In short
We read the council’s official minutes for 117 meetings, from January 2022 to September 2026. 107 of them had recorded votes. Most votes are unanimous. Split votes, where at least one member votes no, were rare from 2023 to 2025 (2% to 7% a year). They jumped to about 1 in 5 after the new council members took office in 2026. Most splits are about growth: rezoning, annexing land, and cutting down big “heritage” trees. (Source: city council minutes on CivicClerk.)
The 30-second version
- 107 meetings with recorded votes (out of 117 in our dataset), 825 recorded votes. 82 were split (10%).1
- By year: 2022: 12% split. 2023: 5%. 2024: 2%. 2025: 7%. Jan–Sep 2026: 23%.1
- What splits are about: 45 of the 82 split votes were about land use. That means rezoning, special permits, annexing land, subdivision plans and heritage-tree removals.2
- So what: split votes show where the council disagrees, and in 2026 that is mostly growth.
- Why members vote no: the minutes record only how each member voted, not why. To learn a member’s reasons, you need the meeting video, and our reader can’t open the city’s video site yet.
Split votes by year
| Year | Meetings with votes | Recorded votes | Split | Split share |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2022 | 26 | 251 | 30 | 12% |
| 2023 | 18 | 106 | 5 | 5% |
| 2024 | 24 | 176 | 4 | 2% |
| 2025 | 22 | 146 | 10 | 7% |
| 2026 (Jan–Sep) | 17 | 146 | 33 | 23% |
| Source: our count of “Vote” and “Yes/No” lines in each set of minutes.1 |
What the split votes were about
2022: mostly about the May 2022 election. The council voted on which sales-tax and city charter questions to put on the ballot, and whether to hold a vote on leaving Capital Metro transit. Former Council Member Shaw cast most of the “no” votes on those items. Other 2022 splits were about rezoning cases, a transit contract, a pay plan and road impact fees.2
2023 to Oct 2025: only a few splits. Most were over single rezoning cases or special permits. Examples: a smoke shop in 2025, and a game room that came up twice in Sep–Oct 2025.2
2026: most splits were about growth:
- annexing one large tract of land and approving development phase plans for two tracts;
- heritage-tree removals for new subdivisions (six votes);
- a rezoning on CR 267 to commercial use, which took several votes over Aug–Sep, including a 3-3 tie;
- how to merge some city boards (three close votes on Jul 16). A few were about other things: a Dark Sky community application, money for America 250 events, and the charter review committee.2
How often each member voted no
This counts only the votes each member was seated for. A member who served a short time has a smaller count.
| Member (role in 2026) | “No” votes | Votes while seated (about) | Share | Most common topic of their “no” votes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sponseller (Place 4, since Feb 2026) | 20 | 123 | 16% | Land use (13): tree removals, annexation, phase plans |
| Shaw (former, Place 3 until mid-2022) | 10 | 147 | 7% | 2022 ballot questions (5) |
| Herrera (Place 2) | 15 | 402 | 4% | Land use (9) |
| Naudin (Place 5) | 6 | 228 | 3% | Land use (4) |
| Ross (Place 6) | 20 | 816 | 2.5% | Land use (13) |
| McDonald (former) | 11 | 523 | 2% | Land use (7) |
| Thompson (Mayor) | 17 | 822 | 2% | Land use (11) |
| Blair (Place 3, since Jan 2026) | 3 | 146 | 2% | Land use (2) |
| DeLisle (former Mayor) | 10 | 656 | 1.5% | Land use (5), 2022 charter questions (3) |
| Chang (Place 1) | 4 | 287 | 1% | Land use (3) |
| Mattke Longoria, Czernek, Pantalion-Parker (former) | 3–5 each | about 400–600 each | 1% or less | mixed |
| Source: our tally from the minutes.3 Seat dates come from the member list at the top of each set of minutes. |
Side by side (same months, Nov 2025 – Sep/Oct 2026)
| Body | Recorded votes | Split | Split share |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leander City Council | 166 | 35 | 21% |
| Leander ISD board | 101 | 11 | 11% |
| Cedar Park City Council | 106 | 6 | 6% |
| Williamson County court | about 350 (video captions, unverified) | about 1 | under 1% |
| Source: our comparison of each body’s minutes (county: captions).4 Each body records votes a little differently, so treat this as rough. |
What a split vote means
A split vote is not good or bad by itself. It shows members disagree in public, so voters can see where each one stands. A body that is always unanimous can be settling things before the meeting, or simply agreeing. A member who often votes no can be speaking for residents who oppose a project, or just seeing the issue differently.
The other side (counterweight)
- Even in 2026, about 4 in 5 recorded votes were unanimous, and routine items pass together on consent.1
- The 2026 jump came with new members and a new mayor. One year is a short record.
- Most 2026 splits were about growth cases, as listed above.
- Many sets of minutes were scanned images. We read them with text-recognition software, so small errors are possible.4
What we still don’t know
- Members’ reasons. The minutes don’t record them. Video was not used, because the city’s video site blocks our reader.
- Sep to Nov 2023. We found no council minutes on CivicClerk for these months (about 6 meetings).
- In one 2022 vote (May 19, 3-4, travel-trailer permit), the minutes list only the “yes” votes. We did not guess the “no” names.
Questions to ask
- Where does the council post minutes and videos for each meeting?
- How can the public get minutes that are not posted online?
Changes to this page
- Nov. 2, 2026: Removed two general claims about how councils vote that we had not sourced, and plainer wording.
- Nov. 2, 2026: Added questions to ask.
- Nov. 2, 2026: We made clearer how many meetings had recorded votes.
Footnotes
-
City of Leander, City Council minutes, Jan 2022 – Sep 3, 2026 (CivicClerk). Count per meeting: our dataset. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4
-
Every split vote, with the agenda item, motion and “no” voters: our dataset. ↩ ↩2 ↩3 ↩4
-
our dataset. ↩
-
Our analysis, our analysis notes (audit fix CL-AUD-33; LISD row CL-AUD-51). ↩ ↩2