49°

Oral arguments in a citizens' lawsuit over last year's term-limit ballot measures are scheduled for Thursday before a Kenai Superior Court judge.

The Alliance of Concerned Taxpayers (ACT), whose initiative efforts saw two term-limit measures win popular support in the Oct. 2 municipal election, filed suit later that month after the school board and assembly voted to seat winning incumbents despite provisions in the propositions that ACT members believe should have disqualified them from taking office.

Ballot Propositions 2 and 3 limited incumbents to no more than two consecutive terms, and made the restriction retroactive, counting terms sitting incumbents had already served. The initiatives also redefined "term" to include even very short periods, as when someone is appointed to fill a vacancy, or is elected to a shortened term, as sometimes happens when districts are reset after a census.

Candidates "term-limited out" must wait at least three years, and perhaps longer, before running again for that office, according to the propositions.

The election through a monkey wrench into the works, however. Boroughwide, roughly 56 percent of voters approved the term limit initiatives for assembly and school board office holders. However, voters within the districts of three incumbent assembly members and two incumbent school board members also re-elected their representatives, in most cases by wide margins.

In effect, the outcomes pitted one set of election results against another, and sub-sets of voters against the wishes of the boroughwide electorate.

On Oct. 15, the school board voted to sit two incumbent board members, Sammy Crawford and Sunni Hilts, even though they had already served multiple terms and were ineligible to serve again under the provision of Prop 3. The assembly soon duplicated that action, seating Gary Superman, of Nikiski, Pete Sprague, of Soldotna, and Paul Fischer, of Kasilof, even though they were not eligible under the provisions of Prop 2.

ACT filed suit on Oct. 22. Several months of motions and counter-motions followed, leading to the May 15 date for oral arguments before Kenai Superior Court Judge Anna Moran. Proceedings are set for 3:30 p.m.

ACT's lawyer, Anchorage Attorney Ken Jacobus, is expected to argue that the propositions are legal, constitutional, and supported by a clear majority of voters and that the incumbent assembly and school board members were seated in violation of voter wishes.

Borough Attorney Colette Thompson will argue that the ordinances should be tossed out, because both violate the constitutional rights of candidates and voters.

Thompson also said the way the initiative ordinances now define a term of office imposes a "severe infringement" on the rights of seated members because it could block incumbents from seeking re-election after having served as little as 14 months in office. In addition, a strict reading of the conditions imposed by the initiative ordinances could keep a term-limited candidate from running again for at least five years, Thompson said.

ACT has argued that term limits are healthy for the democratic process because they restrict the power of incumbency and encourage new faces in political races.

The borough claims that years' of election data show no entrenched incumbency in the borough that has dissuaded others from seeking office.

While the ballot propositions were numbered 2 and 3, they are now officially listed in court documents as initiative ordinances 1 and 2 respectively.

Hal Spence can be reached at hspence@ptialaska.net.