Updated: 6 of 9 Fort Worth's charter propositions pass

What’s happening?

The results from Tarrant, Denton, Wise and Parker counties show:

Proposition G: 12,637 yes, or 55.29%; 10,246 no, or 44.71%

Proposition H: 10,794 yes, or 48.74%; 11,413 no, or 51.26%

Proposition I: 13,103 yes, or 56.68%; 9,227 no, or 41.32%

Proposition J: 12,535 yes, or 55.75%; 9,948 no, or 44.25%

Proposition K: 10,130 yes, or 44.87%; 12,448 no, or 55.13%

Proposition L: 10,992 yes, or 49.29%; 11,309 no, or 50.71%

Proposition M: 9,494 yes, or 42.28%; 12,897 no, or 57.72%

Proposition N: 15,430 yes, or 69.17%; 6,876 no, or 30.83%

Proposition O: 16,841 yes, or 76.47%; 5,181 no, or 23.53%

Posted 9:33 p.m.

Unofficial results show voters are in favor of changing portions of the city of Fort Worth.

According to the unofficial voting totals released so far from the four county elections office websites, seven of the nine propositions are showing as passing after early voting.

The details

The charter propositions are conforming changes to align with state law, either election law or election-code related. Other propositions are to clarify the duties of the city manager’s office, according to the previous reporting.

Each bond proposition is individual, so if one does not pass, the city can not implement the proposed changes.

• Proposition G—pay raises for the city council and mayor
• Proposition H—align the city charter with being an at-will employer
• Proposition I—removes the hearing in front of the city council for appeal of a termination of council-appointed positions
• Proposition J—adopt the city budget at the same meeting where the budget hearing is held
• Proposition K—removes the requirement of public utilities to submit annual reports to the city, since the utility company's websites
• Proposition L—grant of privilege for use of city streets could be approved by the city manager without an ordinance from the council for trash service companies
• Proposition M—eliminates the requirement for ordinances to be adopted by the council for the reorganization of city departments by the city manager
• Proposition N—eliminates the conflict with state law regarding the timelines of special elections to fill vacancies
• Proposition O—detailed documentation must support payment of a claim, regardless of whether that documentation is considered a purchase order

The results show:

• Proposition G: 7,464 yes, or 54.44%; 6,247 no, or 45.56%
• Proposition H: 6,759 yes, or 50.78%; 6,551 no, or 49.22%
• Proposition I: 8,139 yes, or 60.83%; 5,240 no, or 39.17%
• Proposition J: 7,825 yes, or 58.2%; 5,620 no, or 41.8%
• Proposition K: 6,375 yes, or 47.19%; 7,135 no, or 52.81%
• Proposition L: 6,741 yes, or 50.45%; 6,621 no, or 49.55%
• Proposition M: 5,966 yes, or 44.57%; 7,421 no, or 55.43%
• Proposition N: 9,538 yes, or 71.23%; 3,852 no, or 28.77%
• Proposition O: 10,190 yes, or 77.27%; 2,997 no, or 22.73%

Community Impact will update this article as more election day vote totals are released. All results are unofficial until canvassed.