After Fresno’s failed term limit proposal, ‘public deserves an apology,’ city leader says

In the Spotlight is a Fresno Bee series that digs into the high-profile local issues that readers care most about. Story idea? Email tips@fresnobee.com.

A botched effort to fast-track some major changes to Fresno’s city charter, including a proposal to extend term limits, could undermine trust between the Fresno City Council and the residents they’re elected to serve, according to some city and community leaders.

The eleventh-hour push to place four measures on the Nov. 3 general election ballot came as a surprise to some councilmembers as well as the public last week. Even Fresno County’s top elections official called the package of proposals “relatively rare.” With little time for public input, the proposals garnered scrutiny, swift criticism and pushback.

Some city officials were quick to brush off the criticism, but others acknowledged the rushed flurry of proposals was wrong.

“The public deserves an apology,” District 3 Councilmember Miguel Arias said.

“We as the city missed the mark,” he said.

The proposed measures — whose language was publicly unveiled for the first time last Monday morning — included enacting a half-cent sales tax, financing for a major development project, establishing a redistricting advisory committee and extending term limits for elected leaders.

Had it been approved by the Fresno City Council and voters, the term limit proposal would have allowed sitting councilmembers and the mayor to pursue a third consecutive term. Currently, they can serve two terms, then must sit out a term before running again, which they can do indefinitely, though few city officials have.

Fresno Mayor Jerry Dyer said in a July 27 press conference he would consider running for a third term should voters approve the measure. The item, co-sponsored by Council President Nelson Esparza and Dyer — was indefinitely tabled Thursday night.

The timeframe in which the bill’s authors attempted to ram through the proposals was “clearly not enough time” for ballot measures and reforms of this magnitude. Government ethics watchdogs, political science experts and critics said the way in which the proposals were introduced, particularly the term limit change idea, appeared to be “self-serving “ or even a “power grab.” In addition to Dyer, several incumbents would have benefitted from the proposal.

Arias, who is serving the final year of his second term, also disagreed with the way these proposals were introduced. He said it takes years to build trust with the public, and this type of “cronyism tactics” undermines that trust.

“I don’t blame the sponsors of the item, but I do blame the process they took,” Arias said. “When it comes to changing the city’s constitution, it should never come with a 72-hour notice.”

Esparza, the lead sponsor of the item, has pushed back against the idea that the proposal was somehow “self-serving,” saying that he won’t be on the Council after this year even if it were to have passed. Esparza is in the running for a seat on the state Board of Equalization.

“When it comes to these legislative battles, you win some and you lose some,” Esparza said in a statement Monday.

Council president defends proposals

Esparza told The Bee that the timing of his proposals was structured in such a way that he can not personally benefit.

“I’m leaving City Hall in January regardless, and that’s why people in this city can trust that I genuinely wanted to have a conversation about structural reforms and adapting to our role as California’s fifth largest city,” he said.

He also defended the 72-hour notice for the controversial ballot measure proposals, saying the timing had to do with the Fresno County Clerk’s office firm Aug. 7 deadline for items to be placed on the November ballot.

Voters would have had months to review the measures before voting in November, he said.

“Once I knew we had no choice but to ask voters to weigh in on the sales tax this Fall, I felt these governance questions belonged in front of them in the same election since we as the City would already be occupying their ballot and could benefit from the economies of scale.

“The ideas still stand on their own, and the council did its job by debating them accordingly," he said.

‘Stain’ on the Council

Arias said last week’s ballot measure blitz reflects poorly on the entire Council.

“Frankly, the councilmembers who weren’t involved were equally as upset as the public. We spend years trying to show our commitment to trust and transparency. One item at 10 p.m. can undo that trust.

“These numerous ballot initiatives have a stain on the Council,” Arias said. “We’ve all been stained.”

More than two dozen Fresno residents waited until after 8:30 p.m. to speak against the term measure proposal.

Ariana Martinez Lott – a former staffer for Arias and a candidate vying to replace Esparza in the District 7 seat against Esparza’s former staffer and attorney Nav Gurm – called the meeting’s outcome a “community win.”

“These kinds of political maneuvers are what is continuing to burn trust with the residents that really have very little faith in our local government,” she said.

“I think everyone is very astounded by the audacity to put four measures super last-minute (on the agenda),” Harman Singh, a community organizer and west Fresno resident, said.

Christina Soto, a District 3 resident and former PARCs commissioner, slammed the Council, calling them “self-serving” and “disrespectful.”

“...And then have the nerve to call us misinformed and tell us the media is twisting stuff simply because we’re pointing out that this is such obvious corruption,” Soto said.

After public comment Thursday, Esparza acknowledged that some items were controversial and “got people worked up on both sides of the aisle.”

Ultimately, only one item, the half-cent sales tax, was approved by the Council. The redistricting advisory committee proposal was rejected and the development financing item was indefinitely tabled.