County Term Limits measure Qualifies. But Would it Have any Real Effect? — The Omission of both Sheriff and D.A. from the Limits, and a County Legal Summary, suggest it Would Not.

Jim Sills Jim Sills 2 Comments


Term   Limit   Legal   analysis

What if they gave a Term Limit, but NOBODY now in office was
affected by it?

That is the question today, after the SD Registrar of Voters certified
the SEIU-sponsored petition measure had enough valid signatures to
appear on the June 2010 countywide ballot.

Consider these Omissions and Details in the SEIU Term Limit Plan:

(1) The measure does NOT limit the District Attorney….nor the Sheriff,
nor the Assessor/Recorder, nor the County Treasurer. Only the County
Supervisors are targeted.

This omission ignores History. Three recent Countywide incumbents
served LONGER than any current County Supervisor. [Sheriff John
Duffy 1970-1990, Assessor Greg Smith 1983-2008, District Attorney
Ed Miller, 1970-1990]. Yet, the Union term limit plan ignores them.

Why? Perhaps because the Sheriff and The DA do not vote on the
annual County budget and salary ordinance. Supervisors do !

(2) The official Summary written by the County’s lawyer shop (aka
“County Counsel”) also drops this Bombshell. Even should it pass
next June, all 5 current Supervisors could run for TWO more terms !

The vital words are, “This proposed measure, if approved, would
apply PROSPECTIVELY to any person elected or appointed…after
the Term Limit measure is approved….”

“Prospectively” means going forward, sports fans, so today’s 5
County Supervisors could all seek 8 more years.

But given the Incumbents’ generation (their ages range from 60
to 69) it is unlikely any of them would want to stay in office for
another Decade. Consequently, if the Term Limit measure
takes effect, it probably will NOT AFFECT the “Fab 5” either.

SUMMARIZING: If the Union term limit wins in June, it likely
will affect NO ONE now in office. It will not even amount to
effective revenge on today’s County Supervisors who sometimes
reject the Union wishes for more benefits, pay and pensions.

What if they gave a Term Limit…. and No one was Affected?

[For the statistically minded: the Registrar of Voters’ random
sample of 3,586 signatures found 81% of them were valid.
That would project to 92,000 total valid signatures for all the
petitions submiited, and well above the 77,000 required].


Comments 2

  1. I wonder if a legal challenge occurred, if this measure would be thrown out since it is fingering only one group of elected officials.

  2. The 1990 state term limits law, Prop. 140, applies to ALL elected state officials, from the Governor and Attorney General, right through to the state Assembly and Senate

    No exceptions were considered.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.