Mayors play a highly visible role in Texas city government, serving as public leaders, ceremonial figures, and—in many cases—key policy influencers. Although the powers of the office vary widely depending on the city’s form of government, the election of a mayor remains one of the most consequential moments in local civic life.
Mayoral elections in Texas are officially nonpartisan, structured by both state election law and local city charters. Yet beneath that nonpartisan surface, they frequently reflect deep ideological, demographic, and institutional dynamics shaping modern Texas politics.
Legal Framework
Under Texas law, municipal elections—including those for mayor—are typically nonpartisan unless a city charter provides otherwise.1 Most cities follow a uniform legal structure:
Candidates must be U.S. citizens, at least 18 years old, not convicted of a felony, and registered voters residing within the municipality.2 Filing for office requires either a petition with voter signatures or payment of a filing fee.3 If no candidate receives a majority vote, the top two finishers proceed to a runoff election.4
In home-rule cities, these rules are often supplemented by charter-specific provisions, including term limits, campaign finance rules, and filing deadlines.
A related rule with significant practical effects is the “resign-to-run” provision, which requires that an officeholder resign their current position if seeking another office with more than one year and 30 days left in their term.5 This has discouraged many current officeholders from challenging incumbent mayors unless they are near the end of their own terms.
Nonpartisan in Law, Partisan in Practice
While Texas municipal ballots omit party labels, the campaigns themselves are rarely free from ideological signals. Political action committees, donor networks, and local party organizations frequently engage in candidate recruitment, endorsements, and coordinated messaging.
In Houston’s 2023 mayoral election, two Democrats—Sheila Jackson Lee and John Whitmire—emerged as the leading contenders. Their runoff campaign, while formally nonpartisan, was shaped by partisan alignments: Jackson Lee drew support from progressive grassroots organizations and labor unions, while Whitmire’s coalition included law enforcement groups and business-oriented centrists. Whitmire ultimately prevailed with 64% of the runoff vote.
Similarly, in Dallas, Mayor Eric Johnson’s 2023 re-election campaign had no formal party label, yet it was widely known that he had recently switched affiliation from Democrat to Republican. Running virtually unopposed, he secured re-election with 98.7% of the vote, making Dallas the largest U.S. city with a Republican mayor at that time.
Voter Turnout and Election Timing
One of the most distinctive features of mayoral elections in Texas is the low rate of voter turnout. Most cities conduct local elections in May of odd-numbered years, when few other contests are on the ballot. This structure reduces administrative costs but significantly depresses participation.
In San Antonio’s 2025 mayoral election, only 9.3% of registered voters turned out in the first round. Even the runoff, which drew national media attention due to the presence of high-profile candidates, failed to cross the 20% threshold. Houston and El Paso have seen similarly low engagement, especially in runoff elections. Dallas in 2023 had just 7.1% turnout.
Austin has provided a contrasting example. In 2020, voters approved a charter amendment to align mayoral elections with presidential cycles. The result was a sharp increase in voter turnout, with participation levels rising to over 45% in the 2024 city election. This shift has led to growing calls for other cities to adopt even-year elections to boost civic engagement.
Runoff Elections and Their Consequences
Most Texas cities require a candidate to secure over 50% of the vote to win outright. In practice, this means that crowded fields almost always lead to a runoff.
For example, in San Antonio in 2025, 27 candidates appeared on the ballot. Gina Ortiz Jones, a former military officer and federal appointee, led the first round with about 30% of the vote. Her closest challenger, former Secretary of State Rolando Pablos, trailed by several points. In the June runoff, Ortiz Jones prevailed with just over 54%.
The runoff system has been criticized for discouraging participation and increasing the cost and duration of campaigns. Turnout almost always drops between the initial election and the runoff, even as campaign intensity increases. Reform advocates have proposed adopting ranked-choice voting to eliminate the need for runoffs, though no major Texas city has made that change.
Forms of Mayoral Government
Texas cities operate under two basic systems of municipal government: the council-manager model and the strong-mayor model.
Under the council-manager system, the city council hires a professional city manager to oversee daily operations, while the mayor functions as a presiding officer and ceremonial figure. This is the model used by San Antonio, El Paso, Fort Worth, and many mid-sized cities. The mayor in these cities holds limited formal power but can exert considerable influence through agenda-setting, coalition-building, and public visibility.
Under the strong-mayor model, the mayor functions as the chief executive, responsible for hiring department heads, preparing budgets, and implementing city policies. Houston and Dallas are prominent examples. Elections in these cities tend to revolve more around direct administrative authority, and the stakes are often higher in terms of governance outcomes.
In Houston, Sylvester Turner served two terms under the strong-mayor model, overseeing pension reform, flood response following Hurricane Harvey, and major budget initiatives. His successor, John Whitmire, inherited both the power and the public expectations that come with that form of government.
Recent Trends in Campaign Spending
Campaign spending in mayoral elections has escalated sharply in the past decade, even in nonpartisan races. Super PACs and independent expenditure groups now play a significant role, especially in larger cities.
In the 2025 San Antonio runoff between Ortiz Jones and Pablos, outside groups spent over $2.3 million, with additional direct campaign spending exceeding $1 million combined. Ads focused heavily on hot-button issues such as crime, housing affordability, and proposals for a new downtown arena. While high spending can amplify candidate messages, it also raises concerns about the influence of special interests in shaping local outcomes.
Term Limits and Local Variations
Texas imposes no statewide term limit for mayors, but many home-rule cities include such limits in their charters. San Antonio, for example, formerly limited mayors to four two-year terms. A 2021 charter amendment replaced that with a single four-year term beginning in 2025. Houston’s mayor may serve two four-year terms, while Dallas imposes no term limits at all.
Other variations include differing dates for runoff elections, signature thresholds for filing, and provisions governing candidate debates and public financing. These are governed at the local level, making each mayoral contest structurally unique, even within a shared statewide legal framework.
