Charter Review Commission sends its recommendations to Council

The Charter Review Commission has wrapped up its evaluation of possible charter revisions relating to petition requirements, among other items, and has submitted its final report to City Council with nine recommendations. Council will ultimately decide which items will be placed on the November ballot.

In its 2023 resolution creating the commission, one of Council’s key directions was to decide on changes to petition requirements for initiative and referendum or city charter amendments and to explore a “durable signature threshold” using a percentage of the total number of registered voters in the city. The existing requirement is 20,000 signatures of eligible voters.

The commission was most sharply divided on the threshold issue, but ultimately landed on a 3.5 percent signature threshold for petitions. The motion initially failed on a 5-5 vote, but narrowly passed 6-5 when the motion was reconsidered at a later meeting with all members present. The five dissenting commissioners in both instances were Michael Cowles, Cynthia Van Maanen, Brian McGiverin, Betsy Greenberg and Randy Ortega.

As the commission noted in its report, the proposed 3.5 percent threshold may have little impact in the next couple of election cycles, but will have greater consequence over time for initiative and referendum petitions. Such an imbalance could incentivize policymaking through the city charter instead of code, the report noted, since state law sets the signature threshold for charter amendments at 20,000 qualified voters.

The report warned that setting the 3.5 percent threshold would eventually create an inequitable system and make it more difficult for organizers with fewer means.

“Well-funded organizations will continue to have the resources to collect a sufficient number of signatures even if the threshold is raised,” the report said. “However, genuine grassroots, community-based organizations and groups of citizens with limited resources and funding will find it harder and harder to meet that higher threshold.”

Other recommendations created less angst among commissioners. The remaining eight proposals include:

• Alphabetic Rotation for Proposition Lettering: Requires ballot propositions to be labeled sequentially through the alphabet until its completion.
• Signature, Form, and Notice of Intent for Petitions: Addresses signature validity and requires a notice of intent to the city clerk.
• Citizen-Initiated Petitions on Municipal General Election Dates: Requires Council to select the earliest municipal general election date when it orders an election for Charter changes or citizen-initiated initiatives.
• Conflicting Ballot Initiatives: Requires implementation of the provisions of the proposition receiving the highest number of votes.
• Disclosure & Contribution Limits for Recall Petitions: Requires public disclosure and campaign finance reporting for contributions and expenditures made related to recall petitions.
• Recall Signature Thresholds: Requires the recall of a City Council member with a petition containing valid signatures of at least 15 percent of qualified voters within the respective Council district.
• Ratification of City Attorney Appointment: Requires the city manager’s appointment or removal of a city attorney to be confirmed by Council.
• Designated Assistant City Attorney: Designates an attorney within the city attorney’s office to serve as a liaison to Council.

Photo by Loty from United States, CC BY 2.0, via Wikimedia Commons.

The Austin Monitor’s work is made possible by donations from the community. Though our reporting covers donors from time to time, we are careful to keep business and editorial efforts separate while maintaining transparency. A complete list of donors is available here, and our code of ethics is explained here.