This is an archive of a past election.
See for current information.
LWV League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
Smart Voter
Los Angeles County, CA March 8, 2005 Election
Measure ManhattanBeach---2005-A
Repeal of Term Limits
City of Manhattan Beach

957 / 14.4% Yes votes ...... 5701 / 85.6% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures

Information shown below: Impartial Analysis | Arguments | Full Text

Shall an ordinance be adopted which repeals existing term limits for City Councilmembers?

Impartial Analysis
In 1996 the voters of Manhattan Beach voted Measure J into law which provided that a person could not serve as a council member more than two consecutive full terms, or one term of at least two years followed by a full term. It also provided that after serving two terms a council member would be required to be out of office for two years before being eligible to run again.

Measure 2005-A would repeal Measure J thus changing the law to provide that there are no limits on the number of terms, consecutive or otherwise, which a person may serve as a council member.

  News and Analysis

Google News Search
Suggest a link related to Measure ManhattanBeach---2005-A
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Measure ManhattanBeach---2005-A Arguments Against Measure ManhattanBeach---2005-A
(No arguments in favor were submitted)

Term limits guarantee a vital City Council. Term limits ensure new faces on the City Council, bringing fresh outlooks and critical analysis to issues. Term limits for our school board might have avoided the debacle brought on by entrenched incumbents who failed to closely monitor and question administrators.

Term limits encourage strong community participation. Term limits incentivize Councilmembers to help identify and support the development of future leaders. They also encourage participation by leveling the playing field where an incumbent commonly is acknowledged to have an overwhelming advantage.

No public impetus for ballot measure. This measure was not placed on the ballot by the public. It was put on the ballot by the City Council in the face of public testimony opposing it, and no public testimony supporting it. The public made its opinion known when it voted for the current term limits just eight years ago. We have faith that our voters exercised their voting rights responsibly and understood the term limits enacted by that vote.

Support democracy; vote no. The current law is a moderate measure that lowers the barriers of entry, thereby encouraging a diversity of candidates and greater choice for the electorate. The current law is a reasonable one that permits an incumbent completing eight years of service to run again after sitting out just two years.

Our community has recently been scarred as a result of the entrenchment of elected citizens on a government body. The depth and strength of community involvement will be nurtured by continued support of the current law – a moderate law requiring an incumbent to merely sit out for two years after serving eight years. Please Vote NO on Measure 2005-A.

/s/ Martha Andreani
President, Manhattan Beach Residents Association

Full Text of Measure ManhattanBeach---2005-A
WHEREAS, Measure "J" was passed as an initiative measure by the voters of Manhattan Beach at a Special Municipal Election on March 26, 1996 and can only be repealed or amended by a vote of those same voters; and WHEREAS, The City Council is authorized to submit an ordinance to the voters;


SECTION 1. Measure "J" passed by the voters of the City of Manhattan Beach in 1996 which established a term limit for City Council members of two consecutive terms after which a former council member must be out of office for at least two years before being eligible to run for Council again, is hereby repealed in its entirety.

SECTION 2. Any Council member serving on the effective date of this ordinance or elected thereafter shall not have the number of terms they may serve, consecutive or otherwise, limited in any way.

SECTION 3. The City Council may pass any ordinance necessary to implement the provisions of this initiative which are not inconsistent with its express terms.

SECTION 4. This ordinance shall be considered as adopted upon the date the vote is declared by the legislative body, and shall go into effect 10 days after that date.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause it to be published according to law.

Los Angeles Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: March 29, 2005 12:43 PST
Smart Voter <>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.