Austin will remove more than a dozen charter amendments from the November ballot following a ruling from a Travis County judge on Thursday.
Judge Maya Guerra Gamble ruled that the city violated the Texas Open Meetings Act, calling the violation blatant and intentional. She issued a temporary injunction that kept the city from moving forward with the charter amendment election unless the city filed an immediate appeal.
A city spokesperson confirmed to KUT on Friday that the city would not appeal and drop the amendments from the ballot.
"The city has decided it is in the best interest of the public that the special election on charter amendments not be included in the upcoming election," the spokesperson said in a written statement.
The city council and mayor's race, and the special election on disannexations will remain on the November ballot, city officials said.
The City Council approved an ordinance calling for the Nov. 5 election earlier this month — a procedure the city takes before each election. The approval included adding the charter amendments and the city council and mayor’s races to the ballot.
But that move was challenged in a local district court.
Environmental group Save Our Springs Alliance; its executive director, Bill Bunch; and Joe Riddell, a former staff attorney for the Texas Attorney General sued the mayor and City Council, arguing the city violated the Texas Open Meetings Act by adopting the 13 charter amendments as a single agenda item. They said the amendments should have been individually listed, giving residents a chance to understand and speak on each item.
"In our view it's absolutely critical that the public be given notice and an opportunity to participate in shaping what goes on the ballots," Bunch said. "And here the city council clearly just tried to sneak it through, and the judge (agreed)."
A city spokesperson told KUT the city staff takes full responsibility for the mistake.
"Staff is responsible for notice and posting language for agendas," the statement said. "Staff takes full responsibility for any inconsistency with the Texas Open Meetings Act and, as such, staff will ensure that future council action items are posted to provide notice and opportunity for public comment in full compliance with the Texas Open Meetings Act."
Gamble's ruling came about a week after Travis County District Court Judge Daniella Deseta Lyttle granted a temporary restraining order in favor of Save Our Springs, saying the city did not provide adequate notice to approve the election order, and therefore did not allow the appropriate amount of time for public testimony.
Last March, the City Council created an advisory commission to review the city charter, which defines the city’s powers, duties and responsibilities.
Over the last year, the commission has held several public meetings, two open houses and a survey to get public input on what rules they might want to see updated.
Earlier this year, the commission presented its findings and recommended a number of updates, including changing the number of signatures required for citizen-initiated petitions to get on a ballot, like last year’s police oversight proposition, and rules about how the city attorney is hired and fired. There was also a recommendation to change city rules to allow the city to move elections on all municipal and charter amendments to November in even-number years, when turnout is larger.
Julio Gonzalez Altamirano, an appointed member of the review commission, said while he understood and supported the city's decision, he was disappointed.
"The voices of 600,000 Austin voters are going to be likely silenced for months, if not years," he said. "But I hope that we will get a chance to vote on them because the package as a whole is basic clean up and good government reforms that don't really need to wait."
It was not immediately clear when or if the city will put those amendments on another ballot, but that decision is up to the city council.
