February 2011

History of County

Term Limits

1

National Association of Counties

A Publication of the Research Division

of NACo’s County Services Department

Written by

Chanon Bell

Term Limits

History of County Term Limits •February 2011

2

About the National Association of Counties

The National Association of Counties (NACo) is the only national organization that represents county

governments in the United States. Founded in 1935, NACo provides essential services to the nation’s 3,068

counties. NACo advances issues with a unied voice before the federal government, improves the public’s

understanding of county government, assists counties in nding and sharing innovative solutions through

education and research, and provides value-added services to save counties and taxpayers money. For more

information about NACo, visit www.naco.org.

3

National Association of Counties

The Ancient Greeks and Romans were the rst

societies to implement term limits. They believed

that a change of leadership periodically was

good for government. At the end of the last cen-

tury the demand for term limits started to spread

across the United States. Citizens all across the

country began to wonder about elected of-

cials who seemed to spend their careers in their

on a periodic basis was a desirable aim. As they

contemplated how to achieve these changes,

the concept of term limits emerged once again.

As the discussion heated up researchers found

that there are two types of term limits, the rst

is a limit on the number of consecutive terms

an individual can hold ofce and the second is

a limit on the number of terms individuals can

hold ofce during their lifetimes.

Although many proponents of term limits

toward imposing new term limits has slowed.

No states have added term limits in the last

ve years and only a handful of counties have

taken any action. Of those counties that have

addressed term limits in recent years, 10 have

rescinded their earlier legislation, 2 have voted

to continue the current limits and only 4 have

voted to impose new term limits. One of the

most notable changes was in New York City,

where the two, four-year term limit was changed

Mexico voted by wide a majority (74%) to

keep term limits for county ofcials. The pro-

posed constitutional amendment would have

changed Article 10, Section 2 of the New

Mexico Constitution, eliminating term limits

for county ofcials completely. The current pro-

vision restricts the term of ofce to two consec-

utive four-year terms, and allows ofcials to run

again after a two-year break. The state has had

some form of term limits legislation in place for

county ofcials since 1914.

In 1999, when state lawmakers attempted to

repeal term limits legislation, Idaho’s Governor

Dirk Kempthorne vetoed the bill, saying Idaho

voters had “decided the matter.” In response to

a lawsuit brought against the state by incumbent

ofcials. In his decision, Judge Smith ruled that

“a ban on service infringes on a person’s right

to vote and hold ofce and the right to run for

ofce.” The law he overruled stated that county

commissioners could serve no more than 6 years

during an 11 year period, and all other ofcials

could only serve 8 during a 15 year period.

In Santa Clara, California, voters decided to

lengthen the number of terms that the Board

of Supervisors could serve. Legislation passed in

History of County Term Limits •February 2011

4

By a vote of 60%, Prince George’s County,

Maryland voted to keep the term limits they

had imposed in 1992. Currently, the county

limits its ofcials to two four-year terms. Prince

George’s neighbor, Montgomery County, how-

ever, voted down a measure to limit terms of

county ofcials. The ballot measure, defeated in

November 2000, would have amended Sections

council currently, four members are in their rst

term. Of the last ve county executives, none

Alaska reiterated their desire for the term limits

that they set in place in 1990. In the October 7,

1997 election, residents voted to retain the term

limits of six years (two consecutive three-year

terms), with the option of running again after

one year for the ofces of Borough Mayor and

Borough Council.

In 1994, the state of Colorado amended the

State Constitution to impose term limits on all

with nine succeeding. In the 1996 election, 23

of Colorado’s 63 counties (36.5%) asked voters

to eliminate term limits for some or all elected

ofcials. Only ve counties -- Custer, Dolores,

one elected county ofce. Las Animas County

voted to keep term limits for all ofcials, except

the county clerk. That left the county assessor,

sheriff, treasurer, coroner, and county commis-

sioners term-limited. Fremont, Gilpin, and Teller

Counties retain term limits on all local elected

ofcials. Montezuma County decided to retain

its term limits law which allows county ofcials

to serve only two consecutive terms.

There have been noticeable trends observed in

the last 10 years regarding term limits in coun-

ties. One is exemplied in the Colorado coun-

ties’ rescinding of term limits. Although 23 of

Colorado’s 63 counties have voted to remove

term limits for at least some elected ofcials,

these 23 counties stand apart from the rest of

the counties in the state in that they tend to

of county term limits has also been addressed

by the courts. In 1995 the court ruled that con-

gressional term limits are unconstitutional (U.S.

Term Limits v, Thorton), additional legal battles

associated with term limits involve the issue of

ballot access. In states that allow write-in cam-

paigns, the question at issue is if candidates who

states until there is a clear ruling on this issue.

At the turn of the century, interest in impos-

abolished them. In some states, like Florida,

the courts are involved in the debate as well.

In the two most recent elections, there have

been six propositions, or amendments made to

extend or abolish term limits in various states.

These include legislation in San Diego County,

California, El Paso County, Colorado, Broward

York, Multnomah County, Oregon and the state

of New Mexico.

The following counties are counties by state

that have county term limits or have had recent

actions concerning county term limits.

5

National Association of Counties

History of County Term Limits •February 2011

6

are limited to two consecutive four-year terms.

Four years after the expiration of two consecu-

tive terms, in El Dorado County, a supervi-

sor may run again for an unlimited number of

consecutive terms. In 2008, residents voted to

limit the Ventura County Board of Supervisors

to three four-year terms. Similarly on June 8,

2010, voters in San Diego County voted to limit

appointed positions.

Volusia and Palm Beach Counties both restrict

their commissioners to no more than eight

that term limits can only be enforceable after an

appropriate amendment is made in the Florida

Constitution. Orange and Brevard counties

commissioners serve four-year terms and are

not eligible to serve more than two consecutive

terms. Sarasota County commissioners serve

four-year terms, with a limit of two consecu-

tive terms. Former county commissioners may

run for ofce again, though not immediately

after the last term served. Section 4.05 of the

7

National Association of Counties

of Idaho. In 1994, term limits were adopted for

all levels of Idaho government. All elected of-

cials, including state legislators, county com-

missioners, and members of the school board,

were given term limits. Term limits were set to

go into effect in 2004, and specied that any

county commissioner who had served six of the

last eleven years would have to retire in 2004.

Soon after term limits were adopted in 1994,

they were challenged in the Idaho court system

ruling, the Idaho Legislature repealed the term

limits. Citizens gathered signatures and suc-

ceeded in adding a referendum to reinstate term

limits to the ballot in the elections in November

2002, but the referendum failed.

Indiana is a rare case because it has placed

term limits for county ofcials in the state con-

stitution. Article 6, Section 2 of the Indiana

Constitution reads as follows:

Only those county ofces listed in the state

constitution have term limits. An amendment

proposed in the 1980s would have removed term

limits on county ofcials in Indiana. But the

measure was defeated largely because of popular

opinion that the ofce of sheriff, which controls

a large portion of county power and funding,

should have a term limit.

In Louisiana, there is no state law that sets term

limits for parish ofcials. Some charter parishes

Jefferson, New Orleans, St. Bernard, and St.

Mary Parishes have come up with unique phras-

ing for their term limit regulations. In these four

parishes, neither the council nor the president

may run again if he/she has served at least one

and one-half term in two consecutive terms.

This means that if an ofcial lled a vacancy

before or at the halfway point of a term, then

that term counts toward the term limit. Each

term is four years. In Lafayette Parish, the presi-

History of County Term Limits •February 2011

8

three consecutive terms. Each term is four years.

Terrebonne Parish council members may not

run again if they have served two and one-half

terms. The Terrebonne Parish president may

not run again if one and one-half term has been

served in two consecutive terms. Each term is

four years. Caddo Parish simply limits its com-

missioners to three consecutive four-year terms.

Three Maryland counties have term limits.

is a term limit provision for the county execu-

tive. The Anne Arundel County executive

serves a four-year term with a limit of two terms.

The term limit restriction for the Anne Arundel

ter amendment in 1992. County council mem-

bers are now restricted to two four-year terms.

In 1992, Howard and Prince George’s Counties

established all of their term limits through

a charter amendment. The Howard County

executive is limited to two four-year terms and

U.S. Representatives were limited to three con-

secutive terms, while state ofcials and U.S.

senators were limited to two consecutive terms.

When the U.S. Supreme Court determined

that term limits were unconstitutional for U.S.

Representatives and U.S. Senators, ofcials in

Nebraska challenged the term limits for state

and local ofcials. The Nebraska Supreme Court

said the remaining portions of the amendment

were “so intertwined with the unconstitutional

changing or removing term limits. The proposal

passed in the State Senate, but it failed in the

House. In 2010 however, Senate Joint Resolution

5 was passed to amend article 10, section 2 of

the constitution which allows county ofcials to

serve for three consecutive terms instead of two.

Six counties in the state of New York have term

limits for their ofcials.