City Charter, in its own way, addresses tie vote

This is an update to correct the confusion caused by my earlier reference to a section of the Texas Election Code that deals with elections decided by a plurality vote (i.e., an election where the person with the most votes wins regardless of that candidate’s percentage) when I should have referred to that section of the code referring to elections decided by a majority vote (i.e., a vote that requires the winner to have 50 percent of the vote plus one more, which is how elections are decided in Kyle).

Let me state at the outset, I don’t expect this Place 1 City Council election between incumbent Diane Hervol and business owner Travis Mitchell to end in a tie. A recount of yesterday’s votes will be conducted and I have never, ever, in my lifetime seen a recount in which the results weren’t altered. Most of those times those alternations were not large enough to affect the outcome of the election, but, obviously, in the case of a tie vote, any alteration most likely would change the results.

But what happens in the unlikely event the two candidates have the same number of votes even after the recount? I’ve heard several people express concern over the fact that the City’s charter doesn’t address that situation.

I’m here to tell you that it does. Section 5.11 of the charter reads: "If no candidate for an elective office receives a majority of the votes cast for that position in the regular or special election, a run-off shall be held between the two (2) candidates who received the greatest number of votes." That section is definitely applicable here. Obviously neither received a majority and the two candidates who tied "received the greatest number of votes" even though they were the only two candidates in the race. The charter does not specify how many candidates are required in a council election to trigger these provisions so, ergo, they must apply in all "regular or special elections."

The charter even addresses the prospect of another tie vote after the runoff. Later in that same section, the charter says "…if the run-off results in a tie vote, the tie shall be broken in a manner that is not inconsistent with the Texas Election Code."

And section 2.021 of the Texas Election Code says basically the same thing: "If no candidate for a particular office receives the vote necessary to be elected in an election requiring a majority vote, a runoff election for that office is required." And section 2.023 adds "…the candidates in a runoff election are the candidates who receive the highest and second highest number of votes in the main election or who tie for the highest number of votes."

Section 2.024 states: "Not later than the fifth day after the date the final canvass of the main election is completed, the authority responsible for ordering the main election shall order the runoff election" and the next section adds "…a runoff election shall be held not earlier than the 20th or later than the 45th day after the date the final canvass of the main election is completed."

I still think, however, all this probably won’t be necessary, because a recount of the vote, which should take place automatically in case of a tie, will solve the issue. And, if a recount isn’t automatically ordered, Mitchell told me today he would ask for one.

"It’s the right thing to do," the candidate said. "Even if the recount reveals I lost the race, I would rather lose knowing the vote was counted correctly than to have to go through all the trials and all the expense of another election."