CHANDLER PROPOSITION 410: Eases Term Limits For Power-Hungry City Officials
What’s most likely to get your local officials fired up to fight for you? Lower utility rates? Wrong. Removing sexually explicit material from our libraries? Nope. How about just filling potholes in our roads? You’d think so. But what really gets the local officials in Chandler going is making sure they can sit on city council or as mayor longer.
Proposition 410, a local ballot measure, seeks to amend the city charter’s term limit section to extend the term for how long councilmembers and the mayor can serve. The measure is particularly problematic because it directly benefits a sitting councilmember, Matt Orlando, allowing him to run for mayor in 2026 without interruption after finishing his second consecutive council term. This proposition is not about reigning in political power; it’s about conveniently clearing the path for one councilmember to extend his political career. If it doesn’t pass in November, Orlando will face issues being elected mayor after his stint on the council, and clearly, he can’t have that.
The current city charter provision essentially says that one person can serve no more than two consecutive terms as councilmember, mayor, or a combination of both, and must wait four years before running again for either office. Therefore, someone can only serve two consecutive terms total.
However, some argue this language is ambiguous, allowing for another interpretation, one that allows a person to serve up to sixteen consecutive years: eight as a councilmember and eight as mayor. This interpretation has been the practice in Chandler for the past three mayors. Kevin Hartke, Boyd Dunn, and Jay Tibshraeny each served eight years as councilmembers and eight years as mayor – sixteen consecutive years.
The proposed language change on the ballot effectively attempts to legitimize the last three mayors by expanding the term limits in the city’s charter. It now states that a person can serve up to two consecutive terms as councilmember and two consecutive terms as mayor, sixteen years total. After reaching either limit, or a combined sixteen consecutive years in both offices, they must wait four years before running again for either position.
Why the rush for a change? Current Chandler Mayor Kevin Hartke was sued by his 2022 challenger, Ruth Jones, who alleged he was ineligible to run in 2018 for mayor because of his prior service on the city council, making him an illegitimate mayor. While she ran against him in 2022, the formal lawsuit was not filed until May of 2025. In August, a judge dismissed the case, ruling it lacked merit and thereby affirmed that Hartke, and similarly situated past mayors, were eligible to hold the office. Nevertheless, the council had already voted to place Proposition 410 on the ballot in June.
Mayor Hartke was exploring another run for city council after completing his time as mayor, but the lawsuit and controversy put those plans on hold. He is now seeking a seat in the state house in Legislative District 13 (part of Chandler and Gilbert).
Campaign signs around Chandler misleadingly claim that Prop 410 “establishes term limits” for city officials and urges voters to “keep term limits” by voting yes. If anything, this is granting more leeway to the officials, giving them more time in office. Voters need to know that this proposition is not about serving the people but about furthering the ambitions of self-interested local politicians.
The website cited on these deceptive signs, keepchandlertermlimits.com, claims that this measure “respects the voter.” It also falsely insists that it’s imperative to pass Prop 410 to “make sure those limits stay the same.” Because the current charter language is vague, claiming with confidence that this proposition won’t extend or alter term limits is misleading at best and deliberately false at worst.
Instead of pretending that this is all to the benefit of the voters, let’s be honest; this is nothing more than power-hungry officials gaslighting both themselves and the public into believing that nothing is changing. They (Matt Orlando) simply do not want to face the fact that the current city charter might hold them back from more years in office.
Chandler residents deserve transparency rather than being thrown into the middle of a political game designed to protect insiders. Be wary of the slogans and messaging that sound good but are purposely misleading. Vote NO on Proposition 410.
Help Protect Freedom in Arizona by Joining Our Grassroots Network
Arizona needs to have a unified voice promoting economic freedom and prosperity, and the Free Enterprise Club is committed to making that happen. But we can’t do it alone. We need YOU!
Join our FREE Grassroots Action List to stay up to date on the latest battles against big government and how YOU can help influence crucial bills at the Arizona State Legislature.
Recent Comments