3 term per office is already in existence. This is dishonest. The question currently presented is: Shall the City of Fresno Charter be amended to prohibit termed-out elected officers from returning to office for life, limiting Mayors and Councilmembers to no more than 3 terms per office? Let’s break this apart.
If I were to answer yes, then I would be saying: Yes,
the City of Fresno Charter should amend Fresno’s Term Limits Charter… to prohibit termed-outed elected officers from returning to office for life, limiting Mayors and Councilmembers to no more than 3 terms per office. Firstly, this is presumptuous. It presumes that 3 terms per office already exist. That is inaccurate. Let it be clear: there shall be no lifetime appointments.
Now, if I were to answer No to this Catch-22 proposal for the ballot, then it would break down as: No, the City of Fresno Charter should NOT prohibit termed-out elected officers from returning to office for life, limiting Mayors and Councilmembers to no more than 3 terms per office.
When
answering No, I am saying that a termed-out officer can return to office for life, therefore the 3 terms limit is nullified. Again, I am asking leadership to check your roles and expectations. I am asking you to check your language.
My answer is No to lifetime appointments and no to 3
consecutive term
limits both.
Follow the current charter of 2 successive terms, and another 2 more after a 4 year break, please.
A Catch-22 is an impossible circular problem where the solution is blocked by the problem itself. In this case, City Council and Mayor, you have assumed that a 3 term limit currently exists, when it does not exist, all while actually proposing a 3 term limit.
Whether I answer Yes or No to your Catch-22 proposal, I am admitting that a 3 term limit exists and that there is a lifetime appointment problem to be solved. There are no lifetime appointments and a 3 term limit does not exist.
You need to fix the language of your proposal. You might even consider asking constituents:
Shall the Fresno Term Limits Charter be amended from its original 2 successive term limits—totaling 8 years in office—to a 3 terms limit— totaling a potential 12 years an elected officer can run consecutively for and hold office?
This is explicit. It details the current charter and what it wants to amend.
From there, you need to clarify whether the 4 years gap is removed completely from the Charter if a 3 term limit were to be in-forced and voted in favor of. And if the 4 year gap were to stay, you need to clarify by stating that a 3 term limit will be in-force, with a 4 year break, then a return for another 2 potential successive terms is up for grabs (there being an open seat) or remove the following 2 successive terms entirely.
YOU NEED TO BE HONEST AND THOROUGH.
To summarize: No to lifetime appointments, No to 3 term limits, and No to this proposal as it is a Catch-22 and needs to be completely wiped and proofread to ensure there are no Catch-22. Be accountable to fair play. Pay attention to your language and recognize that dishonest language makes for dishonest Leadership. I prefer honest Leaders. Power With The People In Collaboration With Honest Leaders.
Trust,
Treasure
P.S. I was there this morning at 9AM and I believe the Terms Limit Charter Amendment is ID 26-1030 ***RESOLUTION - Submitting to City Electors A Proposal to Amend the Charter to Amend Provisions Related to Political Officers. (Subject to Mayor's Veto)
I could be incorrect. Correct me if so on what item number was correlated to the discourse regarding a Proposed 3rd Term Limits in Office Ballot Proposal.
On Thu, Jul 30, 2026 at 8:31 AM Sisombath Souvannasack > wrote:
Hi,
My name is Sisombath (Treasure) Souvannasack and I live in Fresno County, born and raised in Fresno, CA.
I am here today to encourage city council members to use their oversight authority to hold local elected officers’ accountable to follow through on our current Fresno Term Limits Charter. Let us practice gratitude, integrity, follow-through, and keep this Charter as is, unaffected for generations to come.
I care about this issue as it limits every council member to 2 successive terms, totaling 8 years. And I believe 8 years is enough to influence change and I thank Mayor Dyer and others for all they have done up to date. Notwithstanding, I think it is important to remind each other that the policy of 2 successive terms with 4 years break and an additional 2 successive terms, totaling another 8 years (after said 4 year gap) is how we practice accountability and fair representation.
So I ask you to take your leave, Mayor Dyer.
Please remember to practice humility. And in 4 years, if you want to return, please run for the seat, then let The People of Fresno vote. Please Do Not Amend This Charter.
Additionally, by leaving it the way it was created, it gives other representatives in Fresno and interested council members a chance for the role of City Mayor.
I also want to speak of the proposal itself. It is a Catch-22. It assumes that a 3 term per office is already in existence. This is dishonest. The question currently presented is: Shall the City of Fresno Charter be amended to prohibit termed-out elected officers from returning to office for life, limiting Mayors and Councilmembers to no more than 3 terms per office? Let’s break this apart.
If I were to answer yes, then I would be saying:
Yes, the City of Fresno Charter should amend Fresno’s Term Limits Charter… to prohibit termed-outed elected officers from returning to office for life, limiting Mayors and Councilmembers to no more than 3 terms per office. Firstly, this is presumptuous. It presumes that 3 terms per office already exist. That is inaccurate. Let it be clear: there shall be no lifetime appointments.
Now, if I were to answer No to this Catch-22 proposal for the ballot, then it would break down as: No, the City of Fresno Charter should NOT prohibit termed-out elected officers from returning to office for life, limiting Mayors and Councilmembers to no more than 3 terms per office.
When answering No, I am saying that a termed-out officer can return to office for life, therefore the 3 terms limit is nullified. Again, I am asking leadership to check your roles and expectations. I am asking you to check your language. My answer is No to lifetime appointments and no to 3 consecutive term limits both.
Follow the current charter of 2 successive terms, and another 2 more after a 4 year break, please.
A Catch-22 is an impossible circular problem where the solution is blocked by the problem itself. In this case, City Council and Mayor, you have assumed that a 3 term limit currently exists, when it does not exist, all while actually proposing a 3 term limit.
Whether I answer Yes or No to your Catch-22 proposal, I am admitting that a 3 term limit exists and that there is a lifetime appointment problem to be solved. There are no lifetime appointments and a 3 term limit does not exist.
You need to fix the language of your proposal. You might even consider asking constituents:
Shall the Fresno Term Limits Charter be amended from its original 2 successive term limits—totaling 8 years in office—to a 3 terms limit— totaling a potential 12 years an elected officer can run consecutively for and hold office?
This is explicit. It details the current charter and what it wants to amend.
From there, you need to clarify whether the 4 years gap is removed completely from the Charter if a 3 term limit were to be in-forced and voted in favor of. And if the 4 year gap were to stay, you need to clarify by stating that a 3 term limit will be in-force, with a 4 year break, then a return for another 2 potential successive terms is up for grabs (there being an open seat) or remove the following 2 successive terms entirely.
YOU NEED TO BE HONEST AND THOROUGH.
To summarize: No to lifetime appointments, No to 3 term limits, and No to this proposal as it is a Catch-22 and needs to be completely wiped and proofread to ensure there are no Catch-22. Be accountable to fair play.
Pay attention to your language and recognize that dishonest language makes for dishonest Leadership. I prefer honest Leaders. Power With The People In Collaboration With Honest Leaders.
Trust,
Treasure