Charter Amendment 1 calls for extending term limits from two to three consecutive terms, for Pierce County County Council members and the Pierce County Executive.
The Pierce County Council passed Ordinance No. 2008-113, proposing an amendment to the Pierce County Charter. If approved, the proposed amendment would: (a) move the election of Councilmembers and the Executive to odd-numbered years by 2015; and (b) increase term limits for Councilmembers and the Executive from two consecutive four-year terms to three consecutive four-year terms.
The Pierce County Charter currently provides that the election of Councilmembers and the Executive be held in even-numbered years. If approved, the amendment would move the election of Councilmembers and the Executive to odd-numbered years by 2015. The Pierce County Charter also provides that Councilmembers and the Executive may serve no more than two consecutive four-year terms. If approved, this amendment would also increase term limits by allowing them to serve three consecutive four-year terms. The question on the ballot will be, "Should Charter Amendment No. 1 be approved?"
STATEMENT AGAINST: (as it will appear in the voter's pamphlet)
Stop career politicians from extending term limits
This proposal seeks to extend term limits and change to odd year elections when fewer people vote. Both issues are bad ideas, reject Amendment 1.
Voters overwhelmingly passed term limits in 1980
Term limits were established in 1980 when freeholders created the current form of government.
This amendment was proposed by self-serving incumbent politicians not citizens
Term limits were part of the original charter because Pierce County was renowned for corruption. County commissioners abused their position due to a lack of checks and balances; and catered to insider special interests at taxpayer expense. Conviction of the sheriff on corruption charges motivated freeholders to write a charter making Pierce County the first county in the nation to limit terms of the council and executive.
Ballot title argumentative comparing lawmakers’ and elected administrators’ term limits
Elected officials without two term limits become entrenched incumbents who are virtually impossible to vote out of office. Two term limits provide for more participation of new people. Term limits need not be consistent as the ballot title suggests. Reject this amendment.
Writing committee members: Sherry Bockwinkel, Stacy Emerson, Sen. Larry Faulk, John Hathaway and Ken Paulson
REBUTTAL TO "FOR" STATEMENT: (as it will appear in the voter's pamphlet
Don’t be confused – insiders, incumbents and special interests are the driving forces behind extending term limits and the double subject ballot title.
Save our term limits – eight years is enough time in power for county policy makers.
The current two terms for county policy makers versus three terms for county department administrators is reasonable and appropriate.
Reject longer terms. Say no to insider politics. Reject off year elections when fewer people vote. Reject this amendment.
Charter Amendment 2 calls for moving certain offices to odd-numbered years.
Explanatory Statement: The Pierce County Council has passed Ordinance No. 2008-113, proposing an amendment to the Pierce County Charter.
The question on the ballot will be, "Should Charter Amendment No. 2 be approved?"