It looks like the City of Santa Ana administration is pulling another fast one. Their agenda is posted for next week’s City Council meeting, however the item regarding “Special Municipal Election for the Submission to the Voters Question on Changes in City Charter Related to Term Limits” is not available. The link is not working. And City Hall closed at 5 p.m., so we cannot do anything about this until next Monday.
As a member of the Santa Ana Redevelopment & Housing Commission I told city officials that I would be leaving on vacation this weekend. So they know I won’t be here on Monday. And now I cannot review this Term Limit ballot measure until I get back next Friday. Interesting timing for a website malfunction, isn’t it?
So let’s review what I have heard about this ballot measure. It will be on the February, 208, presidential primary ballot. Supposedly it will extend the Council Term Limit to 3 four year terms, from the current 2 four year terms. And it will put in place Mayoral term limits that will likewise be 3 four year terms.
No matter what happens, Santa Ana Mayor Miguel Pulido wins. If the measure loses, which it likely will as voters rarely vote for longer term limits, then he will say that the voters do not support Mayoral term limits. If the measure passes, he will ostensibly be able to stay for, conceivably, another 12 years – if the term limits begin anew for him, which is likely.
And Pulido’s new ally on the Council, Claudia Alvarez, can run for the First District on the O.C. Board of Supervisors, lose, and then run again for a third council term in the fall of 2008.
So you see, Pulido wins, no matter what.
This is such a travesty! The Santa Ana Charter Reform Commission looked at term limits already, and came up with recommendations. Those have not been tossed out the window by Pulido and his pals.
What we need is Mayoral term limits, period. I would be open to 3 two year terms. Not four year terms – and certainly not 3 four year terms! King Pulido has already been in office far too long – we don’t need to make him King for life.
You can go to Santa Ana Insight and see video footage regarding what the Santa Ana City Council members originally had to say about term limits. There is also a link to the minutes regarding the formation of the ad hoc committee that came up with the ballot measure idea. I believe that the committee included Vince Sarmiento, Sal Tinajero and David Benavides. You can also take a survey about how you feel about term limits.
And you ought to plan on going to the Santa Ana City Council meeting on Monday night at 6 p.m and let them know that you are not happy with the bogus term limits they are offering us. Don’t forget to speak out against the ridiculous handbill ordinance too!
2-year terms is not a good idea. Look at the House of Representatives…these people are CONSTANTLY campaigning and raising money.
I say leave the Council at two, four year terms and the mayor at two four year terms.
I think your comment about Claudia is right on point. Without having the terms extended to 3 years, she has no where to go, particularly since she has no shot at wining a seat on the BOS.
Shame on David, Sal, and Vince for putting such a shameless waste of ballot space together. Any Councilmember that votes to approve this kind of thing is only thinking about themselves. The only thing that should be listed is Mayoral term limits. If it is bound to a council extension, we demand that it be seperated so the voters can vote on each item independently.So much for forming a citizen committee like the one David sat on to review the charter, as it looks like that was just there to further David’s political future. Sellouts all!
I agree with number 2. You want to have terms with enough length to get something done, without the constant campaigning and disruption of extremely short term limits. If the rep is bad, the term will be voted down by the people. A good leader should be allowed to remain for a reasonable amount of time to take care of business, uninterrupted, if the voters agree.
Many of the residents will not be supporting mayoral term limits.
When the only option is to force out the mayor and fill the seat with a Stanley or someone the special interests put up, the residents lose.
Gustavo Arrellano’s tongue and cheek op-ed put into words (in a larger forum) what many people have voiced for years (and Mr. Arrellano is not from Santa Ana): the City leadership is out of touch with its residents.
This term limits agenda item only further illustrates that point. We have two libraries, a rise in homicides, potholes every where and instead of addressing the issues, our City “leaders” busy themselves with a sham term limits measure.
It wouldn’t be so bad if the chicanery weren’t so transparent. Claudia gets to remain on the Council for another term and the Mayor (who has little to show for his tenure) gets another 12 years. The two people who have done so little to move this City forward stand the most to benefit.
The most depressing aspect of all this is that things won
#6
One of the mayor’s steady source of campaign donations and volunteer manpower is the Santa Ana Police & Fireman Associations. These public agencies engage in partisan politcis even though their salaries are non-partisian paid. And the majority of these city employees do not live in Santa Ana, yet they have a major influence on day-to-day governance.
The money and volunteer efforts of the Police and Fireman Associations is, in my opinion, a conflict of interest.
#6 suggests (2) 4 year terms for the mayor. End of story. But it’s not.
Regardless of what is decided on and makes it to the ballot or not Mayoral term limits CANNOT BE RETROACTIVE. So no matter what gets agreed upon the mayor is allowed to serve under those new rules. So, if you limit Pulido to (2) four year terms he can still serve for 8 years after the law is enacted.
Don’t make laws to fit an individual, make laws that fix a procedural problem. If the council gets (3) four year terms the mayor position should get at least two, or better yet, he/she should get (5) two year terms. Two year terms make sense because it allows a council member from different wards to get a ‘free pass’ to run for mayor while still on council. Otherwise, the mayor’s seat comes up with the same wards each election. That favors a particular ward. Hopefully, someone who is a better more succinct writer than I can explain this further.
The important point is that No matter what happens Pulido can stay in office for whatever time is voted on. This at least limits him and any future mayors to the voted upon limits, starting AFTER the election.
While we tried to promote Term Limits to two terms we were only given two choices (at the ballot Box) at that time. Do nothing or allow us to have three, four year terms. Our side lost. Or should I report we lost temporarily.
Well, we took matters into our own hands. The ultimate Term Limits is to organize your own “grass roots” effort to “throw the bums out” as we did in Mission Viejo in 2002
# 8:
I could not comprehend your post. Are you saying the mayor should serve for a shorter term than the Council?
The Council is already limited to two terms. That should not change. What should change is imposing a two, four year term limit on the mayor.
The council’s terms will be staggered so that every one is not running at the same time.
I agree that this issue is not compicated. The council already has a two term limit of for years per term. The Mayor has no term limits. Accordingly, the only term limit the council needs to consider is applying a term limit to the Mayor, not itself.
From a fairness perspective, the mayor should have a limit of two terms at four years per term.
Voters will never pass a measure that extends the Council’s term even if it limits the Mayor’s term.
Thank you ad hoc committee for giving the Council the bogus opportunity to enact mayoral term limits.
# 6
dont fool yourself.
sal helped write this mess and he stands to gain from its passage.
sal will vote yes on this, if he even bothers showing up to council.
time to toss pulido, sarmiento,tinajero,bustamante, alvarez and benavides as they are the ones harming the latino community in santa ana.
#10
The problem with where we are today is that the council voted to remove mayoral term limits from the other changes that the review committee suggested. That happened due to a flip-flop by Bustamante after saying he would support all the changes. Oh well. So now a simple change would be to put limits on the mayoral term. The problem is that if its four year terms it coincides with particular wards and not others. remember, the council ward elections are staggered. Mayoral four year terms would give a free pass for certain council members to run while still a councilmember without losing their seat while the other wards would have to choose to run for council or mayor. That is an advantage to the former wards and I believe, unfair.
So that leaves us with 2 year terms for the mayor. If that office has (4) or (6) 2 year terms the same problem arises. So you go to an odd number (5) or (7). which one is arbitrary, I chose (5). That still gives someone the ability to serve 8 years on council and 10 more as mayor. Seems like a long time to me. I don’t have a problem saying the mayor serves 10 total and council 12 total (if they move forward with a 3-term limit on council.)
Lastly, I wanted to emphasize to people who think this will somehow affect Miguel Pulido—It will NOT! You can’t make a law retroactive. He would be subject to the same rules as anyone else. So, if they decided on my suggestion, say (5) 2-year terms, Pulido could still serve ALL those terms regardless of how long he has already served. I believe he only was against the recommendations of the review committee because it would look bad to be the sitting mayor and have term limits passed. I think he should have embraced them and enjoyed another decade or so as mayor. Again, laws should be passed to create a smooth running government entity NOT to be punitive against a particular person. That just creates more problems down the road. Thanks for listening 🙂
This disaster was done by the Council, not the Mayor. Claudia has the votes to get Mayoral term limits on the ballot, and she’s had those voter for months. But it was Claudia and the other’s that decided to try to extend their *own* terms by putting the two issues together on the ballot.
They could have gone for 4 two year terms for Mayor or 2 4 year terms so there would be the same total years (8) served by everyone. The only reason they went for the 3- 4 year terms for the Mayor was so they could raise their own term limits to 12 years too.
Their strategy is to use the fact that there are currently no terms limits for the Mayor to get people to vote yes. Not a bad strategy, but I hope people will see through this and force them separate the two issues into two separate ballot issues. And you thought this Council was better than others? Yeah! Sure!
what does 55c mean?
are they going to write the words Monday night?
“prepare guidelines for preparation of arguments.” *fix the date”, “post the notice for argument process”
Reminds me of that auto insurance commercial with the caveman. “What?”
Do we need term limits?
Bob Dornan says no
Jim Morisey says no
Jerry Patterson says no
Grey Davis says no
Who says incumbents can’t be voted out.
I found the link to the term limits measure, http://www.ci.santa-ana.ca.us/coc/documents/Items/55C%20-%20TERM%20LIMITS.pdf.
I guess all we can say is that this comes as no surprise. With most of the council members depedent on the mayor for their political lives, it’s no surprise that the council adopts the mayor’s plan.