Lago Vista council leans toward putting 3‑year terms and majority‑vote option before voters

Lago Vista’s City Council moved closer on Monday to asking voters whether to change term lengths for mayor and council seats, endorsing a proposal to present three‑year terms to the public while leaving open four‑year and two‑year options.

“I'm inclined to get something on the ballot to let citizens vote on 3 year terms,” Councilor Prince said, urging the council to put a clear transition plan before residents. Several councilors who spoke said they preferred longer terms to reduce perpetual campaigning; others raised turnout and transition concerns.

The debate centered on two practical questions: whether to give voters a direct choice about term length and how to stagger seats so not all councilors face election in a single cycle. Councilor Prince presented two transition diagrams and recommended attaching the detailed plan as an exhibit to the charter rather than embedding complex timelines in the charter text. “So that's the picture transitioning… I like having the mayor as a standalone election,” Prince said while outlining one preferred sequencing.

Opponents of the three‑year option said the change could produce odd‑year elections with low turnout. “I’m against 3 years. I would prefer 4 years or keeping it 2,” Councilor Benfield said, arguing four years would align council elections with major state or federal contests and produce higher participation.

Council members also weighed a related ballot question to require election winners to achieve a majority rather than a plurality. City Attorney Brad Bullock explained the legal mechanics: moving to longer-than‑two‑year seats can trigger different state rules about majority thresholds, and, in any event, a separate ballot measure would be needed if council wants a majority requirement regardless of term length.

The council recorded informal agreement at the workshop—via head nods and verbal confirmation—to advance a three‑year option and to draft a standalone ballot question on majority vote. Members asked staff to draft clear ballot and charter language, and to place Prince’s transition diagram as an exhibit for voter review.

Next steps: staff and the city attorney will prepare draft ballot and charter text for council review; the council scheduled follow‑up discussion at its next workshop and asked to see legal options that align transition timing with uniform election dates.

(Reporting note: Statements and counts reflect council discussion and informal consensus at the June 17 workshop; no final ordinance or formal vote was taken during the meeting.)