The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1996-09-03 - AGENDA REPORTS - TERM LIMITS (2)AGENDA REPORT City Ma pproval Item to be presented by: George Caravalho NEW BUSINESS DATE: September 3, 1996 SUBJECT: TERM LIMITS DEPARTMENT: City Manager BACKGROUND Term limits for elected officials, at all levels of government, has increasingly become a major topic of discussion as voters become more frustrated with a perceived lack of government responsiveness to citizen concerns. The City Council has requested that the issue of term limits be presented for their consideration. Municipal level term limits have spread silently but steadily across the country. Virtually everywhere voters are given the chance, they pass measures to limit the terms of city officials. At least 58 million people live under municipal term limits. The average percentage of the vote of local term limits measures is 70 percent, higher even than the national and statewide averages of 65 percent. Proponents of term limits argue that voters want new candidates who reflect new ideas and desires of the community. They also believe that term limits properly reflect the intent of the framers of the Constitution who supported "citizen politicians" taking time to serve their country for a short period of time as opposed to "career politicians." Proponents suggest that term limitations is the one method by which gerrymandered "safe" district and incumbent fundraising advantages would play a lessor role in the electoral process. Opponents of term limits cite the lack of continuity and experience resulting from a constant elected official turnover. They note that ineffective representatives can be voted out by recall or at the next election. Term limit opponents further argue that as an institutional history is built, it may demonstrate that term limits is not the best solution to perceived non- responsive elected officials. The early 1990's brought a number of bills to the legislature with the sole purpose of imposing term limits on various levels of government. In 1990, a total of six initiatives on the subject were filed with the State Attorney General's Office; at that time all but proposition 140, which established term limits for the state legislature and constitutional officers, were Agenda Item:. 7 defeated. A 1995 law passed by the state legislature in California opened the discussion of numerous new city term limit laws. Senate Bill 2 (Kopp), expressly authorizes the governing bodies of county boards of education, school districts, community college districts, any board of supervisors or city council, or the residents of those respective entities, to submit a proposal to the electors to limit or repeal a limit on the number of terms a member of the governing body, board of supervisors, or city council may serve. There are currently 45 general law cities in California which have imposed term limits on their elected officials. The average length of service allowed in term limited cities is 7.9 years. Thirty cities limit service of some local officials to four years, either consecutive or lifetime. The most common length of service is eight years. Attached is a list of cities, both general law and charter, with a description of population, year in which the limits were imposed, the limits, method of limitation, and the percentage of vote in favor and opposed.. Under existing law, the City of Santa Clarita has the option to propose term limits to the electorate. If the City chooses to adopt term limits, the Council can draft an ordinance and present it to the voters in a special or regular election. RECOMMENDATION Review report and discuss. ATTACHMENT Listing of cities. city Population Ynr Waited Limits, Method Method of %mf Vote %oLVote Number' of Vote Number of Votes Cite in Favor Opposed in F OPPm.ed Alaska Anchorage 226,338 1975 mayor mayor. 2 terms (3 yr. charter Ns Ns Ns Na 1 terms) 1990 assembly, 3 terms (3 F. mans) charter 74.6% 25.4% 40,342 13,727 amendment school board 75.1% '24.97. 40,592 13,484 Fairbanks Nono SW 77,720. 1990 mayor,. ;2 consecutive terms (3 yr, ordinance .6776 32.3% 9,194 4,391 2 Borough assembly terms) Fairbanks (city) 33,100 1993 mayor, council 2 comautive semis (3 yr.. charter 71.1% 28.9% 4,033 1,642 3 Isms) wamdmant Jmesu 26,751 1991 ..yo,, 3 wmecutive Was (3 yr. charter 63.2% . 36.8% ..5,210 3,034 4 assembly terms) amendment Kenai Peninsula 44,000 1983 mayor 2 consecutive full tams Ord.. VAN .32.76 5,350 2,622 5 Borough (3 yr. mems) assembly 72.6% 27.4% .5,778 2,184 school board 71.7% 28.3% 3,701 2,253 Kcbaaan(city) 8,263 1990 mayor, woad 2 wmsicamw W. (3 yr, chaser '70.76 29.3% 1,414 587 6 terms) emeodmeat Ketchikao Gateway 13,828 1993 mayor, 2 exaucudve terms (3 yr.. ordinance 72.4% 27.6% $280 870 7 Borough assembly tams) MU -Su Borough 50,058 1981 mayor, 2 consecutive terms (3 yr.: rdimmuce unmimom Na Na Na a assembly terms) assembly vote North Pole 1.654 1993 mayor, cone" 2 consecutive Was (3 yr. charter 86.7% 13.3% 78 12 9 Was) amendment NOM Slope Borough 6,538 1972 mayor, 2 coaaculaw tams (3 yr. charter Na Na Na Na 10 asse oily terms) 1990 assembly 2 consecutive Wms (3 yr.. charts 75.6% 24.4% 1,395 .451 tams) amen lmerd Wasilla 4,831 1994 mayor 2 woucutive terms (3 yr. ordirumu 72.9% 27.1% 790 293 11 terse.) council 75A% 24.6% 313 :265 Arizona Chandler 90,533 1972 mayor 2 terms (2 yr alms) charter W(M. 10.0% 208 23 12 amendment ..it 2 booms (4 yr. to mss) Goodyear 8,900 1988 mayor, waned mayor: 4 terms (2 yr.. chance 80.7/. 19.3% 138 33 13 terns); Council: 3 grew, N y<. being) Mau .283,091 1994 mayor; waned 2 Wms(4 yrtenors) charW 56.7%' 43.3% 9,937 7,578 14 aroendmeat Phoenix 983,403 1989 mayor, couocB 2 gains (4 yr. alms) . elmder 56.1% 43.9. 82,688 64,620 15 amendment a4ap Fw.si�`�^S wLi'3�ry.u..y ,yyf *PrM1wi+r/.1pq California .,.i'i �a1dG:i,..... Alameda 76,459 1976 mays, council 2homes, (4 yr. gams) charter 63.4%. 31.6% 14,177 6,538 16 AWambb 82,106 1964 eayR, caused 3 taxes (4 yr. was) amendment Charly Na Na Na Na 17 Amhems 266,406 1992 mayer, comoil 2 consanmve wag (4 yr.. chamber addition 30.6% 19.4% 62,665 15,067 IB tams) Amadia 48,290 1968 mayor, cemcil 2 homes (4 yr. Was) chow Na Na N8 Na 19 (may-. I year limit appointed by emmeed Goer woad members) Chu , Vista 135,163% 1973 may-, couneik 2 Was (4 yr. gams) chaser 82.6% 17.4% 7,826. 1,653 20 members of city amendment boards and c-mmissioos Cupertino 42,441 1990 mayor said limiting themselvmm 2 advisory 76.0% 24.0% 9,932 3,143 21 commil terms (4 yr. term,) tenter[ Passed, following an advisory got binding roeume 1988 advisory (appointed by caused) 2 passed by Na. Na Na Na ,. commission, & tam, (4 yr. event) woad comminses C". 42.655 1977 maynm Caused 2Wms(4 yrtenor) dh 77.0% 23.0% 2,930 974 '22 wendment City Bas Page 4 City Population Year Limited Limifa Method of Limitation %of Vote in Favor %of Vote Opposed Number of Votes in Favor Number of Votes Opposed Cite Dene Point 32," 1992 mayor, council 2 cm smutrve tams (4 yr. Screw law 89.E 11.0% 7,952 983 23 terms) Fresno 354.202 1993 council 2 consecutive terms (4 yr. balimeressure 67.4% 32.6% 78,853 18,811 24 terms) Faster City 29,207 1995 council 2 consecutive terms(2 yr.. advisory vote 62.0'. 38A% 2.591 L590 24A terns) planning 2 consecutive terms (2 yr. council vote Na Na Na Na commission terms) Gran Valley 635 voter 1991 council torn mused (advisory) 2 charter Na Ne Na Na 25 cososa my 2yr. terms Hillsborough 10,667 1994 mayor 2 terms (1 yr. Leri policy adopted Na Na Na u Ne 26 selected by council from by council council member Huntington Beach 181,519 1978 mayor, wuncd mayoo I term (1 yr. tam) charter Na Na Na Na 27 council: 2 wsswoov terms (4 yr. tams) Irvine 110,330 1986 mayor,.9 mayor. 2 terms (2 yr.. charm 62.1% 37.91% 12,066. 7,370 28 terms) cmmcil; 2 amendment consecutive ams (4 yr. tams) Long Beach 429.433 1992 mayor, council 2 terms is yrterms) charter 65.80/6 34.21% 78,963 40,970 29 lifetime buffet restriction - amendment coo win as • write-in candidate Los Altos 26,303 1990 council 2 consecutive tams (4 yr. municipal code passed by Na Na Na 30 tams) causc8 Los Angeles 3,485,398 1993 all elected city 2 mew (4 yr, terms) charter 65.4% 34.6% 292,933 154,719 31 officials amendment (including mayor, couni cityavanry and controller) Merced 56,216 1992 mayor 2 M. (2 yr. ams) charter 67.1% 32.9% 7,954. 3,908 32 amendment 1985 council 2 terms (4 yr. tams) 59.9% 0.1% 1,841 1,235 Mountain View 73,800 1975 comed 2 wmsecutive cents (4 yr. chats 71.N 28.3% 3,270 1,290 32A terms) amendment Newport B h 66,643 1992 may", council 2 cassemmve tams (4 yr. rlurter 81.7% 18.3% 30,184 6,746 33 and planning terms) samdmmt Pacific Grow 16,117 1990 wmmiasion may", council '8 yeas in accession' chanct, iw 74.7% 25.1% 4,= 1,600 34 (may" sera 2 yr. across, cousN serves 4 yr. lams) Palo Alb 55,900 1991 m M. council 2 consmistme net (4 yr. charm 58.09. 42.W. 6,889 4,979 35 lerns)(may" rbosen ansrdmeN from eouseil by council for l yta term) Piedmont 11,000 1907 mayor, eamcil 2 crosecutive terma (4 yr. original Na Na Na Na 35A terms) mcorpantim JI appointed 2 wwecutive tam, (3 yr. city coma) mmoslssiom Redondo Beach K 167 1975 may", council 2 same (4 yr, series) s) charter 72.6% 27.4% 5,442 2,051 36 Redwood City 66,072 1968 coy", council 4 cauemnive ova, (4 yr. eNtee Na Na Na Na 37 Roseville 44,685 1982 mayor, council ams) 2 terms (4 yr. tams) charter 69.1% 30.9% 3.2.% 1,454 38 wevdment San Diego 1,110,549 1992 mayor, board of 2 cors (4 yr. ams) charter 75.4% 24.6% 166,004 54,178 39 supervisors amsedment San Fnmcixo 723,959 1990 mayor, board of 2 masecutive lama (4 yr.. charter 59.0% 41.0% 78,998 54,799 40 supvvuor ams) amendment San Sow 782.225 1990 may", unwed 2 terms (4 yr. tams) chute 68.5% 31.5% 114,323 52,585 41 amendment . San Leandro 68,223 1974 may", council 2 terms (4 yr. terms) charter no record w record no record no record 42 .. amendment San Luis Obispo 41,958 1978 may", council maym.4 enmemnive charter 65.5% 34.5% 7,005 3,697 43 tam (2 yr. lams) amendment - council: 2 was (4 yr. terms) CRY qat Pape 2 Colorado 1976 cities, 3194,394 1994 JI nurrjudicial 2 consecutive meant. For c astroh tonal municipalities; and elected official all terms leu than 2 yam amemdtent localities - in every each: Nen 3 consecutive terra) Political soh- tams. Can run againdivision we of the after 4 year, out of office. 58.9% stain 638 Ftnancc 63 Stratford City PapuAtion Year Limited Limits Method of % of Vote %of Vote number of Vat. Number' of Vat" Cite school board, terns (2 yrtrams): Limitation in Farar Oppaard and boards consecutive roma (4 ye. mora) Delaware Wilmington. in Favor Opposed may% Sm Me" 85,480 1983 ..A 3 tern, (4 yr. terms) charter 99.5% 105% 5,831 682 44 Boca Raton - 69,000 1993. coencil amendment 3 comccea ve roma (2 yr. Chance amcodam t 46,194. 1966 may", council mus) arncndmrnt 2 user (2 yr. mors) charm Senn Ma 293,742 1966 council 2 cons"utive scm a (d W. charter 716% 26.4% 18,907 6,785 45 terms). amendment Sena Barbara 85,571 1990 mayor, council 2 consecutive terns(4 yr. chart" 70.16 29.97. 16,618 7,075 46 terms) amendment Sana Cl. 93.613. 1972 mayor...cil ' 2 consecutive terms (4 yr. charter 55,6% ".4% 15,079 12,031 67 tams) armendmrnt Sana Cruz 49,040 1979 mayor, council 2 consecutive tams (4 W. charter a amm ms No We Na 48 terms) (mayor is amendmcrt by council vote. appointed by council Eon council council member and serves 1 Y. terms. SW Beach 25,098 1974 council 2 consexuaw terms is yr. cher" 57.7A .42.3% 6,355 4,654 49 terns) 1992 planoin8 .. ordmance We We Na da commission passed by coumcd Stockton 210,943 1986 may., council mayor. 2 terms (4 yr. chart" 56.5% 43.5% 2L286 16,359 50 lama) council: 2 tenor (4 ' amendmml yr. farm) Sunnyvale 117,229 1991 council 2consecutive an is yr. chvmr. 76.1% 23.7/. 11,668 3,664 Sl terns) amend0lent Tustin 59,751 1994 council 2 consecutive wrong (4 yr. ordinance '78.3% 21.76 10,}00 2,856 52 mens) Umka 28,250 1994 mayor 2 consecutive terms (4 yr. chaner 60.0% 40.0% 3,639 2,426 52A. returns) amendment cmmcil 2 consecutive term. (4 yr. 63.0% 37,0°% 3,818 2,238 trema) Vallejo 109,199 1977 mayor, council 2 terms (4 yr. terra) chane! 63.01/6 37.07. 9,897 4,628 33 amendment Villa Pah 6,402 1978 mayor, council 2 moms (4 yr. terms) 9ememl lav 7776 22.8% 2,200 650 54 Wetsonvale 31,099 1989 council 2 terns(4 yr, corms) chane 94.5% 25.5% 7,131 1,072 55 amendment Yorba Linda 56,540 1992 councik mayor 3 comsec ndw terns (4 yr.. ordimance 78.7% :21.1% 19,880 5,301 56 terms) Colorado 1976 cities, 3194,394 1994 JI nurrjudicial 2 consecutive meant. For c astroh tonal municipalities; and elected official all terms leu than 2 yam amemdtent localities - in every each: Nen 3 consecutive terra) Political soh- tams. Can run againdivision we of the after 4 year, out of office. 58.9% stain 638 Connecticut Flat Hampton Na (948 a." of 2 censccutive tetter (4 yr. ordinance 63.7% :36.1% 7,450 Eduutio4. terra) Na We we Board of 59 58.9% .41.2% 638 Ftnancc 63 Stratford 49,389 1991 council 3 roams (2 yr. terms) oedmmce Wilton 16,250 1993 selectmen, selecmen: 4 cooeecotive chammr school board, terns (2 yrtrams): all commissions commission and boards- 2 and boards consecutive roma (4 ye. mora) Delaware Wilmington. 71.529 1968 may% 3name is yr. moms) charter Florida Auburndale 8,858 1989 council 2 tears (3 yr. usage) charm Boca Raton - 69,000 1993. coencil amendment 3 comccea ve roma (2 yr. Chance Boynton Beach 46,194. 1966 may", council mus) arncndmrnt 2 user (2 yr. mors) charm Clry Hal 51.0% 49.W. 5M,238 531,521 57 Na Na Na da 57A 63.7% :36.1% 7,450 4,208 58 Na We we Na 59 Na Na Na of. 60 W.4% 39.6% 479 313 61 82.9%, 17.2% S'm 1,201 62 58.9% .41.2% 638 447 63 Page 3