With both Potter and Randall Counties reporting results from all polling places, it appears all local propositions other than the City of Amarillo’s Proposition E have failed.

The City of Amarillo’s Proposition A, a vote on a proposed ordinance to prohibit abortion in Amarillo, has failed with 56.46% voting against. The ordinance was put forward by a petition committee which gathered enough signatures to force a vote by Amarillo City Council. After the council rejected the ordinance, it was placed on the ballot. While many conservatives backed the ordinance, many conservatives locally joined with liberals to oppose the ordinance. Much of the controversy centered around a provision which would have prohibited a person from transporting a woman to seek an abortion. While supporters of Proposition A referred to the provision as a ban on “abortion trafficking,” opponents characterized the provision as a “travel ban.”

The City of Amarillo’s Proposition A wasn’t the only local Proposition A to fail. Both Bushland ISD and Canyon ISD had ballot measures to approve tax increases listed as “Proposition A” on the ballot. The Bushland ISD measure failed with 50.66% voting against. While a slim majority of Randall County voters supported the proposition, with 533 votes for to 518 against, the opposition from Potter County was enough to defeat the tax increase, as the vote totals for Potter were 2,022 against to 1,437 for. The Canyon ISD Proposition A failed with 20,076 against to 14,220 for.

Returning to the City of Amarillo, only one of the four proposed charter amendments passed.

Proposition B, which would have added two seats to Amarillo City Council, failed with 52.43% voting against. Proposition B earned the most attention of the four charter amendments, with several groups criticizing the measure as “bigger government.” A slim majority of Potter County voters voted for the proposal, with 565 more voting for than against. However, in Randall, roughly 4,000 more people voted against than for.

Proposition C failed by the widest margin of any of the props, with 60.54% against. The proposal would have moved Amarillo City Council from concurrent 2-year terms to staggered 4-year terms. A nearly identical proposition failed in 2020, with 52% voting against then.

The closest of the charter amendment propositions was Proposition D, which would have reduced the requirements to recall a member of Amarillo City Council. Under the current city charter, a person seeking to recall a member of the council needs to collect signatures from 30% of registered voters within 30 days of starting the petition. Of those who sign, at least one-fifth must certify that they voted for the person they are seeking to recall.

Had Proposition D passed, a petitioner would only have needed to collect signatures from 30% of the number of votes cast in the election the person being recalled was elected. Petitioners would have had 60 days to collect those signatures, and the one-fifth requirement would have been abolished. Additional procedural provisions were also included in the proposal, such as a more clear timeline for the City Secretary to verify signatures and a lock-out period preventing a recall during the first six or final six months of a council member’s term.

Proposition D failed with 50.74% against. The difference between the for and against vote totals was 945. In Potter County, the difference was only 9 votes, while the Randall County difference was 936.

Proposition E was the only local ballot proposition to win, with 55.05% voting for. The proposition, which requires a special election to be called if a vacancy occurs on Amarillo City Council, as long as there are still 12 months left in the term. (If fewer than 12 months are left, the council can appoint someone to fill the vacancy, which is the current procedure regardless of when the vacancy occurs.)

The proposition also includes a provision where a councilmember who declares their intent to run for another office as having resigned unless they have fewer than 13 months in their term.

Proposition E was placed on the ballot in anticipation of Proposition C passing. Most of the provisions in Proposition E would have been automatically put in place by the Texas State Constitution had Proposition C passed, as the constitution lays out special provisions for terms which are longer than 2 years.

You can view our results spreadsheet here.