Austin's 2026 charter amendments: Propositions C through J
Last checked: October 14, 2026. Austin voters will decide eight changes to the City Charter, the City's founding document, on the November 3, 2026 ballot. This page explains what each would change, one at a time. It does not say how to vote. The Austin Bulletin does not endorse.
The bond measures, Propositions A and B, have their own page: Austin's 2026 parks and library bonds.
How did these get on the ballot?
On August 6, the City Council ordered a special election on proposed charter amendments, including one citizens petitioned for, and lettered them C through J. The ordinance passed without objection. Council Member Mike Siegel said he would have preferred the petitioned amendment be placed after the City's own; Mayor Kirk Watson disagreed with putting the petition last. Siegel asked to be shown voting yes. Y'all, City Hall: August 6, item 4
Proposition I is the citizen-initiated amendment. The City Clerk certified its petition as sufficient on June 22, after Save Austin Now gathered signatures. KXAN, June 22
Each proposition, one at a time
Each entry gives the official ballot question, then what it means in plain words. Ballot wording is from the Travis County consolidated ballot, read October 14, 2026.
Proposition C: the redistricting commission
Shall the City Charter be amended to clarify that the Independent Citizens Redistricting Commission (ICRC) is independent of City Council control, allow the ICRC to review City districts after changes to the City's boundary lines, create voter registration and residency duration exceptions for student members, provide an effective date for the redistricting plan adopted by the ICRC, increase the potential appointees to the ICRC, clarify the method and timing of filing vacancies on the ICRC, and allow City staff to communicate with the ICRC outside of meeting as long as such communication is in compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act?
In plain words: The citizen commission that draws Austin's Council districts would be stated to be outside the Council's control. It could redraw districts when the City's borders change, student members would get exceptions to the voter-registration and residency rules, the pool of possible appointees would grow, and City staff could talk with it outside meetings as long as they follow the Texas Open Meetings Act.
Proposition D: weekly Council meetings
Shall the City Charter be amended to delete language providing that the City Council shall meet at least once each week?
In plain words: The Charter would no longer require the Council to meet every week.
Proposition E: Council rules
Shall the City Charter be amended to delete language requiring the City Council to determine its rules and order of business by ordinance?
In plain words: The Council would no longer have to set its own rules and order of business by passing an ordinance.
Proposition F: campaign finance limits
Shall the City Charter be amended to clarify the meaning of the term "election" and to provide that the campaign contribution and expenditure limits shall be modified each year by January 1st instead of with the adoption of the budget?
In plain words: Austin's campaign contribution and spending limits would be updated each year by January 1, rather than when the Council adopts the budget, and the Charter would define "election" more clearly.
Proposition G: when petition elections are held
Shall the City Charter be amended to provide that initiative elections and petitioned charter amendment elections must be held on the next available November election date that occurs in an even-numbered year and that allows sufficient time to comply with other requirements of law?
In plain words: Elections on measures that residents put on the ballot by petition would be held on the next November election date in an even-numbered year that leaves enough time to meet other legal requirements.
Proposition H: the City Attorney
Shall the City Charter be amended to provide that the City Council appoints and removes the City Attorney?
In plain words: The Council would hire and fire the City Attorney.
Proposition I: the outside audit
Shall the City Charter be amended to require an Independent Affordability and Efficiency Initiative on a regular basis and before any tax rate increase election and requiring the independent contractor to identify annual and multi-year savings that exceed the cost of the contractor's service?
In plain words: The City would have to hire an outside firm to review all City operations regularly, and before any election to raise the tax rate. The firm would have to find yearly and multi-year savings larger than its own fee. Austin Current describes the review as an audit of all city operations every five years. Austin Current, October 8
The Council already approved its own outside efficiency review by ordinance and in July chose Public Works LLC to do it. Unlike that ordinance, Proposition I could be changed only by another vote of the people. Austin Current, October 8
What each side says, in their own words:
- Bill Aleshire (supports), the former Travis County Judge who drafted the amendment, said the consultant would be professional: "They aren't going to suggest silly cost savings." He said it "is not going to be hard to find more savings that could reasonably be implemented than what the cost of the consultant's fee would be." KXAN, October 7
- Matt Mackowiak (supports), co-chair of Save Austin Now, said in June: "If Austinites want to see their tax dollars spent wisely and efficiently, then we must pass this outside audit amendment." KXAN, June 22
- Council Member Vanessa Fuentes (opposes): "Prop I dictates that consultants must identify enough cuts to pay their own fees … it won't even matter if the cuts don't make sense." Opponents put the cost of each review at $5.2 million to $20 million. Austin Current, October 8
- Mayor Kirk Watson said in June that the City is "already doing the substance of what Save Austin Now is asking for." KXAN, June 22
The political action committee opposing the measure is Austinites for Equity; Save Austin Now brought the petition. KXAN, October 7
Proposition J: cleanup
Shall the City Charter be amended to make non-substantive corrections of typographical errors, punctuation, and sentence structure, and to change or remove language that is moot or unenforceable because it has been superseded by state law or by a final court order?
In plain words: Typos and grammar would be fixed, and language that state law or a final court ruling has already overridden would be changed or removed.
Dates to watch
- October 19–30: Early voting in Travis County. Sites and hours are on our Vote 2026 page.
- October 23: Last day to apply for a ballot by mail.
- November 3: Election Day.
Bulletin coverage
Editions that covered the charter amendments, newest first: