Dublin should have been transparent about the proposed term-limit ballot measure.

Vote no on Measure JJ - it doesn't clearly state the extended length of service it proposes.

November 3rd 2024.

Dublin should have been transparent about the proposed term-limit ballot measure.
To access our full list of endorsements for the upcoming election, simply click here. On the ballot this Tuesday, the Dublin City Council has proposed a measure that aims to bring about positive changes in our government, including an extension of term limits. However, their approach to informing voters about this particular aspect has been less than forthcoming. As a result, we urge voters to reject Measure JJ and hope that the council will take a more transparent approach in the future.

The measure includes several important reforms, such as prohibiting council members from accepting gifts from city contractors or lobbyists, and preventing lobbyists from serving on city commissions. Additionally, it requires the city to post monthly financial reports and most city contracts on their website before they are approved by the council. These are all commendable improvements, though it's worth noting that a ballot measure may not have been necessary to implement them.

However, there is one part of the measure that has caused some confusion and controversy. The term-limit provision, described as "imposing a combined term limit of 12 years for the Mayor and/or City Councilmembers, while retaining existing term limits for the current Mayor and City Councilmembers." What this fails to make clear is that this would actually increase the maximum length of time someone could serve as an elected mayor or council member, from eight consecutive years to twelve.

While the idea behind this change is sound, we must also acknowledge the efforts of the council members who did not apply this increase to themselves. This is in stark contrast to the actions of the Santa Clara Valley Water District board in 2022, who used a similar measure to deceive voters and serve their own interests. Unfortunately, despite their good intentions for government integrity, the Dublin council did not practice what they preach when drafting this measure, thereby failing to provide a transparent and honest proposal for voters to consider.

[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]
[Generative AI is experimental.]

 0
 0