Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8.2 - 1730 Term Limits Page 1 of 1 STAFF REPORT CITY COUNCIL DATE: December 5, 2017 TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers FROM: Christopher L. Foss, City Manager SUBJECT: Discussion of Term Limits Prepared by: Caroline P. Soto, City Clerk/Records Manager EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the October 21, 2017 City Council meeting, the City Council agreed to bring back an item to discuss term limits. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Discuss and provide direction, as needed. FINANCIAL IMPACT: None. DESCRIPTION: On June 21, 2016, the City Council agenda included a discussion item regarding the potential initiation of a ballot measure amending the City’s current term limits for the Mayor and Councilmembers (Attachment 1). There was no action taken on that item on that date. At the October 21, 2017 City Council meeting, the City Council agreed to bring back an item to discuss term limits. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS/PUBLIC OUTREACH: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. June 21, 2016 Staff Report DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: 1:14061:411111 CITY COUNCIL File #610 -2 June 21, 2016 Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers Christopher L. Foss, City Manager Discussion Regarding a Ballot Measure Amending Term Limits for Councilmembers Prepared by John Bakker, City Attorney EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: At the June 7, 2016 meeting, the City Council requested that Staff place an item on the agenda to discuss initiating a ballot measure amending current term limits for the Mayor and Councilmembers. FINANCIAL IMPACT: City Staff is working with the Alameda County Registrar of Voters to determine the estimated cost of placing this measure on the ballot, including costs associated with translation, proofing, and printing and mailing the Voter Information Guide/ Sample Ballot. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council provide direction to Staff. l Reviewed By Assistant City Manager DESCRIPTION: At the June 7, 2016 meeting, the City Council requested that Staff place an item on the agenda to discuss the history of Dublin's term limits and to allow the City Council to consider initiating a ballot measure amending or repealing current term limits. This Staff Report is intended to provide background regarding the current term limits, a timeline should the City Council wish to submit a ballot measure to the voters at the November 8, 2016 General Election, costs associated with the ballot measure, and information regarding what term limits, if any, neighboring jurisdictions have adopted. Page 1 of 6 ITEM NO. 8.4 State Legislation Prior to adoption of California Senate Bill 2 (SB 2) in 1996, California law did not authorize the imposition of limits on the number of terms that individuals could serve on the governing bodies of local governmental entities. SB 2 added Government Code section 36502, which expressly authorized a city council or the residents of a city to submit a proposal to the voters to limit or repeal a limit on the number of terms a member of the city council can serve. The law requires that a term limit proposal apply prospectively only and makes operation of the proposal contingent upon voter approval (majority of the votes cast on the question) at a regularly scheduled election. Dublin's Council Initiated Ballot Measure and Current Local Ordinance Soon after the Passage of SB 2, the Dublin City Council discussed proceeding with a Council - initiated ballot measure and by a 3 -2 majority vote, the City Council directed the City Attorney to draft an initiative limiting the term for Councilmembers and the Mayor to eight (8) consecutive years. (See Attachment 1.) The measure did not prevent any Councilmember or the Mayor from serving after a lapse of service term. For purposes of short terms, two (2) years and one (1) day would count as a term for a Councilmember and one (1) year and one (1) day would count as a term for the Mayor. On July 23, 1996, the City Council adopted a resolution submitting the initiative to the voters. The ballot question stated: "Shall an ordinance be enacted to impose term limits on the offices of Mayor and Councilmember and to define "term" in cases where an individual serves less than a full term, to have the effect generally that no individual taking office after the effective date of the ordinance could serve more than eight (8) consecutive years in total in any combination of Mayor and /or Councilmember." The Measure passed at the November 5, 1996 election with 5,395 voting yes, and 2,186 voting no. (See Attachment 2.) On December 13, 2016, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 18 -96 confirming the vote (See Attachment 3) and adding Section 2.08.050 "Term Limits" to the Municipal Code: "No person shall serve as Councilmember for more than two (2) consecutive terms, nor shall any person serve as Mayor for more than four (4) consecutive terms. In addition: (a) no person who has served as a Councilmember for one (1) term shall serve more than two (2) terms as Mayor if the terms as Councilmember and Mayor are consecutive; (b) no person who has served as Councilmember for two (2) consecutive terms shall serve a consecutive term as Mayor; (c) no person who has served as Mayor for three (3) or four (4) consecutive terms shall serve a consecutive term as a Councilmember; (d) no person who has served as Mayor for two (2) consecutive terms shall serve more than one (1) succeeding consecutive term as Councilmember; (e) no person who has served consecutive terms as Mayor and Councilmember shall serve more than one (1) more consecutive term as Mayor; and (f) no person who has served consecutive terms as Mayor and Councilmember shall serve another consecutive term as Councilmember. As used herein, a person shall be considered to have served a "term" of office as a Councilmember if such person has served as a Councilmember for two (2) years plus one (1) day and a person shall be considered to have served a "term" of office as Mayor if such person has served as Mayor for one (1) year plus one (1) day." Page 2 of 6 Term Limits in Neighboring Jurisdictions For the Council's information, the City Attorney's office collected the following information regarding term limits (or lack thereof) in neighboring jurisdictions: Jur�sd�cton' erm Livermore Mayor. No person who has served terms totaling eight (8) consecutive years as mayor shall be qualified for further service in that office until he or she has a break in service in that office of at least two (2) years. Councilmember: No person who has served terms totaling eight (8) consecutive years as a council member shall be qualified for further service in that office until he or she has a break in service in that office of at least two (2) years. Term: A person shall be considered to have served a "term" of office if such person has served one -half of a full term of office plus one day. (Livermore Municipal Code Section 2.04.040) Pleasanton Mayor: A mayor shall serve no more than four (4) consecutive terms and a person who has been appointed or elected to mayor for more than one (1) year shall serve no more than three (3) additional terms. Councilmember: A council member (other than mayor) shall serve no more than two (2) consecutive terms and a person who has been appointed or elected to council for more than two (2) years shall serve no more than one (1) additional term. Pleasanton Municipal Code Section 2.04.015 San Ramon None Danville None Union City Mayor and Councilmember: Neither the Mayor nor any member of the City Council shall serve in the same office for more than three (3) consecutive terms. For purposes of this chapter, the office of Mayor and the office of City Councilmember are distinct offices. At any municipal election after the expiration of two (2) years following said consecutive elective terms, a former Councilmember or Mayor may again seek election to City Council or as Mayor. Term: For purposes of applying this chapter, any time in office served for a partial term, whether appointed or elective, shall not be considered. Union City Municipal Code Section 2.07.020- 2.07.030 Fremont Mayor: No mayor who has served terms comprising eight (8) consecutive years as mayor shall be qualified for further service in that office until he or she has a break in service in that office of at least four (4) years. Councilmember: No councilmember who has served terms comprising eight 8 consecutive years as a councilmember shall be qualified for further service Page 3 of 6 Page 4 of 6 in that office until he or she has a break in service in that office of at least four (4) years. Term: The disqualifications imposed by this section shall not prevent a person who is disqualified from serving as mayor from serving as a councilmember or a person who is disqualified from serving as a councilmember from serving as mayor. However, any person who has served terms comprising sixteen (16) consecutive years in the offices of mayor and councilmember shall be disqualified from further service in either office until he or she has a break in service from both offices of at least four (4) years. Time spent in office while serving less than a full term shall not be counted in computing consecutive years in any office. Time spent in office prior to the enactment of this section shall not be counted in computing consecutive years in any office. In computing the number of years served, full, four (4) year terms shall count as four (4) years of service even though the period encompassed by such terms may not be exactly four years in duration. Fremont Municipal Code Section 2.05. 109) Milpitas None Hayward None San Leandro None Tracy Mayor and Councilmember: After the operative date of this section, no person shall serve more than two (2) terms as a member of the City Council, and no person shall serve more than two (2) terms as Mayor. Term: If a person is appointed or elected to fill the unexpired term of a member of the City Council or the office of Mayor, that term shall count as one term against the two -term limit for each of those offices provided in subsection (a). (Tracy Municipal Code Section 2.04.040) Pinole Mayor and Councilmember: Any person who shall have served three (3) successive terms as a member of the Council shall be ineligible to serve again in the office until an intervening period of two (2) years has elapsed. Term: For the purposes hereof, any person who serves as a Councilmember for two (2) years or more of an appointed or elected term shall be considered to have served a term. Terms completed prior to this provision taking effect shall not be counted in determining a person's eligibility under this section, but terms that are in progress at the time this provision goes into effect shall count toward the three (3) term limit. Pinole Municipal Code Section 2.08.030 San Jose Mayor: No person who has been elected to the office of Mayor for two (2) successive four -year terms shall be eligible to run for election to the office of Mayor, nor to serve as such, for any additional successive term; but the Page 4 of 6 above shall not disqualify any person from running for election to the office of Mayor, nor from further service as Mayor, for any term or terms which are not successive; nor for any parts of terms which are not successive. Councilmember: No person who has been elected to the City Council as a Council member in any Council District in the City for two (2) successive four - year terms, after the effective date of this Section, shall be eligible to run for election as a member of the Council in any Council District, nor appointed to serve as a Council member for any additional successive term. Any person appointed or elected to the City Council as a City Council member to fill an unexpired term of two years or less in length shall be eligible to serve two successive four -year terms upon the expiration of the unexpired term for which that person was appointed or elected. Any person appointed or elected to the City Council as a City Council member to fill an unexpired term of more than two years in length shall only be eligible to serve one successive four - year term. The above shall not disqualify any person from running for election to the Office of Mayor or for any term or terms which are not successive. (San Jose City Charter Section 402) Consideration of and Timeline for New Ballot Measure If the Council decides that it would like to initiate a ballot measure revising or repealing the existing Term Limits in the upcoming November 8, 2016 election, it must meet the Alameda County's August 12, 2016 deadline for filing a resolution requesting consolidation with the statewide election and setting forth the ballot question. In order to meet that deadline, the Council would need to adopt (by a 2/3 vote) a Resolution 1) calling election, 2) requesting consolidation with the statewide election, and 3) setting forth the Ballot for the tax. To meet the deadline, this would take place at the July 19, 2016 meeting. Effective Date If the ballot measure passes, changes to the term limits would be considered adopted upon the date the vote is declared by the City Council and would go into effect ten (10) days after that date. Because election results are usually certified at the end of November, the vote would likely be declared at the December 6, 2016 Council meeting. Alternative Timelines Council may also consider a ballot measure consolidated with a later election cycle. The next regularly scheduled election day is March 7, 2017. Costs City Staff is working with the Alameda County Registrar of Voters to determine the estimated cost of placing this measure on the ballot, including costs associated with translation, proofing, and printing and mailing the Voter Information Guide/ Sample Ballot. Options Staff has identified three potential options for the City Council to consider (see below): Page 5 of 6 1. Direct Staff to proceed in drafting a ballot measure to remove Council term limits; or 2. Direct Staff to proceed in drafting a ballot measure to amend current term limits; or 3. Take no action and leave current term limits in place. Staff is requesting that the the City Council provide direction. NOTICING REQUIREMENTS /PUBLIC OUTREACH: None. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Excerpts of Minutes of April 23, 1996, May 14, 1996, May 28, 1996, and July 23, 1996 Council Meetings 2. City of Dublin Ballot Measure Y 3. Ordinance No. 18 -96 Providing for Term Limits for the Office of Mayor and Councilmember Page 6 of 6 out pretty small, but not everybody can spend the time calling on people at their homes every day. It's an academic question as to whether we can even do this. On motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Howard, and by unanimous vote, the issue was tabled. TERM LIMITS FOR COUNCILM ERS AND / ®R MAYOR 8:53 p.m. 8.2 (61020) Mayor Houston stated he threw out the idea and suggested a limit of 8 years. This would be 8 consecutive years. This is a great idea and he would like to see it on the ballot. During the City Council's 1996 Goals & Objectives meeting in February, the Council requested that Staff prepare a report on Council term limits. SB 2 became effective January 1, 1996, and authorizes the City Council or residents of the City to propose, by initiative, an ordinance limiting the number of terms a member of the Council may serve or the number of terms an elected Mayor may serve. Both a Council - sponsored initiative and a citizen - sponsored initiative must be approved by the majority of the voters voting to be effective and shall be effective prospectively only. If the Council wished to proceed with a Council - sponsored initiative, it would need to determine the number, of terms that a Councilmember would be limited to serving and the number of terms the Mayor would be limited to serving and then direct Staff to prepare the necessary documentation in order to meet the timeline established by the Registrar of Voters to get the issue on the November, 1996 ballot. Ms. Silver explained that a limitation has to be number of terms, not years. You can limit consecutive terms or you can say limit to 2 terms (lifetime). A third issue would be limitation of terms for Councilmember or Mayor. Mayor Houston clarified that this would apply prospectively and so it would not even start until the election following the passage of this. Ms. Silver stated the question is if somebody is elected in November and if ,this passes in November, does this apply to that term. If we want to say it does apply, we would need to address this. It could then be written in the appropriate manner. It is a little ambiguous as to how this would apply and she therefore suggested that the City Council clarify this. Mayor Houston stated he would like it to count immediately; otherwise you would have 12 years. Crry COUNCIL VOLUIN Is REGULARMEEMG 009 PAGE 210 Cm. Moffatt stated he would like to offer a compromise. We should allow citizens one vote each and citizens have a right to vote for any individual they want to vote for. This eliminates shuffling people involved in City government. We don't go to Washington, D.C. and then come back and spend 10 or 15 minutes talking to people here. They meet and talk to people all the time, at the grocery store, at the gas station, etc. He suggested that we don't need term limits. Cm. Barnes commented on saying years versus terms. She asked what would happen if she were to retire. Would the time of the person filling the term start immediately for term limit purposes? How is a- shorter term determined? Ms. Silver stated they would need to address this. She referenced other legislation which says that if less than half the term remains it shouldn't be counted. Cm. Howard felt there might be a problem with running jointly with another City on the DRFA Board. She felt we already have term limits and it's called election. If a majority of the people want to keep someone in office, they should be able to vote to keep them. Cm. Barnes stated she got a lot of calls on this issue. She favored letting the people have their say. If they want term limits, let them tell it. She felt people will listen to all sides of the story and then vote. Al Hunter discussed how it was pointed out just a few minutes before that campaign contribution expenditures were against the constitution. As a Republican he supported the effort to break up the power groups in Washington. People we couldn't vote for were, making decisions impacting us. Congress has since set limits on how long a person can sit on a committee. The same problems exist with the State; mostly controlled by Los Angeles. We don't have districts here, so people can vote for whoever they want. Term limits may have a role in State and Federal elections, but we should not compare Dublin to them. By not allowing people to vote for whoever they want for as many times as they want, isn't this against his rights? David Beverly agreed with Mr. Hunter. Terms limits don't apply to local government. People will probably vote for it more out of cynicism than a real need. This is the level where people speak eyeball to eyeball. This is an inappropriate solution to a problem that has never existed in Dublin. This is an artificial restraint that impedes the democratic process. Do we have a known evil that needs an artificial solution to correct an abuse? Local government works differently than other government. John Anderson, Brittany Lane felt the technical need for term Aimits has been well received. The perception is that it removes career politicians. People will perceive term limits based on their understanding of state and federal government. At the local uacaL HIMUM VOLUME is RaeoLim mErnNe ALPM41 Sees, X0043 PAGE 211 Al Hunter asked how many years each. one had been on the Council. They are trying to make a case where no one except Cm. Moffatt even comes close. He questioned how this would apply since none of them would be affected. Mayor Houston responded that it is obviously in the future. Cm. Barnes has been on the Council since November, 1994. Cm. Burton has been on the Council most recently since November, 1990. He also served a partial term from February, 1982 to October, .1983. Mayor Houston has been on the Council since November, 1992. Cm. Moffatt has been on the Council since February, 1982. Cm. Howard has been on the Council since November, 1990. Cm. Barnes was concerned that she wants to give people a chance to vote, but they can't decide on the number of years.. Mayor Houston felt 8 years is adequate and is plenty. It's good to have turnover and encourage turnover. This eliminates the old girl and old boy network of deciding who can be in office. Cm. Moffatt asked if this 8 years would also include someone's ability to go on to another office such as senator. If you go to a different job, you should have the number of terms associated with that job. He felt the job of a Councilmember is different from that of Mayor. The motion was restated. Mayor Houston made a motion, which was seconded by Cm. Barnes, to have the City Attorney prepare the necessary documents to allow term limits of 8 consecutive years, using the appropriate number of terms, and place on the November ballot, and have terms counted if elected in November. This motion was defeated due to NO votes cast by Councilmembers Barnes, Burton, Howard and Moffatt. Cm. Burton made a motion, which was seconded by Cm. Howard to allow 8 years for the position of Mayor and 8 years as a Councilmember, with the exception that less than half a term would not count. If you are on the Council and you run for Mayor, it breaks the continuity, so you could run another 8 years. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME I$ REGULAR MEETING 9 PAGE 213 Cm. Moffatt stated his fear is that people will be elected by those who make the most contributions to their campaign. He suggested that this item be tabled until the question of contributions is settled. Cm. Burton stated he felt they weren't related. Cm. Barnes felt they definitely are related. She supported tabling this and stated she would like to hear from people about whether they want term limits and if so, how many years. She wants to hear from the people of Dublin. On substitute motion of Cm. Moffatt, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by majority vote, the Council tabled Cm. Burton's motion. Cm. Burton voted against the motion. Cm. Moffatt stated as the 'ty's representati e had . brought this up a couple of times. The Board is weighted inst us. It' a situation of one person one vote. As a consequence he felt this "IS an a nt letter to send. dete ine compatibility and cost effectiveness. r. Honse discussed the Master Plan schedule and also an analysis o kpl sals received. Under Phase 1, systems to be evaluated would include: eleciro lan d »' 8:40 p.m. 7.2 (610«20) City Attorney Silver stated following discussion of this item at the April 23, 1996 City Council meeting, the Council tabled a motion "to allow 8 years for the position of Mayor and 8 years as a Councilmember with the exception that less than half a term would not count. If you are on the Council and you run for Mayor, it breaks the continuity, so you could run another 8 years." Ms. Silver explained that under Robert's Rules of Order,, when a motion has been tabled, it can be removed from the table at the same meeting or the next meeting by a motion to "take it from the table ". 'Therefore, if the Council wishes to consider this issue, it must first pass a motion taking Cm. Burton's motion from the table. On motion of Mayor Houston, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by unanimous vote, the motion was taken from the table. Ms. Silver stated issues which the Council should consider include: 1) Should term limits be imposed for the office of Mayor and the office of Councilmember? 2) What limit would be placed on the number of terms of office for Mayor and Council- member? 3) Would the limitation for the offices of Mayor and Councilmember be combined so there is an effective limitation of "X" years on the Council, or would the limitations be separate? 4) Would the limitation on the number of terms be a lifetime limit or a consecutive limit? 5) Would the limitation apply to persons elected to office on November 5, 1996, . or would the limitation apply to persons elected at the following election in November 1998? 6) What is a "term "? Should a term be defined to include service of more than half of the full term and exclude service if it is less than half of the full term? Cm. Burton stated if you ran- for Mayor and you were running from a safe seat this would break the chain. He stated his objective was to make a seat available when someone was up for election. There is 8 years but if you run for Mayor, it breaks the continuity. Mayor Houston thought in a theoretical situation you could run for City Council and then for Mayor and then for City Council and repeat the cycle. Cm. Burton stated he would back off on his motion. Cm. Howard stated she felt a flat 8 years would be okay on the City Council, Ms. Silver stated the original motion was made by Cm. Burton and seconded by Cm. Howard. Mayor Houston made a motion to get back to 8 consecutive years. The verbiage would .include terms rather than years. If someone serves less than half a term it should not count as a term. More than half would count as a term; 2 years + one day. The City Council agreed. Cm. Barnes stated she originally felt it would be a real simple thing to let the voters decide on years, but it gets confusing because of the difference in terms. Ms. Silver stated it would have to be drafted to preclude someone from running for City Council and then Mayor and then for City Council again. Mayor Houston clarified 2 years and a day would count as a term and this would be from November, 1996 forward. Cm. Barnes clarified that they are just giving direction to have Staff prepare a report to possibly place this on the ballot. At the next meeting, language would be there for them to vote on. On motion of Mayor Houston, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by majority vote, the Council directed Ms. Silver to draft an initiative to place before the voters limiting Councilmembers and Mayor to 8 consecutive years or terms. If someone serves 8 years and goes off they could break the cycle and then come back and run again. Also, these limitations would apply to those elected. on November 6, 1996. For purposes of short terms, two years and a day would count as a term for Councilmember, -and for Mayor, one year and a day would count as a term. Cm.'s Howard and Moffatt voted against this motion. John Wagner stated he believes fully in the term limit concept and not being able to make a career of it. In Washington, D.C., it used to be this way. If you want competition and want new blood, a vacancy makes it more possible for people to run. Cm. Moffatt felt we would be taking the vote away from the citizens of Dublin and eliminating choices and it is an expensive situation to put this on the ballot, some $30,000 and he has not received any phone calls or letters from anybody requesting term limits. Cm. Barnes stated nobody is committing to her whether they support this or not, but what they want is to vote on it. She asked about the costs. Ms. Keck responded that there are variable factors involved such as whether there are ballot arguments and rebuttals, but basically, she . estimated the costs to be between $270 and $800. Printing costs would be incurred for the ballot questions, the City ttorney's analysis, ballot arguments supporting and opposing, and then rebuttal CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 1S REGULAR MEETING mgwsr XAA, 1 PAGE 232 arguments. The basic election costs will already be incurred because we will have candidates on the ballot. Ms. Keck explained that Cm. Moffatt was probably referencing the two special elections that were held in the City in 1993. Special elections are very expensive. Cm. Howard stated she would go along with having it on the ballot but not just g years. She felt the office of Mayor is a different office and they should be able to run for Mayor after serving on the City Council. Cm. Barnes asked if it..could be changed regarding the number of terms when it comes back before the Council. Ms. Silver stated she would word it accordingly. OTHER BUSINESS 9:15 P.M. -joint City Council /School Board Meeting (61010) Staff indicated this could be done. Mr. Ambrose advised the C it that Dubli wi June 19, 1996. Mayor Hot n would like the Luigi Too Restaurant. W ave only one item on tlf suggested putting the er on the agenda. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME Is REGULAR MERTINa PAGE 233 host the Tri- Valley Council on ig held at the Frankie Johnnie & 1genda so far. The City Council Mayor Houston didn't u tand how you cool clude the actual election day from the election period. Cm. Barnes thought it could have n days before because they didn't want someone to receive money the last fiv ys. Mr. Ambrose explained it was riatwas ast min u major contributions that don't show up on your reporting stat mmen the iss _ Cm. Barnes commen at she didn't understand t 58 days afterward because someone could be' bt.. f m. Burton felt it was a darn nuisance to have to list $25. k� A Break was called from 9:58 p.m. until 10:05 p.m. 10:05 p.m. 7.1 (61020) City Attorney Elizabeth Silver presented the Staff Report. At the April 23 and May 14 Council meetings, the City Council considered whether to place an initiative measure on the ballot to impose term limits for the offices of Mayor and Councilmember as authorized by Government Code Section 36502, The Council directed the City Attorney to prepare the language for a .ballot initiative which would limit Councilmembers and the Mayor to eight consecutive years in office.. The measure would not prevent persons from serving as Councilmembers or the Mayor after a lapse of at least one term. The measure would define a "term" as two years and a day for Councilmember and one year and a day for Mayor. A person could serve any one of CITY COUNCIL )dMUM VOLUME Is REGULAR M ERTIN4 AKSLY MIS, 9 PAGE 261 W five combinations of office and after a break in service, could again serve on the Council for any of the five combinations. The ordinance may not be applicable to persons elected on November 6, 1996. In accordance with Elections Code Section 9217, the ordinance would not be effective until ten days after the date the vote is declared by the City Council. Government Code Section 36502 provides that any proposal which imposes term limits shall be prospective only. In other words, the ordinance and the limit on the number of terms Will apply to persons who are sworn into office after the ordinance becomes effective. Thus, if Councilmember A is elected on November 6, 1996 and is sworn into office on the date the election results for the initiative are certified, she will not be subject to the term limits. But if Councilmember B is not sworn in until after the ordinance becomes effective, he will be subject to the ordinance's term limits. Prior. service on the Council would not count towards the term limits. An ordinance enacted by the people can be amended only by the people unless the initiative ordinance states that it can be amended by the Council. As drafted, the ordinance could only be amended by the people. Cm. Burton questioned if it is voted by the people, it has to be changed by the people, but yet it said the Council could add something. Does that make it an advisory election? Ms. Silver responded no. If any initiative can only be amended by:the people since an initiative is an ordinance that is adopted by the people and it can only be amended by the people unless the text of the ordinance that the people adopt says this ordinance can be amended by the City Council by 3/5 vote or 4/5 vote or can be amended by City Council after two years or five years. Language could be put into the proposed ordinance that says that the City Council can amend this ordinance. If you don't put that language in, it can only be amended by the people. Cm. Burton felt it was probably a good safety measure, maybe a 4/5 vote. He asked if it could be changed tonight without going through another hearing. Was it a significant change? Ms. Silver indicated it was within the language of the agenda. Cm. Burton stated the Council should leave that option open for the future to eliminate the hassle. Mayor Houston felt if you wanted to pass it, then the Council should just vote on it tonight as an ordinance and pass it and not have a vote of the people. If you want to have a vote of the people, then let's not water it down. CrrY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME 1 s REGULAR MEETINe PAGE 262 Cm. Moffatt agreed with Mayor Houston if the people are going to vote it in, let them be the ones to change it. Cm. Burton felt it was an option that sounded pretty good. Mayor Houston indicated it was not a public hearing item, but there was one person who wished to speak. John Wagner, 8342 Mulberry Place, asked the Council to pass the resolution as it is presented. He felt the people should have the right to vote on it and he had faith in the people of this. City and this Country. He thought they would make the wise decision. He felt it was a fair way to encourage people to run for office. They feel that they can't run against so, and so because he has been in there so long. I have to get my name out there. Suddenly there is an open seat and an opportunity to get.-new blood in the organization. He favored the way it is written now. Mayor Houston wanted to have this put on the ballot in this format and not have it so that the Council could change it at a later date. The limitation we have. to work with being in effect for this election, he felt would be up to the individual that was elected at that time whether they wanted to forego the will of the people or not, but they do have that right to be sworn in within that 10 day period. They can make that personal decision themselves, but he was very happy with the Staff Report. Cm. Barnes _stated she was opposed to term limits because she felt they do take away from her right to vote, but from the tone of the telephone calls she has received and the people she has asked, she was going to go ahead and have it put on the ballot just for the idea that the people should decide. Once and for all put this to bed. Because she personally felt it was taking away somebody's right to vote, but in order for her to say she was opposed to it and not allow them to say it, she felt was sending a bad message. Cm. Moffatt felt the same as Cm. Barnes in that he is against term limits for the same reason, but he felt the people have a right to vote on the situation. When you come down to local government, the folks that live in the City, they are the ones who really make the decision. He would be in favor of this motion to allow the people to vote on it although as a personal opinion, he is opposed to term limits. Cm. Howard indicated she did not mind it being on the ballot at all. She did have a problem with the wording of putting the Council and Mayor's seat together. She felt running for the Council for eight years, a person should be able to run for Mayor if they wanted to. She would vote for it if that wording was changed so that the Council seat and Mayor seat are separate. Mavor Houston called for the question. CITY COUNCIL MIN VOLUME Is REGULAR MEETING 9X PAGE 263 (� On motion of Mayor Houston, seconded by Cm. Burton, and by con vote (Cm. Howard voted no), the Council directed the City Clerk to return at the Council's first meeting in July with the appropriate resolution submitting the initiative ordinance (Exhibit 6) to the voters, consolidating the municipal election with the statewide election and taking other actions related thereto, such as ballot arguments and impartial analysis. \the' P.M. 8.2 (63020) s Director Lee Thompson presented th e Staff Report. At the Cit ouncil May 14, 1996, the City Council requested a report on the spri ownership ical Alamilla Spring by the Springs Apartments, the condit' of the the maintenance responsibility. Since the spring is not visible from ordinance would not apply. Staff i and was informed that the Springs that builds up from the public usir some dead trees in the near future the spring. iblic et, the property maintenance i eva Spears, the Springs property manager ance staff periodically removes the trash is .a. The Springs staff will be removing will riove the existing downed branches from Cm. Moffatt indicated wal ' g along the trail the aXa looks pretty dilapidated. Cm. Burton stated thaLAuck weed is natural and is go the feed. 5r Houston suggested that the report be passed on to the Heritage Com ee and can look at it and they could determine what might be done. CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME Is REGU MEETING AK$wwr 0", X0043 PAGE 264 W Cm. Barnes felt %entered ave lower rates,. but t a lot more service for. our money. No testimony waany. r of th e public relative'to this issue. Mayor Houston closed TERM. LIMITS FOR MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS 8:54 p.m. 7.1 (610 -20) City Attorney Silver presented the Staff Report and stated Staff had, in accordance with Council direction, prepared a Resolution submitting an initiative ordinance to the voters at the November election related to term limits. The ballot question, as presented for consideration, is "Shall art ordinance be enacted to Impose term limits on the offices ofMayor. and Councilrnember and to define "term "in cases where an individual serves less than a full term, to have the effectgenerally that no individual taking office after the effective date of the ordinance could'serve more .Man eight (8) consecrative years .W total in any combination ofMayor and/or Councilmember ?" If adopted by the voters, the term limits will apply to those persons sworn into office the effective date of the ordinance (ten days following the;Couneil's certification of the election results). The ordinance, if adopted by the voters, can only be amended by the voters. Cm., Moffatt asked if it-would be simpler to separate Councilmembers from Mayor and say if you serve a term of 8 years on the Council, you could then serve 8 years as .Mayor. This would simplify this a lot. He suggested he would like to see it put on the ballot as an advisory vote. This would give a future Council the prerogative to change it without having to go to a vote. Cm. Howard stated she would like to say someone could serve two terms on the Council and two terms as Mayor. . cffy coundl. MMUMS VOLUME 15 REGULAR O July 23, 1996 PAGE 381 Cm. Moffatt felt it was unfortunate that when the Mayor position was voted on it was 2 years instead -of 4. years.. It takes a year or so to getup to speed -and in order for people to become effective. Mayor Houston pointed out they were not talking about a 2 year versus 4 year Mayor term; this was not the issue before them. Cm. Moffatt felt a Mayor should be able to serve at least 8 years as Mayor.' Cm. Burton pointed out this doesn't preclude someone from being Mayor'for 8 years. Cm. Moffatt felt it was difficult to go directly to Mayor.without experience on the Council. Cm. Barnes stated she listened for hours when Pleasanton had this discussion. We should just say what we mean. We're saying 8 years, regardless of'all the combinations. Maybe the people won't buy this whole thing. bet's let the people make the decision and get it over with. Al Hunter asked what happens if we run into a situation with one or two people at the end of their limits and we don't have enough people running for Council. He would support-going with this as an advisory measure. If you make, it mandatory, you could be setting up a crisis, Mayor Houston felt an open seat will attract applicants, no matter what. You can't force anyone to stay in when they don't want to. Mr. Hunter stated he was, just bringing up something for consideration. Cm. Howard asked about a situation where a Mayor and two Councilmembers terms were up and no one runs. John Wagner, 8342 Mulberry Place, urged the City Council to vote for the amendment. An advisory measure wastes the taxpayers money and it doesn't mean anything. The only thing to do is go ahead with it as presented. If it doesn't get passed, they will have to do it the hard way and go out and get signatures. People don't want people in office all their lives. He stated he could support Cm. Moffatt's comment about 8 years and 2 separate offices. We should make it as simple as we can. Cm. Moffatt stated he would support putting it on the ballot, but would still'like it to be advisory. On motion of Cm. Burton, seconded by Cm. Barnes, and by unanimous vote, the Council adopted CITY COUNCIL MINUTES VOLUME I's REGULAR ME,£TING July 23, 1996 PAGE $82 . I til I 1' 1 ; Ms.' Iowart stated the Par Community approved the preliminary Cm. Moffatt congratulated Ms. Ioi Commission and stated he felt this has reviewed and the Parks & Community Services t idea and he certainly favored this motion. Ms. Iowa tated it would not be done by this time. It will r ouncotion of Cm. Howard, seconded by Cm. Moffatt, and by unani il approved the date of October 12, 1996, and authorized Staff plans for the Fall Heritage Days. CITY COUNCIL MINIrm VOLUME 1$ REGULAR H%Ir fiG July 23, 1996 PAGE 383 be done by next vote, the roceed with 1, BRADLEY J. CLARK, Registrar of Voters for the County. of Alameda, State of California, having canvassed the returns of all votes cast in the City of Dublin at the General Municipal Election held on Tuesday, November 5, 1996, do hereby certify the following to be a full, true and correct Statement of the Results of all votes cast for each of the candidates entitled to receive votes for the office indicated; CITY OF DUBLIN MAYOR Guy S. Houston 5911 Valerie A, Barnes 2136 CITY COUNCILMEMBER Janet Lockhart 4530 Lisbeth Howard 3144 Ralph D. Hughes 2232 George A. Zika 2210 I further certify that the total number of ballots cast in the City of Dublin at said election was 8,656 and attached hereto is a complete statement of the results showing the number of votes cast at each precinct for each candidate. Dated this 27th day of November, 1996 qtr ��...•..��d OA- « n V EXHIBIT A. Ll 1, BRADLEY J. CLARK, Registrar of Voters for the County of Alameda, State of California, having canvassed the returns of all votes cast in the City of Dublin at the General Municipal Election held on Tuesday, November 5, 1996, do hereby certify the following to be a full, true and correct Statement of the Results of all votes cast on the following measure; GIN OF DUBLIN MEASURE Y — YMEASURE Y: Shall an ordinance be enacted to impose term limits on the offices of Mayor and Councilmember YES and to define "term" in cases where an individual serves less than a full term, to have the effect generally that no indi- vidual taking office after the effective date of the ordinance NO could serve more than eight (8) consecutive years in total in any combination of Mayor and/or Councilmember? Measure Y - Yes 5.395 No 2186 I further certify that the total number of ballots cast in the City of Dublin at said Election was 8,656 and attached hereto is a complete statement of the results showing the number of votes cast at each precinct for and against each measure. Dated this 27th day of November, 1996 47✓�f� � ,ttr BRAD r. CLARK Regi of Voters County of Alameda State of California ORDINANCE NO. 18 - 96 AN ORDINANCE OF t PROVIDING FOR TERM E THE PEOPLE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN DO HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Term Limits Section 2,08.050 is added to the Dublin Municipal Code to read as follows: "Section 2,08.050 Term Limits No person shall serve as Councilmember for more than two (2) consecutive terms, nor shall any person serve as Mayor for more than four (4) consecutive terms. In addition, (a) no person who has served as a Councilmember for one (1) term shall serve more than two (2) terms as Mayor if the terms as Councilmember and Mayor are consecutive; (b) no person who has served as Councilmember for two (2) consecutive terms shall serve a consecutive term as Mayor; (c) no person who has served as Mayor for three. (3) or four (4) consecutive terms shall serve a consecutive term as a Councilmember; (d) no person who has served as Mayor for two (2) consecutive terms shall serve more than one succeeding consecutive term as Councihnember; (e) no person who has served consecutive terms as Mayor and Councilmember shall serve more than one more consecutive term as Mayor; and (f) no person who has served consecutive terms as Mayor and Councilmember shall serve another consecutive term as Councilmember. As used herein, a person shall be considered to have served a "term" of office as a Councilmember if such person has served as a Councilmember for two years plus one day and a person shall be considered to have served a "term" of office as Mayor if such person has served as Mayor for one year plus one day." SECTION 2. Effective Date If approved by a majority of the voters, this ordinance shall be considered as adopted upon the date that the vote is declared by the City Council and shall go into effect ten (10) days after that date as provided in Elections Code Section 9217. SECTION 3. Posting The City Clerk of the City of Dublin shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in at least three public places in the City of Dublin in accordance with Section 36933 of the Government Code of the State of California. APPROVED by the following vote of the people on November 5, 1996: CITY OF DUBLIN MEASURE Y: Yes. Votes = 5,395 No Votes = 2,186 ADOPTED by Declaration of the vote by the City Council of the City of Dublin on December 3, 1996. EFFECTIVE on December 13, 1996, Clerk 44qj� Mayor K' 112- 3- 96 1ord -lmts, doc