The number of terms that elected officials could serve continuously would be raised to three from the current two under one of 27 proposals the Honolulu City Charter Commission voted to advance Wednesday.

The proposals now go to the commission’s Committee on Submission and Information, which will meet Friday to look into whether any of the proposals should be eliminated, consolidated or changed to conform with the charter’s style and legality. Its recommendations would then be considered by the full commission, Commission Chairman David Rae said after Wednesday’s meeting.

But it’s unlikely that any new proposals will be made or that any of the 27 could be changed substantially, Rae said.

Proposal 44 would change to three the number of four-year terms that elected mayors, City Council members and prosecutors could serve consecutively. Currently elected mayors and Council members can serve a maximum of two straight terms, while elected prosecutors have no term limits.

If approved by voters in November, those already in office would be able to serve up to three terms, not three additional terms. For example, Council Chairman Ernie Martin is in the middle of his second term and, under current law, is “termed out” and barred from seeking a third term when his second four-year term is up in 2018. If the Charter amendment is approved, he would be allowed to seek a third term that would keep him on the Council through 2022.

The proposal, introduced by commission member Paul Oshiro, has generated little fanfare and only a smattering of testimony. The commission vote was 10-3, with members Michael Broderick, Rick Tsujimura and Pam Witty-Oakland casting the “no” votes.

Commission members supporting the proposal said it takes time for elected officials to acclimate to the job.

“I believe it’s in the best interest of the public to vote, and to do so vociferously and not rely on the artificiality of term limits to make changes for them,” Rae said.

Said commission member Donna Ikeda, “At a time when you have issues like … rail and things that are going to have a long impact, I think that it serves a good purpose to at least have people who have institutional knowledge and a good understanding of the workings and problems and potential benefits of these projects.”

In written testimony, downtown Honolulu resident Lynne Matusow objected to the proposal. “The only reason to extend the term is to further entrench elected officials,” she said. “These paid public servants are public servants. This is not meant to be a lifetime job.”

Two other ideas that moved on, both unanimously, would tighten the reins the Police Commission has over the police chief and the Honolulu Police Department. Recent controversies involving officers and Chief Louis Kealoha have resulted in public criticism that the Police Commission was not doing enough.

Charter commission member Kevin Mulligan said “this is really about citizen control over the police” and a conversation taking place nationally. “We need to take these actions to give the Police Commission additional powers.”

Proposal C-1 would allow the appointed, seven-member Police Commission to suspend or terminate the chief “at will.” Existing Charter language says the chief serves at the pleasure of the commission and allows the removal of the chief for cause. But it lists only “gross or continuous maladministration” on the chief’s part as one possible cause for removal.

Proposal C-2 would give the commission authority to issue subpoenas in investigations against officers, including the power to compel witnesses to testify and have evidence turned over.

The biggest of about a dozen proposals rejected Wednesday was Proposal 153, which would have barred city officials and employees from receiving any gifts from lobbyists. The vote failed when only six members supported it, five objected and two abstained.

Those who opposed said it was too onerous.

Also killed were several proposals to curtail the semi-autonomous nature of the Board of Water Supply.

Other proposals that advanced:

>> Proposal C-3, which would require 0.5 percent of annual property tax revenues go into a Honolulu Zoo fund through June 2023.

>> Proposal C-7, which would require most grants-in-aid funding to nonprofits be vetted through the existing Grants In Aid Advisory Commission via the Grants In Aid Fund.

>> Proposal 76A, which would transfer all operations and maintenance of the city’s upcoming rail project to the Department of Transportation Services and away from the Honolulu Authority for Rapid Transportation, which is tasked with building the rail. Fares for rail, bus and para-transit operations would be set by a rate commission.

>> Proposal 29, which would give budget autonomy to the prosecuting attorney’s office.

>> Proposal 73, which would create a new Office of Climate Change, Sustainability and Resiliency.

>> Proposal C-5, which would create a new Department of Land Management.