Council delays vote on charter term‑limit fix after hours‑long public debate

The Chandler City Council on Thursday moved to table a proposed charter amendment about consecutive terms and set a special meeting for final review by June 9, after more than two hours of council discussion and public testimony.

The proposal in resolution 5913 would clarify Article II, Section 2.01(e) of the Chandler City Charter by stating that “no person shall be eligible to be elected to a combination of the offices of council member and mayor for more than 16 consecutive years,” and that a person who serves 16 consecutive years “shall not be eligible to hold either office again until 4 years have elapsed.” The council did not adopt the language tonight; instead members voted unanimously to table the resolution and return with final ballot language before the county deadline.

Council members and the city attorney described the charter language as ambiguous and said outside counsel had delivered differing opinions. City staff cited a written outside elections attorney opinion that under the current charter wording “a person who has served 8 consecutive years as a council member is not eligible to serve an additional term as mayor or council member until he or she has a break in service for at least 4 years.” The city attorney’s office told council the charter is ambiguous and could be interpreted multiple ways.

Council member Orlando moved the resolution to send clarified language to the ballot; several council members said they supported clarification but wanted more time to confirm precise wording. The motion to table carried unanimously.

Public speakers were sharply divided. Several residents urged the council to place the clarification on the November ballot now so voters can resolve the ambiguity and avoid litigation. “Placing this clarification on the November ballot is a necessary step to provide voters with clear guidance without additional cost to taxpayers,” said Sherry Johnson, a community leader in Legislative District 12.

Other residents urged delay and broader public review. “It would be extremely unfortunate to rush a vote to amend the City Charter when said amendment is poorly written and open to more interpretation,” said Lisa Askey, a longtime resident, who asked the council to form a charter subcommittee of residents and attorneys and vote in 2026 instead.

City staff told the council the deadline to submit final ballot language to the county is midnight on June 9. Staff also provided a rough special‑election cost estimate: approximately $471,000 if the city ran a stand‑alone special election; that cost would be lower if the amendment ran on the November ballot with other jurisdictions.

Council members said they are open to either sending a clarified question to voters in November or taking more time through a committee process, but they emphasized the immediate need to resolve the legal uncertainty. The council did not adopt any charter language tonight.