,   IndyAustin

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.

City of Austin : City Council, District 1

I still need to study the ballot language, but I do not support misleading the people of Austin under any …

More >>

Mitrah Elizabeth Avini

Our initial concern about bringing CodeNext to the ballot was the lack of understanding in regards to the contents of …

More >>

Lewis Conway Jr.

Rating: 1 I believe removal of the word “CodeNext” from the first ballot language actually makes it more clear because …

More >>

Natasha Harper-Madison

Rating:  3 While I understand the concept of having a comprehensive vote on the LDC, I am concerned that the …

More >>

Natasha Harper-Madison

As the son of a judge and working with court decisions in analysis of policy I understand the complexity of …

More >>

Reedy Macque Spigner III

City of Austin : City Council, District 3

I will use social media platform to explain to grassroots communities what the petition means and what your vote signifies. …

More >>

Susana Almanza

I answered this question in the last question. Yes, 100% yes. If we’re going to be placing something as important …

More >>

Jessica Cohen

I find the language for the CodeNext petition cumbersome and leaning too far in the direction that requires one to …

More >>

Justin Jacobson

Yes, I think the ballot language should have been left unchanged from the language that was used on the petition …

More >>

James Valadez

City of Austin : City Council, District 8

The City Charter clearly states that the caption of the ordinance should be used for the ballot, along with “YES” …

More >>

Bobby Levinski

City of Austin : City Council, District 9

I agree that the language was misleading. The ballot language is ALWAYS misleading. I’ve always been an informed voter, however …

More >>

Linda O’Neal

I am an engineer and not a lawyer, so I will defer to the Texas Supreme Court’s decision on August 27th …

More >>

Danielle Skidmore

Rating: 10 for Code Next; I believe the ballot language for the CodeNEXT petition should have included that term, and …

More >>

Kathie Tovo

City of Austin : Mayor

The entire system misleading to people, because it is designed to protect the corporate interests of the state, not defend …

More >>

Travis Duncan

The language approved by a majority of the current City Council members for these two measures does appear to be …

More >>

Laura Morrison

Yes, ballot language must be clear and factual. Rate your support: 10

More >>

Todd Phelps