Easing Council term limits will deny voters fresh faces, ideas

The City Charter Commission is trying again to give city elected officials looser term limits after voters resoundingly rejected the idea a decade ago.

The mayor and City Council members would be allowed three consecutive four-year terms instead of the current two under a proposal being advanced by the commission.

A proposed 2006 Charter amendment that would have extended or eliminated Council term limits was defeated, with only 40 percent voter support.

It’s as bad an idea now and deserves the same fate if the Charter Commission, which was appointed by the mayor and Council, puts it on the November ballot.

The Council is increasingly a closed shop for incumbents and career politicians wielding big campaign funds provided by lobbyists, labor unions, corporations and city contractors.

Incumbents almost always retain their seats easily, either unopposed or running against underfunded challengers.

The only spirited competition for Council seats is when incumbents hit term limits, and even then, newcomers often face state lawmakers moving to the Council; five of the nine current Council members are former legislators.

The Charter Commission should be working to encourage more competition in municipal elections, not less.

The system already has loopholes that get some Council members more than eight years.

Half the members get two extra years after reapportionments, and for those elected to midterm vacancies, partial terms don’t count the toward the two-term limit.

A couple of current examples of how it works:

Councilman Ikaika Anderson was elected in 2009 to fill the final three years of the late Barbara Marshall’s term and was re-elected to a full term in 2012.

His $302,704 bankroll as of Dec. 31 scared off challengers, and he’s unopposed this year for a new term that will take him to nearly 11 years. The proposed Charter amendment potentially adds four more years.

Councilwoman Ann Kobayashi, who was twice elected to midterm vacancies, has served nearly continually on the Council since 2002.

With $104,688 on hand as of Dec. 31, she’s seeking re-election this year against Kimberly Case, who reported $3,319, and Robert Armstrong, who reported zero campaign funds.

If Kobayashi wins and the proposed Charter amendment gives her yet another term, she could serve 22 years with only a few months’ break.

It’s exactly the kind of entrenchment voters were guarding against when 80 percent originally voted for term limits in 1992.

A special beneficiary of the proposed change, championed by Council-appointed Charter commissioners, is Council Chairman Ernie Martin, who dropped a plan to run for mayor this year and hinted he’ll go instead in 2020.

The problem is he’d hit his term limit in 2018 and need a way to draw a paycheck and maintain visibility for two years.

If the proposed Charter amendment passes, problem solved — his, not ours.

Reach David Shapiro at volcanicash@gmail.com.