,  IndyAustin View All Reponses >>

Do you agree that the ballot language proposed for two ballot petitions – the CodeNEXT petition and the Austin Efficiency Audit – was misleading to the voters of Austin and if so, will you help clarify to voters what these measures really mean – regardless of how you might vote on them? (Note: This article in the Austin Bullldog is a helpful review. Also note: the Texas Supreme Court ruled on August 27 th , in favor of the city of Austin – see KUT report here.) Rate your support on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the most support and 1 being the least.

Bobby Levinski

City Council, District 8

The City Charter clearly states that the caption of the ordinance should be used for the ballot, along with “YES” and “NO” options. This charter provision was inserted to prevent the council from using ballot language to influence the vote. The council went too far with both sets of language. Generally, they should understand their duties to be ministerial in nature–both in placing the items on the ballot and drafting the ballot language.

For Prop J, the council should have used the caption that was on the circulated petition. And, for Prop K, the language suggested by CM Troxclair at the end of the debate was probably the most unbiased version that I heard proposed. I’ll do my best to speak about both petitions accurately and from an informed perspective.

Rate your support: 10

View All Reponses