An appellate panel has ruled it is legal to limit San Bernardino County Board supervisors to one-term limits and to a compensation cap, over the supervisors' objections such restrictions are unconstitutional.
The May 25 decision was penned by Justice Manuel Ramirez, with concurrence from Justice Douglas Miller, of California Fourth District Appellate Court Division Two, which sits in Riverside. Justice Frank Menetrez dissented, saying the appeal was moot and premature, because the ballot measure has not been put into effect.
The majority ruling favored Nadia Renner and other supporters of Measure K, in their dispute with the San Bernardino Board of Supervisors.
On Nov. 3, 2022, voters in the county approved Measure K, which restricted county supervisors to one four-year term and limited their compensation to $5,000 per month. The Board has five supervisors, who were previously restricted to three four-year terms. Any supervisors already serving their second or third term could fill out their terms under Measure K.
In December 2022, the Board of Supervisors went to San Bernardino Superior Court to have Measure K blocked.
Judge Donald Alvarez ruled the term limit was unconstitutional, but not the compensation cap. However, Alvarez further ruled the term limit and the compensation cap could not be separated, so the cap was also tossed.
Renner appealed, largely finding success.
Justice Ramirez pointed out the benefit of limiting the time an official can stay in office.
"When the problem is personal empire-building by entrenched incumbents, the only solution is term limits," Ramirez noted.
In Ramirez's view, the term limit of Measure K is "nondiscriminatory" and not based on "protected speech," impacting all political candidates in an even-handed manner. In addition, Ramirez pointed out the Board did not show that a supervisor could not accomplish something in four years, that the supervisor could accomplish if given six or eight years.
Ramirez said term limits do not affect voters' or candidates' rights. Further, after one term, a former supervisor is free to run for any other office.
Regarding the ceiling on compensation, the Board argued it could violate minimum wage laws, but Ramirez dismissed this notion as "speculative."
Ramirez did determine the compensation cap does not apply to the three supervisors elected at the same time as Measure K was passed, because Measure K did not take effect until 11 days after the new supervisors took office.
In dissent, Justice Menetrez said Measure D, which passed in 2022 after Measure K was on appeal, would impose more generous term and compensation limits, and would supersede Measure K. As a consequence, Menetrez said Measure K cannot go into effect unless Measure D is "invalidated," so any appeal of Measure K is moot until and when Measure D is banished.
Ramirez brushed aside Menetrez' objection, saying, "With all respect to our dissenting colleague, Measure D is irrelevant."
San Bernardino County has been represented by Bradley Hertz and Nicholas Sanders, of Sutton Law Firm, which has offices in Los Angeles and San Francisco.
Renner has been represented by Cory Briggs, of Briggs Law Corporation, which has offices in San Diego and Upland, as well as by Aaron Burden, of Red Brennan Group, a tax protest group in Fontana.
Friend-of-the-court arguments in support of Renner and Measure K were submitted by Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Foundation.
Arguments in support of the Board were submitted by California State Association of Counties.