Council weighs 4‑year terms and recall question; historical petition thresholds raised

Greenbelt council members, Board of Elections representatives and residents discussed placing a charter question before voters on whether council terms should increase from two years to four years and whether a recall mechanism should be added.
The Board of Elections told council it had no formal position on term length but suggested that, if the city puts the change to voters, it could be paired with a question on recall. "We don't have a position on whether council members should serve for 2 years or 4 years," a board member said, adding that recall provisions do not currently exist in the charter.
Why it matters: a change to four‑year terms would lengthen the interval between council elections and could affect accountability. Several residents and at least one council member expressed opposition to longer terms without recall or other checks.
Historical and procedural context: Council Member Roberts recalled the last time the question came up in 1991 and argued that four‑year terms reduce responsiveness. Roberts urged caution and said petition thresholds for citizen-initiated referenda must be reviewed; he said the required number of signatures is currently about 3,000 and is effectively too high for citizens to mount petitions.
Resident Jay Davis said putting the question on a ballot along with a recall provision would be acceptable to him, but that he remained personally opposed to four‑year terms. Davis also urged that voters decide: "I am not opposed to having it as a referendum question... but I already will tell you that I am opposed to a 4 year term."
Legal limits and next steps: Council members noted the state law and charter may affect petition signature rules. The Board of Elections recommended council get more information — including how other municipalities handle staggered terms and the percentage of Maryland municipalities on four‑year cycles — before deciding whether to place a question on the ballot. No ordinance or charter amendment was adopted; the board and council agreed to continue study and return with refined proposals and data for future decisions.
Ending: Council asked staff and the Board of Elections to gather more information, including signature‑count requirements and examples of staggered term implementations, before deciding whether to put term‑length or recall questions to a vote.