents:
domestic violence awareness month 2026.pdf
B.
National Night Out Proclamation
Documents:
national night out proclamation.pdf
C.
Community Planning Month Proclamation
Documents:
community planning month 2026.pdf
D.
Public Communications Update
4.
PUBLIC COMMENT
This Is An Opportunity For The Public To Address The Governing Body On Any Matter, Except Public Hearings That Are Included On The Agenda. Comments Related To Public Hearings Will Be Heard When The Specific Hearing Begins. Public Comments Are Limited To Three (3) Minutes Per Speaker, Unless Otherwise Required By Law. To Address The Governing Body, Each Speaker Must Complete A Public Comment Form And Present The Completed Form To The City Secretary Prior To The Start Of The Meeting. Each Speaker Shall Approach The Podium And State His/Her Name And Address Before Speaking. Speakers Shall Address The Governing Body With Civility That Is Conducive To Appropriate Public Discussion. Speakers Can Address Only The Governing Body And Not Individual City Officials Or Employees. The Public Cannot Speak From The Gallery But Only From The Podium. Per The Texas Open Meetings Act, The Governing Body Is Not Permitted To Take Action On Or Discuss Any Item Not Listed On The Agenda. The Council May: (1) Make A Statement Of Fact Regarding The Item; (2) Make A Recitation Of Existing Policy Regarding The Item; Or (3) Propose The Item Be Placed On A Future Agenda.
5.
CONSENT AGENDA
All Items Under Consent Agenda Are Considered To Be Routine By The City Council And Will Be Enacted By One Motion. City Staff May Answer Questions From The City Council Regarding Consent Agenda Items. However, If Discussion Is Desired, That Item Will Be Removed From The Consent Agenda And Will Be Considered Separately.

A.
Consider Approval Of Minutes Of The Following Council Meetings:
June 1, 2026 Regular Council Meeting
June 3, 2026 Special Council Meeting
June 15, 2026 Regular Council Meeting
June 22, 2026 Special Council Meeting/Budget Workshop
June 29, 2026 Special Council Meeting
July 6, 2026 Special Meeting/Meet & Greet
Documents:
staff summary_minutes.pdf
B.
(This Is A Resolution Calling For A Public Hearing To Consider Updates To The Roadway Impact Fee) Consider Approval Of Resolution No. R-2026-076- Discuss, Consider, And Take Any Calling For A Public Hearing For The Purposes Of Receiving Comments And To Discuss, Consider, And Take Any Necessary Action On The Updated Land Use Assumptions, Capital Improvements Plan, And Roadway Impact Fees.
Documents:
rif ph resolution_staff summary_20261005.pdf
C.
Consider Approval Of Resolution No. R-2026-077- Authorizing A Contract For Reimbursement Of Cots Incurred By Fate Texas 66, LLC, Associated With Construction Of Public Water Infrastructure To Serve Future Facilities; Authorizing The City Manager To Negotiate Final Terms And Execute An Agreement With Fate Texas 66, LLC To Undertake Additional Work, And To Execute All Documents And To Take All Other Actions Necessary To Finalize, Act Under, And Enforce The Agreement, Subject To Final Review And Approval By The City’s Legal Counsel.
Documents:
combined - police station waterline.pdf
6.
ACTION ITEMS/PUBLIC HEARINGS
A.
(This Is An Application For A Type III Site Plan For An Auto Repair (Minor) Operator Building) Discuss, Consider, And Take Any Necessary Action Regarding Approval Of A Type III Site Plan For A 0.99-Acre Lot Of Land For The Future Development And Construction Of A “Auto Repair (Minor)” Operator. The Applicant Is Kiew Kam. The Reason For This Type III Site Plan Is Due To The Woodcreek Planned Development Requiring Commercial Developments To Have A Type III Site Plan Rather Than A Type I Site Plan. The Proposed Development Is Located West Of The Ben Payne Road And W Holiday Drive (SH 66) Intersection. The Legal Description For Parcel 338633 Is A0120 R IRVINE. Case # SP-26-010.
Staff Presentation
Applicant Presentation
Discuss, Consider, And Take Any Necessary Action Regarding Resolution No. R-2026-078- Approving A Type III Site Plan For A 4,960 Square-Foot Auto Repair (Minor) Commercial Building On Approximately 0.993 Acres Of Land Identified As Rockwall CAD Property ID 338633, City Of Fate, Rockwall County, Texas.
Documents:
sp-26-010_locals auto_staff summary w exhibits_cc_20261005_redacted.pdf
B.
(This Is A Consideration Of Two Annexation Petitions) Discuss, Consider, And Take Any Necessary Action Regarding Two (2) Properties That Are Subject To Non-Annexation Agreements With The City Of Fate. These Agreements, Which Serve As Voluntary Annexation Petitions, Have Expired. The City Has Gone Through All Legal Requirements And Will Consider Annexing These Properties Following A Public Hearing.
Documents:
keim non-development agreement annexations_staff summary w exhibits_20261005.pdf
1.
Conduct A Public Hearing (Continued From 3/23/2026) And Discuss, Consider, And Take Any Necessary Action On Ordinance No. O-2026-075- Annexing Into The Corporate Limits Of The City Of Fate An Approximate 53.81 Acre Tract Of Land Legally Described As Abstract No. 67, J Delgardo Survey, Tract 1, Rockwall County, Texas, As Further Identified In The Rockwall County Appraisal District As Property ID #10635; And The Proposed Annexation Of That Portion Of I-30 Adjacent To Said Territory; Thereby Extending The Boundary Limits, Amending The Official Map, And Providing For Matters Related Thereto.
2.
Conduct A Public Hearing (Continued From 3/23/2026) And Discuss, Consider, And Take Any Necessary Action On Ordinance No. O-2026-076- Annexing Into The Corporate Limits Of The City Of Fate An Approximate 5.871 Acre Tract Of Land Legally Described As Abstract No. 42, James R. Briscoe Survey, Tract 5, Rockwall County, Texas, As Further Identified In The Rockwall County Appraisal District As Property ID #10387; And The Proposed Annexation Of That Portion Of I-30 Adjacent To Said Territory; Thereby Extending The Boundary Limits, Amending The Official Map, And Providing For Matters Related Thereto.
C.
Discuss, Consider, And Take Any Necessary Action Regarding The Use Of Flock Camera Systems.
Documents:
discussion of flock cameras_staff summary.pdf
D.
Discussion Regarding The City Of Fate's Special Use Permit (SUP) Process For Data Centers.
Documents:
discussion of data centers_staff summary_v2.pdf
E.
Discussion, Consider, And Propose Future Action Regarding City Policies For Council Approval Of Purchasing Contracts, Vendor Agreements, And Related Procurement Policies.
Documents:
staff_summary_council_manager_purchasing_v2.pdf
7.
MAYOR, COUNCIL, AND CITY MANAGER REPORTS
Regarding Items Of Community Interest – Pursuant To Texas Government Code Section 551.0415 The Mayor, Council And City Manager May Report On The Following Items: (1) Expression Of Thanks, Congratulations Or Condolences; (2) Information About Holiday Schedules; (3) Recognition Of Individuals; (4) Reminders About Upcoming City Council Events; (5) Information About Community Events; (6) Announcements Involving Imminent Threat To Public Health And Safety.

A.
Mayor's Report
B.
Council Reports
C.
City Manager's Report
8.
EXECUTIVE SESSION: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, SECTION 551.001, ET SEQ., THE CITY COUNCIL WILL RECESS INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION (CLOSED MEETING) TO DISCUSS THE FOLLOWING:
A.
In Accordance With Texas Government Code, Section 551.071, Consultation With Attorney On A Matter In Which The Duty Of The Attorney To The Governmental Body Under The Texas Disciplinary Rules Of Professional Conduct Of The State Bar Of Texas Clearly Conflicts With The Texas Open Meetings Act Regarding:
1.
Receive Briefing From Interim City Attorney Regarding Current City Financial And Purchasing Policy Systems Relating To Council Approval Requirements.
2.
Legal Consultation Regarding November 2026 Election Matters (Continuity Of Operations After Canvass, Election Orders)
B.
In Accordance With Texas Government Code, Section 551.087, To Discuss Or Deliberate Regarding Commercial Or Financial Information That The City Has Received From A Business Prospect That The City Seeks To Have Locate, Stay, Or Expand In Or Near The Territory Of The City Of Fate And With Which The City Is Conducting Economic Development Negotiations; And To Deliberate The Offer Of A Financial Or Other Incentive To The Business Prospect:
1.
Fate Station Park Leases
9.
RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION: IN ACCORDANCE WITH TEXAS GOVERNMENT CODE, CHAPTER 551, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL RECONVENE INTO REGULAR SESSION TO CONSIDER ACTION, IF ANY, ON MATTERS DISCUSSED IN EXECUTIVE SESSION
10.
ADJOURNMENT

Save the date for the upcoming City Council Meeting on Monday, October 5th. The meeting will begin at 6pm and be held at Fate City Hall (1900 CD Boren Pkwy).

To view the agenda, visit:
https://www.fatetx.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_10052026-1533?html=true
To watch the meeting live, visit: FateTx.gov/Live
To submit a Council Comment Card, visit:
https://fatetx-city-secretary-city-secretary.app.transform.civicplus.com/forms/55801

10/05/2026

09/25/2026

Proof she hides her “facts“ because she has me blocked along with other people.

She’s into monologue, not dialogue. She’s into hiding her facts so that they can’t be fat checked but yet as you recall, she claims in her own page that she is for 100% free speech and nobody will be blocked..

This is clear proof of former council woman Chinn’s credibility. Or should I say the lack of it.

09/25/2026

I would like to point something out it’s probably gonna be the last point I make on this because she’s actually beyond looking ridiculous and she’s losing quite a bit of her keyboard. Courage credibility that she tried to claim
But the fact that she posts she post on her hot topic page where I am many people are blocked from seeing to scrutinize her facts to actually fact check them yet everything that I have written, everyone can see because no one is blocked from my page not one single person.

Proof is when I click the link you see that the page is not found that means she has blocked me from even seeing the page let alone posting.

Is that something that an advocate for free speech as she claims she is is for? Hiding her speech in her facts from the detractors?

 Keyboard, courage, and hiding behind blocked pages it’s not the behavior of someone who is confident in their arguments and their facts.

And I know many dozens of people who are also blocked from that page and have been blocked from even commenting on the page when they were allowed on there.

This is sound like The actions of someone who is not afraid of good dialogue and debate?

Sounds quite the opposite to me.