Fort Worth council will ask voters to double their pay in the May 2 election
Fort Worth voters will again have to weigh in on whether the mayor and city council deserve a pay raise.
The city council unanimously approved holding a charter amendment election May 2, which among other questions will ask voters to approve raising the mayor’s pay to $60,000 a year, and council member pay to $50,000 annually.
Fort Worth currently pays its council members $25,000 annually, and its mayor $29,000.
This will be the third time in the last decade voters have been asked to increase council pay.
Voters in 2016 soundly defeated a measure that would have raised council member pay to $45,000 and mayoral pay to $60,000. The margin was roughly 2-1 against the pay raise.
In 2022, voters were asked to raise the mayor’s pay to $99,653, and council member pay to $76,727. That measure was also defeated, but by a much smaller 52.40% to 47.60% margin.
“I think the results don’t say the city doesn’t think we are worth it. I think it says we need to communicate to voters how demanding the job is,” District 9 council member Elizabeth Beck said following the 2022 measure’s defeat.
Council members and Mayor Mattie Parker have long argued the pay raise is needed to make serving on council more accessible to the average Fort Worth resident. They say the time commitment is much longer than a standard full-time job, and the pay should be adjusted to reflect that.
Most council members and Parker hold other jobs in addition to being on council.
Mayor Pro Tem Carlos Flores used to work as an aerospace engineer, but gave up that position to focus on council duties.
Flores told the Star-Telegram in a Feb. 5 interview that his family has had to make sacrifices to afford his career in public service. He credited his wife and her career as the reason their family has been able to afford his being on council.
Voters will decide May 2 whether to increase the council’s pay.
Other changes to the city charter
Voters will also be asked to make changes to rules governing the firing of city department heads, the powers of the city manager, and other items to bring the charter in line with state law.
Proposition H
This amendment would remove the option for city department heads to request a hearing in front of the city council if they’ve been fired by the city manager.
The council has no power to overturn the city manager’s decision, so the hearings don’t result in any changes for the person who has been fired.
Proposition I
This amendment would do the same thing as Proposition H, but for positions appointed by the city council. Those positions are city manager, city attorney, and city auditor.
Proposition J
This amendment would allow the council to have one meeting to discuss and vote on the city budget as opposed to a separate budget hearing.
Right now, the council is required to have two separate meetings: first to discuss the budget, then to vote on it. These meetings are usually held back-to-back on the day council is scheduled to vote on the budget, so this amendment would eliminate the need to have two meetings.
Proposition K
This amendment would remove the requirement for public utility companies to provide written reports to the city council.
Most of these reports are available online, so the additional requirement for a report to the council creates more work for the utilities, assistant city attorney Gavin Midgley said during the Feb. 3 city council work session.
Proposition L
This amendment would remove the requirement that people seeking to use city streets for events get approval from the city council. Instead, city staff would handle these applications administratively.
Proposition M
This proposition would allow the city manager to create or close departments at their discretion, except departments mandated by the city’s charter. Currently, the city council has to pass an ordinance to create or close a department.
City Attorney Leann Guzman noted during the Feb. 10 council meeting that this is a power the city manager already has when it comes to personnel management; however, the change would eliminate the need for the council to sign off on those changes.
Guzman also noted the city charter prevents the council from interfering with the city manager’s personnel decisions.
Several speakers at the Feb. 10 council meeting spoke in opposition to this amendment arguing it would allow the city manager to get rid of departments like the diversity and inclusion department without robust public debate.
However, the charter amendment would not prevent the city council from creating a new department at its discretion, a city spokesperson said in an email to the Star-Telegram.
Proposition N
This proposition would clean up the city’s election code to bring it in line with state requirements for special elections to fill a vacant council seat.
Proposition O
This proposition would change the language in the city charter about paying out claims against the city. Currently, the charter requires a purchase order, but this amendment would change that language to “appropriate written documentation.”
This story was originally published February 10, 2026 at 9:25 PM.
.jpg)