Posted 10:20 p.m.
Austin voters appear to have approved most of the eight city charter amendments on the Nov. 3 election ballot, while rejecting several including a proposed requirement for a city financial assessment program.
The big picture
The charter serves as a local government constitution and rulebook, and can only be amended through citywide elections that are limited to every two years.
Seven of the eight charter amendments stem from city processes and would adjust City Council powers and procedures; local election rules; and the work of the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission, or ICRC, that redraws council districts every decade. The proposals landed on the ballot after consideration by both city officials and another resident-led commission tasked with reviewing the charter.
One of this fall's amendments, Proposition I, resulted from a petition campaign by the political action committee Save Austin Now to create a permanent requirement for a third-party "Affordability and Efficiency Initiative." That proposal is separate from the wide-ranging comprehensive efficiency assessment program already enacted by elected officials this year that's now underway, with which it has some key differences.
This story will be updated as Election Day results are released, and all results are unofficial until canvassed. Based on early voting tallies only, the eight charter amendments are headed for a mix of passage and failure:
Proposition C, clarifying the ICRC's independence, has nearly 70% of the vote for
Proposition D, removing a requirement to hold weekly City Council meetings, has almost 64% of the vote against
Proposition E, removing a requirement for City Council to set its rules via ordinance, has more than 72% of the vote against
Proposition F, moving the date that annual campaign finance limits are set to Jan. 1, has 75% of the vote for
Proposition G, limiting resident-initiated petition elections to Novembers of even-numbered years rather than the next available election date, has 63% of the vote for
Proposition H, granting City Council—instead of the city manager—the power to hire and remove Austin's city attorney, has more than 66% of the vote for
Proposition I, the recurring Independent Affordability and Efficiency Initiative mandate, has 58% of the vote against
Proposition J, making "non-substantive" edits to the charter and updating provisions that are out of date or legally out of line, has more than 72% of the vote for
The context
Proposition I drew the most attention of the slate of charter measures on the November ballot, generating hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign activity by Save Austin Now in support and several other groups opposed to the concept. It follows 2018's Proposition K, a similar resident-initiated ballot proposition for a third-party city efficiency study that voters rejected by a more than 15% margin.
Save Austin Now campaigned for the charter provision this year as City Council members adopted another third-party auditing process. That "Comprehensive Efficiency Assessment Program" was added into city code in February and requires independent financial reviews on an ongoing basis into the future.
After a public solicitation, officials authorized a multi-year $5.23 million contract for the existing assessment program this summer. It's currently moving forward under vendor Public Works LLC with oversight from the Austin City Auditor's Office, and funded through that office's budget.
If approved, Proposition I could be costlier—the city estimated that efficiency initiative could cost $9.4 million in just one year. It'd also have to be paid for through city budget cuts, to be determined by the audit contractor, that exceed its project costs.
