Remarks by Steven D. Losner
633 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 24 of 26
“If either one of these two questions, either exempting appointed service from the calculation of term limits and changing the mayor's term back to two years, affirmative action on either or both tonight is merely a direction to the attorney to bring back final ballot language at our July 7th meeting for approval for placement on the ballot. So we're not necessarily approving”
“if there's concerns about the ballot language you can address them and i will try you can let me know and i will try to incorporate anything that you're looking for for placement on the july 7th july 7th agenda agenda okay and then after we dispense with these two i'd like to talk about a third concept that i believe needs to go on the ballot and and we can dispense with with that so The first item would be the concept of reducing the mayor's term, not term limit, but term from four years to two years, commencing with the 2027 election, correct?”
“Mr. Mayor, if I may. Yes, Councilman Fletcher.”
“Okay, so let's get a motion on the floor with respect to the concept of the mayoral term of it. Vice Mayor Bailey? Did you?”
“Yes. I didn't know if you said may I or do we? Oh, well. Okay.”
“I agree going forward, but it's retroactive to also include the councilwoman's free 20 months.”
“Well, but we can do it for the good of the city by adopting it prospectively rather than retroactively also. But let's get a motion on the table to have the city attorney bring back ballot language reducing the mayor's term from four to two, not the term limit. Moved. Moved by Councilman Roth. Second. Second by Councilman Canabal. If there's nothing further, let's have a roll call vote on that concept coming back.”
“And then the next one would be the exemption of the period of appointment. Moved by Councilman Roth. Second. Second by Councilwoman Bailey. Roll call, please, Madam Clerk.”
“Now, if I might, the other concept, and I think this is very... this is time sensitive and appropriate to go on the ballot, my opinion, is that, and this would not apply to anyone who is in office now, but for those who are elected to a fresh term for the first time, commencing in 27, as to council members, they are limited to an eight-year term rather than 12 on council. There's a little nuance. This does not change the 12 consecutive year limit that we have now that would not prevent a council member from jumping from council to mayor so long as they're within that 12-year limit consecutive…”
“Well, they get to reset their clock too.”
“That's right, take her seat when she's termed out. But it ain't happening.”
“Well, if you want, you'll need to bring that up. And that may be something that we need to work through the committee to implement in 29, because we're bumping up against an election this year to be effective in 27.”
“The charter controls how the vice mayor title is bestowed. Yes.”
“Not casting curses on anybody who's up for election next year, but I see the potential in an election blowout, there will probably be, there will be a new mayor and potentially four new council members. Because if the mayor's two-year term change doesn't pass, I think we're going to see a resign to run. So we're going to have four, potentially, you have to run like you're always losing. In 27, there could be as many as four new members. Those four new members would enjoy the benefit of 12 years if we don't go forward for this cycle, reducing it to eight. It would be those who were first…”
“All right. So if there's anything else on that concept, if we could have a motion on the concept of Eight-year council terms commencing for new folks coming to council in 27. Do we have a motion for that? Okay, moved by Councilman Canabal. Yes, Vice Mayor.”
“Correct. Not applicable to, in this case, Cannonball and Fletcher. Their grandfather with the 12.”
“But again, I think to your question, we will see this one more time. If it dies tonight, you won't. If it lives to fight another day, as the first two have, We'll see it again. We'll see these first two again.”
“You never heard the phrase burden of service come out of my mouth. Okay, so Councilman cannibal moved to direct the attorneys to draft language reducing future Council terms limits from 12 years to eight years we don't have a second yet nobody else wants to second it, I will. Okay, so second by the Vice Mayor any final comments before we vote on the reduction of Council term limits. Okay, let's have a roll call, Madam Clerk.”
“Does it carry? It carries. It carries, okay.”
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
“Thank you. Background. This came out of my angst, and I'm sure the angst that all of you share with the BRT chaos. It occurred to me again that the straight line linear mass transit, whether it be BRT, whether it be elevated rail, does not really serve the majority of our community. I think it's fair to say folks who live on the east side, who represent the majority of our population, who have to get on the turnpike every morning to go to their place of employment even if elevated rail came all the way to homestead would probably not that make that drive back across town so in thinking that…”
“We will. And I know there are a lot of different clarifications of which agency has its hands in the pot.”
“Thank you. We have a meeting with the director later this week, and certainly that will be on the list. Councilman Roth?”
“But our folks are on the turnpike going somewhere at 530 in the morning.”
“To see where the employment hot spots are. I think it would be very enlightening.”