Term limits for Denton City Council members have been in the city’s charter since the 1980s. In 2008, some voters disagreed with the city attorney’s interpretation that council members should be allowed to vacate one kind of council seat, whether at-large or district-specific, and reset the clock on another kind of council seat. They filed suit to keep term limits at three terms, or six years.
An ad hoc committee proposed a set of charter amendments that were, ultimately, looser than the original three-term limit and codified the interpretation. Voters approved the propositions in 2009.
Here’s how it rolled, according to a news report by Lowell Brown we published on Nov. 4, 2009:
Proposition 1 keeps the existing limit of three consecutive two-year terms and applies the limit separately to each of the council’s seven seats. It essentially codifies the city’s longtime practice of not counting past years of service against council members who switch seats or take a break in service. The proposition was designed to settle a debate over whether Denton term limits applied per seat or across all seats. Past years of service don’t count against council members who run for a different seat, including mayor, or sit out a term.
Under the new amendment, residents will be limited to 12 consecutive years of council service. The amendment includes no limit on the number of terms someone could serve in a lifetime. That means a council member could serve up to 12 years in a row by switching seats, sit out a year and then run again.
Proposition 2, which says council members representing the city’s four geographical districts must remain living in their district throughout their term in office. The charter previously didn’t prevent council members from staying in a seat after moving out of the district in which they were elected.
Proposition 3, which says vacancies in the mayor’s seat will be filled by special elections. Before, the mayor pro tem would have completed a mayor’s unexpired term.
Proposition 4, which makes clear that the council can’t interfere with the personnel decisions of any of its four appointees. The charter already prevented council members from interfering with the city manager’s personnel decisions, but the restriction didn’t extend to the city attorney, city auditor and municipal court judge.