Charter results: the council will hire its own lawyer, petition elections move to even-year Novembers, and the weekly-meeting rule stays

Beyond Prop I, Austin voters decided seven other changes to the city charter on Tuesday. Five passed and two failed, according to unofficial results. The changes that passed will let the council hire and fire the city attorney and will move future citizen-petition elections to November of even-numbered years. Voters kept the charter rule that the council meet every week.

The council has to canvass the results before they are official.

The results

These are Community Impact's figures as of its 7:58 a.m. update Wednesday, which included Election Day ballots. KUT, updated at 8:47 a.m., reported the same outcomes.

| Prop | What it does | Result | |---|---|---| | C | Clarifies the independence of the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission and changes how members are chosen and vacancies filled | Passed, 68% for | | D | Removes the rule that the council meet at least once a week | Failed, 64% against | | E | Drops the requirement that the council set its rules and order of business by ordinance | Failed, 72% against | | F | Clarifies "election" and moves the yearly update of campaign contribution and spending limits to Jan. 1 | Passed, 74% for | | G | Holds citizen-initiated elections only on November dates in even-numbered years | Passed, 64% for | | H | Lets the council, not the city manager, appoint and remove the city attorney | Passed, 65% for | | I | Independent efficiency audit | Failed, 55% against | | J | Allows non-substantive fixes, such as typos and language superseded by state law | Passed, 72% for |

Descriptions follow the ballot and KUT's pre-election summaries. Our Prop I story covers that measure.

What our records show

Most of these were years in the making. In May, Council Member Ryan Alter told the Audit and Finance Committee that the council formed a charter review commission in 2023 and that its recommendations were meant for a 2024 election that was not held because of a posting rule. In July, an assistant city attorney told the committee that the petition-timing change and the city attorney change both came from that commission. The rest were mostly staff proposals the council had approved in 2024.

The council voted on each one, and dropped several. On July 30 the council took up 14 possible amendments one at a time. Our transcript shows the results:

• Weekly meetings (Prop D): approved for the ballot 6-4. Mayor Kirk Watson noted the council already does not meet every week, and said a no vote was a vote against what the council does in practice. Council Member Mike Siegel said the city has a workaround and questioned making voters wait longer to finish the ballot. Voters sided with keeping the rule.
• Rules by ordinance (Prop E): approved for the ballot 7-3. Voters rejected it by the widest margin of the night.
• Campaign finance date (Prop F): approved 7-3.
• Petition elections (Prop G): approved 8-2, with one abstention. City lawyers told the council the rule covers both ordinance and charter petitions.
• City attorney (Prop H): approved 8-2, with Mayor Watson among the no votes and Siegel abstaining. A similar measure failed 51% to 49% in 2012, KUT reported before the election.
• Typos and moot language (Prop J): approved, with two members shown voting no.

Several others did not make the ballot. A proposal to raise the recall petition threshold from 10% to 15% of qualified voters failed 4-7 after an amendment to keep it at 10%. An amendment on accounting standards failed 1-10. Prop I, as a certified petition, was placed on the ballot without objection.

Siegel said that day he was concerned about how many amendments would be on the ballot and how long voting would take, and planned to vote no on most of them.

What changes, and when

• The city attorney. Under Prop H, the council will appoint and remove the city attorney, a role the city manager now fills. We found no announced timeline for the change. Deborah Thomas is the current city attorney, according to the council's meeting roll calls.
• Petition elections. Under Prop G, any future citizen-initiated ordinance or charter election waits for the next November in an even-numbered year. Prop I itself was on such a date.
• Campaign finance limits. Under Prop F, the yearly adjustment to contribution and spending limits happens by Jan. 1 rather than with the budget.
• Redistricting. Prop C changes how members of the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission are chosen and vacancies are filled. On July 30 the council also adopted an amendment to the measure without objection.

None of this is final until the council canvasses the results, likely in mid-November, based on last year's timing.