YORBA LINDA : Voters to Consider Term Limits at Ballot

Voters will consider a measure on the November ballot to limit City Council members to three consecutive terms each.

The council voted 3 to 1 this week to place the issue before the electorate. Yorba Linda is the latest city to consider such a ballot measure this year. An initiative to limit the terms of state lawmakers won statewide voter approval in 1990. The city of Dana Point will consider term limits in June, and the Anaheim City Council could decide next week whether to place a similar measure on its election ballot.

Under the Yorba Linda plan, council members could serve three consecutive, four-year terms, and then would have to wait two years before running again. The measure would not be retroactive and would start in November of this year.

But even if voters approve the plan, it will not be legally binding. Councilman Gene Wisner proposed that the measure be only advisory because of concerns it would conflict with state laws. Several “general law” cities--which are guided by rules of the state--have been unable to prevent candidates who have reached their term limits from placing their names on the ballot.

“I’m calling it a hollow victory,” said Councilman John M. Gullixson, who first proposed term limits on council members when he ran for his seat in 1990. “It’s better than nothing.”

Even so, Gullixson said the state law might be changed this year. He said he is considering collecting enough signatures to make sure the Yorba Linda measure is legally binding in the event the state law is changed this year.

In any case, Gullixson predicted that 7 of 10 voters would support the measure.

“It allows for fresh air to come on the council and for people to step out for a while,” he said.

Councilman Henry W. Wedaa voted against placing the measure on the ballot, and Mayor Irwin M. Fried abstained. Both have been opponents of term limits, saying they restrict voters’ rights to choose from an open field of candidates.

But Gullixson said his proposal is less restrictive than the state initiative, which prohibits legislators from ever seeking the same seat again.

“You can be too restrictive,” he said. “I wanted something the entire public would embrace.”