Committee debates term limits and elected‑official benefits amid charter discussion

Committee members spent substantial time on two related items: how term limits would translate under a charter city and whether to align elected officials’ health benefit allowance with full‑time employee benefits.

Staff noted that the city’s current municipal code treats term limits by office in a way that can allow lengthy cumulative service (a presentation example showed combinations of council and mayoral service could result in long overall tenure); staff warned that increasing a per‑office limit to three consecutive four‑year terms could legally extend continuous service substantially. Members asked whether a break in service should be required when shifting from council to mayor; staff said that current ordinance language sets salaries by ordinance and that specifics would be reflected in any draft charter language.

On compensation, staff showed options that would preserve part‑time status for mayor and council while matching the health benefit allowance (HBA) to full‑time employees. One committee member cautioned that listing the full HBA in total compensation would look like a large raise — “it’s kind of a look of you’re wanting to go to a charter city, but you’re wanting a 95% raise,” they said — and urged adjustments to avoid compaction between mayoral and council pay. Staff estimated the recommended changes would increase net costs by approximately $100,459 and noted that final salary levels are set by ordinance.

Members discussed tradeoffs between making elected service more attractive to diverse applicants and the optics of a substantial listed increase in total compensation. Several suggested that the council, if it adopts adjustments, could calibrate benefits or salary to avoid excessive compaction between mayor and council compensation.

Staff said the committee’s recommendations on these items will be captured in draft charter language for review at the committee’s next meeting.