Fresno councilmember says public deserves apology after rushed term-limit push failed

A botched attempt to fast-track major changes to Fresno’s city charter — including letting sitting councilmembers and the mayor run for a third consecutive term — has one city leader saying the public deserves an apology.

The proposals, unveiled publicly for the first time last Monday morning, gave residents and even some councilmembers just 72 hours to digest four ballot measures before a Thursday night vote. The term-limit extension was indefinitely tabled after more than two dozen Fresno residents showed up to speak against it, some waiting past 8:30 p.m. for their turn.

“The public deserves an apology,” District 3 Councilmember Miguel Arias said. “When it comes to changing the city’s constitution, it should never come with a 72-hour notice.”

Advertisement

The four proposed measures included a half-cent sales tax, financing for a major development project, a redistricting advisory committee, and the term-limit extension. Under current rules, councilmembers and the mayor can serve two terms, then must sit out a term before running again. The proposed change would have allowed them to pursue a third consecutive term.

Mayor Jerry Dyer said in a July 27 press conference he would consider running for a third term if voters approved the measure. Council President Nelson Esparza co-sponsored the item with Dyer.

Arias, serving the final year of his second term, called the rushed process “cronyism tactics” that undermine trust with the public. “I don’t blame the sponsors of the item, but I do blame the process they took,” he said. “Frankly, the councilmembers who weren’t involved were equally as upset as the public.”

Esparza pushed back against criticism that the proposal was “self-serving,” noting he’s running for a seat on the state Board of Equalization and won’t be on the Council after this year regardless of the outcome. He defended the 72-hour notice, saying the Fresno County Clerk’s office had a firm Aug. 7 deadline for items to be placed on the November ballot. Voters would have had months to review the measures before voting, he said.

“Once I knew we had no choice but to ask voters to weigh in on the sales tax this Fall, I felt these governance questions belonged in front of them in the same election,” Esparza said in a statement Monday. “The ideas still stand on their own, and the council did its job by debating them accordingly.”

Community members who spoke Thursday night weren’t buying it. Ariana Martinez Lott, a former Arias staffer now running for Esparza’s District 7 seat, called the meeting’s outcome a “community win.” “These kinds of political maneuvers are what is continuing to burn trust with the residents that really have very little faith in our local government,” she said.

Christina Soto, a District 3 resident and former PARCs commissioner, called the Council “self-serving” and “disrespectful.” “…And then have the nerve to call us misinformed and tell us the media is twisting stuff simply because we’re pointing out that this is such obvious corruption,” she said.

Ultimately, only the half-cent sales tax was approved by the Council. The redistricting committee proposal was rejected, and the development financing item was indefinitely tabled along with the term-limit measure.

The Breakdown

• The Fresno City Council introduced four charter amendment proposals last Monday with only 72 hours’ public notice before a Thursday night vote.
• The term-limit proposal would have allowed sitting councilmembers and the mayor to run for a third consecutive term, instead of sitting out a term after their second.
• More than two dozen residents spoke against the measure Thursday night; the proposal was indefinitely tabled.
• Council President Nelson Esparza defended the tight timeline, citing the county clerk’s Aug. 7 deadline for November ballot items.
• Councilmember Miguel Arias called the rushed process damaging to public trust and said the public deserves an apology.

What This Means for You

This is about how much say you get before your elected officials rewrite the rules governing their own time in office. A charter amendment isn’t routine legislation — it’s the city’s constitution. The Council’s decision to table the term-limit measure after public pushback means current term limits stay in place for now, but the fight over how much notice the public gets on changes like this isn’t settled. Your leverage is showing up when these proposals surface — and making noise when the process feels like it’s being railroaded.

What to Watch

Watch whether the Council tries again with the term-limit proposal on a longer timeline, or whether the public blowback killed it for good. Also watch who benefits from the rules as they stand: several incumbents would have been positioned to run for a third term under the proposed change, including Mayor Dyer, who said publicly he’d consider it. The real question is whether extending terms actually gives voters more continuity or just makes it harder to replace officials who’ve worn out their welcome.