Correspondence
·
...; ~.... . J
~... ,., GJ"'..', A
,!.t' . ~; ~(
..... .~... f
':.. ~. 'I!' ,.Ii.
......~~.. /~
'.... ~
.-~
{-'-I,
\ Ì'/
i
"( e.
City of
Cupertmo
Office of the City Attorney
10320 S. DeAnza Blvd., HID
Cupertino, CA 95014
Ph: (408) 777-3405
Fax: (408) 777-3401
November 5,1996
Charles T. Kilian
City Attorney
Eileen Murray
Deputy City Attorney
Honorable Mayor and Members
of the City Council
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Avenue
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: Term Limits for Councilmembers
Dear Mayor and Councilpersons:
Pursuant to your request, I have examined the law with respect to the power of a
general law city to enact measures which would provide for term limits for
councilmembers. On November 6, 1990, the voters of Cupertino passed the following
advisory measure:
Do the qualified voters of the City of Cupertino approve
limiting the service of city councilmembers to two
consecutive elected terms for a maximum possible time
on a consecutive basis (appointed and elected combined)
of 10 years and 354 days, after which they would not be
eligible for election or appointment to a council seat for
two (2) years? (See attached notice)
The primary reason that the measure was designated as advisory was that, until
recently, general law cities were prohibited by state law from enacting term limitation
ordinances. See Steinkamp v. Teglia (1989) 210 Cal.App.3d 402. However, in 1995,
the State Legislature enacted Government Code Section 36502(b) which provided as
follows:
Printed on Recycled Paper
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 6, 1996
Page 2
b) Notwithstanding any other provision oflaw, the city council of a general
law city or charter city may adopt or the residents of the city may propose, by
initiative, a proposal to limit or repeal a limit on the number of terms a
member of the city council may serve on the city council, or number of terms
an elected mayor may serve. Any proposal to limit the number of terms. . .
shall apply prospectively only and shall not become operative unless submitted
to the electors of the city at a regularly scheduled election and a majority of the
votes cast on the question favor the adoption of the proposal. . . .
Term limitations either may limit an elected official's successive terms in office or
they may place an absolute limit on the number of terms in office that an elected
official may serve. In 1991, the California Supreme Court upheld an absolute
limitation on California legislative terms in office See Legislature of the State of
California v Eu 54 Cal.3d 492 (1991). Further, in Cawdrey v. Redondo Beach 15 Cal
App. 4th 1212 (1993), the appellate court upheld a city's charter provision placing an
absolute limit on the number of terms a city councilmember could serve. On the other
hand at least one Federal District Court has declared that a law which bars an office
holder from ever returning to public office is invalid under the U.S. Constitution.
(See attached article)
Based upon the present state of the law, the Council may wish to consider the
following options:
1) Placing on the ballot a measure which is identical to the advisory
measure adopted in 1990. (two consecutive elected terms - total 10
year and 354 days - two year waiting period.)
2) Placing a measure on the ballot similar to the 1990 measure but with
a longer waiting period (e.g., 4, 6, 10 years).or with a greater number of
terms (e.g., 3 terms).
3) Placing a measure on the ballot providing for a life time limit on the
number of terms. (caveat, this alternative may be vulnerable to future
federal court decisions).
In the event that the council wishes to place any measure on the ballot, it should direct
the City Clerk to initiate the procedure to place the measure on the ballot for the
November 1997 municipal election.
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City Council
November 6, 1996
Page 3
If you have any questions, I will be happy to answer them at the next council meeting.
øJ¿~
Charles T. Kilian
City Attorney
ss
Enclosure
cc: Don Brown
Kim Smith
· i.-: ...
... l' ¡e.
'.-1Il' ."..'"
.- @~.
.';. ,...\: .......'
'.... '",_1 ~~
....., . ~
\-. .......
Citvof
Cupertmo
City Hall,
10300 Torre A venue
Cupertino, CA 95014-3202
Telephone: (408) 777-3223
FAX: (408) 777-3366
kimberlys@cupertino.org
OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
August 20, 1997
To City Council incumbents and candidates:
There have been voluntary term limits in Cupertino since 1990 when the Measure U advisory
measure was passed. On the ballot this November will be Measure C which would make term limits
mandatory. If you are interested in submitting an argument for or against the measure, please contact
the City Clerk's office.
CITY OF CUPERTINO - MEASURE C
"Do the qualified voters of the City of Cupertino approve limiting the service of city council
members to two consecutive elected terms, for a maximum possible time (appointed and
elected combined) of 10 years and 364 days, after which they would not be eligible for
election or appointment to a council seat for four (4) years?"
City Attorney's Impartial Analysis of Measure C:
California law authorizes the adoption of a local ordinance which imposes term limitations
with respect to members of the City Council. Any proposal to limit the number ofterms a
council member may serve becomes operative only upon a majority vote of the City's electors
and can only be applied prospectively.
This proposal seeks to limit the service of city council members to two consecutive elected
terms of four years each. In addition, the measure provides that a council member who is
appointed to serve the balance of a vacant, unexpired term which is three years or more, may
only be elected for one additional consecutive term of four years.
Hence, the maximum time any council member could conceivably serve on a consecutive
basis would be ten years plus 364 days (i.e., 2 years 364 days of an unexpired appointive term
plus two consecutive elected terms of four years each).
Once a council member reaches any of the limits described above, he or she would not be
eligible for election or appointment to a council seat for four years.
If adopted, this proposal would be incorporated into the city's ordinance code and could be
amended or repealed only by a majority vote ofthe city's electorate.
Printed on Recycled Paper
If you decide to prepare an argument for or against the measure, please note the following:
· Arguments for or against the measure must be submitted to the Cupertino City Clerk no
later than 5:00 p.m. on Friday, August 29.
· No arguments shall exceed 300 words in length.
· No more than five signatures shall appear with any argument submitted.
· Printed arguments submitted shall be titled either "Argument in Favor of Measure C" or
"Argument Against Measure C." Words used in the title shall not be counted when
determining the length of any argument.
· The City Clerk will select an argument for and an argument against said measure to be
printed and distributed with each sample ballot.
· The City Clerk will send a copy of the selected argument in favor of the measure to the
authors of the argument against, and a copy of the selected argument against to the authors
of the argument in favor.
· The authors may prepare and submit rebuttal arguments not exceeding 250 words. The
rebuttal arguments must be filed with the City Clerk not later than 5:00 p.m. on
Wednesday, September 3.
· In accordance with Section 9600 of the California Elections Code, all arguments and
rebuttals filed pursuant to this notice shall be accompanied by the following form
statement to be signed by each author:
The undersigned author(s) of the ARGUMENTIREBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN
FAVOR OF/AGAINST Ballot Measure C at the special municipal election for the
City of Cupertino to be held on November 4,1997, hereby state that the argument is
true and correct to the best of his/her/their knowledge and belief.
Please contact me or Deputy City Clerk Roberta Wolfe if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Kimberly Smith, CMC
City Clerk