.png)
A debate over how long City Council members should serve — and whether to limit their time in office — will now be settled at the ballot box.
The council voted Aug. 5 to place two proposed amendments to the city’s home rule charter on the Nov. 4 ballot, following recommendations from a charter review committee appointed earlier this year. One proposition will ask voters to increase council terms from two years to three years, while another will decide whether or not to impose a limit of four consecutive terms.
Council members voted 8-1 to advance the three-year term proposal, with Councilman Chuck Swain opposed.
“If you don’t like somebody in office, vote them the hell out,” Swain said.
The council discussed both changing and removing the term limit proposal before sending it to voters. A motion to revise it to three consecutive terms failed 5-4, as did a motion to strike it from the ballot.
The ordinance was ultimately approved with the original consecutive four-term limit intact, over the dissent of three members.
Committee representatives said the proposed changes would not be retroactive, meaning the limits would apply only to terms served after the amendments take effect.
Councilman Liston Crim said longer terms could make members more effective, while Mayor Pro Tem Sue Brashar said they could also save money by reducing the number of elections.
“I spent my first year on council way back when just learning the ropes,” Crim said. “The next two years, I thought I could be more productive because I knew what was going on.”
The full text of the propositions and their effects will be posted on the city’s website ahead of the election, according to officials.
