Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Term Limits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning board debates term limits; members indicate preference for three-year terms
Summary
Board members and public commenters debated whether to impose term limits and how they should be set; the board signaled majority support for 3-year staggered terms with no hard limit on the number of terms and asked staff to refine language.
Planning staff introduced term limits as a possible addition to the draft bylaws, saying they are intended to keep the board fresh and prevent burnout. Members discussed multiple options — leaving five-year terms in Chapter 18, shortening terms to three years, or imposing consecutive-term limits — and weighed continuity against turnover.
Public commenter Raymond urged caution, arguing term limits should be set by ordinance and adopted by council rather than by bylaws. Board members debated staggering, whether returning after a year should be allowed, and whether chair or vice-chair service should be treated separately from regular member terms.
The board moved toward a working preference for three-year terms with no limit on the number of terms: "So 3 year terms with no limit on the number of terms," said Rick Lowes, the vice chair. Staff will incorporate member feedback into the draft bylaws for further review.
