It turns out that a proposal to change how the city restricts terms for City Council members won't make it on the May 8 ballot after all.
After voting Feb. 1 to put the proposed City Charter amendment before voters this spring, City Council revisited the matter last week and voted 3-2 to rescind its decision.
The current city policy limits a council member to two consecutive three-year terms, but doesn't prohibit that member from then sitting out for a year and running again. The defeated proposal would have allowed members to serve four terms, consecutive or otherwise, but would have prevented a member from ever running for a fifth term.
Councilman Kevin Cole said he voted against putting the the proposed term-limit amendment on the ballot because it could have unintended consequences if approved.
"If the voters were to pass it, it means that Pearland would have a 'hard cap' on its term limits," he said. "The feedback and information that I see, especially out of the city of Houston, is that a 'hard cap' has had unintended consequences.
"People get in their last term … and they have a tendency to do crazy things that could hurt the city," Cole said. "They’re not necessary following the will of the people. They’re just not accountable any more."
Joining Cole in the Feb. 8 decision to remove the term-limit proposal from the May ballot were Woody Owens and Steve Saboe. Voting in favor of putting the proposed amendment before voters were Felicia Kyle and Scott Sherman.
On Feb. 1, the council had voted 4-1 to put the matter to voters, with Cole casting the no vote. Saboe at that time said that although he personally didn't agree with the proposal, he was OK with taking it to the voters.
The council on Monday also revisited another proposed charter amendment, but with a different result. In considering whether the ballot should include a proposal to add two seats to the council -- now a five-member at-large board plus the mayor -- the group voted no, reaffirming a decision made at the Feb. 1 meeting.
In the Feb. 8 vote, Owens, Saboe and Cole voted against including that proposal in the election, with Kyle and Sherman supporting inclusion.
On Feb. 1, Kyle had cast the lone vote in support of placing the proposed amendment on the ballot, saying, "I support the growth of the council because the city is growing."
At that meeting, Sherman had tried unsuccessfully to gain support for ballot inclusion of an amendment to add one seat to the council.
The end result of all this is that a single proposed charter amendment will go to voters in May: one that would allow the city more time to adopt a budget before the start of the fiscal year on Oct. 1.
Currently, the charter says the city must adopt the budget at least 15 days before Oct. 1. The proposal is for the city simply to be required to adopt the budget before the start of the fiscal year, allowing more time for the process to be completed.
City Council approved inclusion this proposal on the ballot at the Feb. 1 meeting.
Robert Stanton contributed to this entry.
Readers are solely responsible for the content of the comments they post here. Comments are subject to the site's terms and conditions of use and do not necessarily reflect the opinion or approval of the Houston Chronicle.
Comments
Dear Council members, you've got it all wrong.
Putting such initiative on the ballot is not up for the City Council to decide. Proposals from the Charter Commission should go on the ballot automatically and should be decided by voters.
Term Limits
They could do crazy things like vote against hard caps or expanding the council.
With Sam Davis
Protect the good ole boy network
Seriously, with less than 1500 people voting out of a 100,000+ in community, how could we expect anything less? Pearland politics is all about the friends and family network because nobody outside the circle is interested. The only chance a newcomer has on getting in is by community discontent; such as, a landfill sharing a fence line.
I am of the opinion that the vote is the best form of term limit and those in office voting for self preservation should be voted out on that premise alone. As the next election nears, our motto's should be, "What have they done for us lately", instead of "what have they done for themselves".
Waking up
I agree with you George, but I also see more people getting involved, they seem to be waking up and realizing what you have already known. An example is the election of Scott Sherman into position 2, instead of the person chosen for the seat. I also believe you'll see the same for the coming election.
All it takes is one person... Then another.. And another and with that, we can see some real change.
Go vote... Get involved.
Tammy
If you are able to read through some of the past blogs, you will see that I have been a huge supporter of the city and of many of our elected officials. In many cases, I have publicly defended their actions and decisions. Unfortunately, from watching and studying how the city works over the years, what projects get financed, who gets appointed, etc, my opinions have changed. Today, my feelings are that our city is a “Buy-in” system that only works for those willing to provide the “Tithings”.
Is it really getting on 5 years now that we have been studying the Park and Ride…~10 years and 30 million dollars since the roads to nowhere have been laid in the Spectrum center? Why do we dump money upon more of our money every year into a waterlight project that may or not happen due to watershed issues? A city sponsored subdivision built beside a stinky landfill? The fading away of Mom and Pop shops? I can go on but it does not do any good because the majority of the 1500 folks (out of 100,000+) willing to vote, seem to like what is going on.
George Fishman, those are excellent observations
I went to a neighborhood planning meeting yesterday. I was the only person in the crowd who was not retired. The first salvo fired by the crowd was question whether the taxes would go up. I asked a few questions after the over-65 folks got their grievances out of their system. I found out that the planning commission can only recommend future land use patterns but it is up to city councilmembers to implement those changes. This speaks volumes.
The city says they want to attract young workers to move and start families here. But the input they get is from a very different demographic group. Everybody else is too busy or not aware. Low voter turnout translates into lack of safe routes to schools, proliferation of strip malls and lack of park space in parts of the city. The longer people spend commuting, the less time they have for other things, and that's why there is still no park and ride or any other public transportation system.
One of City Council candidates was at the meeting and I asked him for ideas for increase of the voter turnout. He couldn't think of any off the top of his head.
meetup.com anyone?
Kasiawi
I work in the industrial construction field and I travel throughout the country on a regular basis. Watching Pearland grow over the years has me aware of other area developments and I notice, with a critical eye, what seems to work and what does not. A few cities that come to mind as comparisons to Pearland’s development are;
- Evansville, Indiana
- Dubuque, Iowa
- Brandon, Florida
- Owensboro, Kentucky
- Fairmont, West Virginia …Just to name a few.
The reasons I pick these cities over others in the 49 states I have worked in, is because of the similar growth rates, types of development (i.e. subdivisions, strip centers, town centers, etc), and how the communities are laid out in general. They are all thriving and each development seems to compliment the other (even in this economy). Pearland, on the other hand, seems to have one area it is focused on (at the cost of other areas), and it does not seem to be getting off the ground very well, despite intense advertising and 10 years of throwing money at it. I am not sure how a smart business practice can dictate that it continuing, unless a profit is currently being made somewhere, somehow, or by someone(s)?
The main point I am trying to make is that in the 49 states and various cities in each I have worked and visited, I do not see the huge vacancy rates, restaurant failures, store closures, deferred maintenance, and the general lack of regard to the overall community, as I see in Pearland these days. It seems to be all about one dream; which is, building up the hwy 288/ BW8 area and nothing else. Moreover, with our tax dollars.
A good example is the neighborhood I live in, Westminster. It is one of the older communities and the homes and large trees offer a lot of charm and elegance. Unfortunately, the roads are a patch-work of shoddy repairs, the ditches are not maintained, the 1960 waterlines are so full of sediment that water filters are a required for drinking, and the power grid is so old and week that it took over 2 weeks for us to get power along Hampshire St. during Ike. Dixie Hollow is another good example if you have ever driven through there.
I truly believe that our designers and trustees of the master plan have done an excellent job getting Pearland turned around from the 80’s, and to where we were 3 years ago. I also know that our elected officials and the city staff have done excellent jobs working to fulfill the goals and expectations that the master plan had spelled out, up to 3 years ago. Unfortunately, we are currently stuck on one goal and it has stagnated us as a community. It is time for new faces and new goals…ones that will represent Pearland as a community rather than, just the waterlight and spectrum districts. In my humble opinion, of course.
Post new comment