1ÅÝֱܽ²¥

Currently, there are no term limits for either mayor or city councilors and there is no prohibition against family members serving.

Councilors are expected to finalize the language of each question before a March 1 deadline to get the proposed measures on the May 21 ballot.

At the next regular city council meeting on Tuesday , members of the public will have a chance to weigh in on the matter.

City attorney Keith Leitz said if the council sends the measures to the ballot and voters approve them, mayoral term limits would not go into effect until the beginning of the mayor’s term in 2026. The other two measures, if approved, would take effect Jan. 1, 2025.

Term limits

If term limits are passed by voters, starting in 2025 city councilors would only be able to serve two consecutive terms before they are barred from running for re-election. Leitz said the changes would not prohibit people from serving as mayor or councilor for as many times as they are able, as long as those terms are not consecutive.

All councilors would start with a blank slate in 2025, meaning that current councilors could run again even if they had served two consecutive terms.

“No matter how many terms someone had served up to this point, their term limits would start after this goes into effect,� Leitz said. “You wouldn’t be precluded from running for one of the other offices. If you did two terms as a councilor, you could then run for mayor at that point or vice versa.�

Leitz said he looked at model charters from the League of Oregon Cities when crafting the language for the proposed charter changes. He said while charter language concerning nepotism is less common than term limits, he said cities like Beaverton had similar prohibitions.

Barring family members from serving together

Leitz said the draft language at this point would bar spouses, domestic partners, or parents or children from both serving on the city council, including as mayor. Other relationships could be considered in violation of city charter if the anti-nepotism question passes.

“Ultimately the decision for that relationship is council itself and that is true for any of the qualifications for council,� Leitz said. “They, as a body, have the authority to make that judgment call.�

The anti-nepotism language came about after former mayor George Endicott and his wife, former city councilor Krisanna Clark-Endicott, served together on the council for years.

Current mayor Ed Fitch said the arrangement made it awkward during city council meetings.

“We experienced that for four years with George and Krisanna, and I am not criticizing them. They were duly elected, but it created a strange dynamic in the council discussions,� Fitch said . “I’ve never seen two people from the same household being on the council in the 45 years I’ve been here in Redmond. It was just different. I didn’t particularly care for it.�

Former mayor Endicott said he does not agree with any of the proposed charter changes. He said voters should have the decision on whether to keep someone in power or replace them, not mandated term limits.

“If you are not doing a good job for the people then my opinion is they should toss you,� Endicott said. “Ultimately, the voters are smart enough to know what they want and what they don’t want.�

Endicott said he and his wife acted independently while serving together as mayor and councilor. He did not think the arrangement caused problems.

“I didn’t influence my wife. She made her own decisions,� Endicott said. “I do not see any issue with it and don’t forget, secondly, you are two of seven. If two of you are conspiring the other five can say, ‘Hold it, enough is enough.’�

He said during his time as mayor he would assure the council that he and his wife were not discussing city matters in private.

“Look, we are newlyweds. Do you really think our pillow talk has to do with the next vote on city council?� Endicott said. “Changing charters because you don’t get your way is a bad approach.�

Current councilor perspective

City councilor Clifford Evelyn said he is in favor of all three proposed charter amendments. He said it is important to give elected city officials enough time to complete what they promised voters, but also to limit the number of terms in order to prevent officials from getting too settled into their position.

“No one should be there long, because what happens … they become complacent and they are not as dedicated. Because now the power has gone to their head,� Evelyn said. “The term limits is a basic thing. It is like the president. A president gets four years and then they get another four years.�

Evelyn said serving on the council is about prioritizing the community, and doing what is best for the city with an eye to the future. He said prior administrations lacked this quality, and that changing the charter is about keeping the mayor and council’s priorities straight.

“If you are a leader, you are supposed to have vision. If you have vision, you can see the city changing just from the population. The population alone tells you, ‘Well, we are going to need better roads, better schools.’� Evelyn said. “These things are normal. It comes with growth.�

When it comes to anti-nepotism, Evelyn said such practices are common in the business world, and in the law enforcement field where he spent his career.

“No person that is related to someone should have authority over that person,� Evelyn said. “It could work both ways. It could create favoritism and it also it could create friction.�