2004-03 Council Member Term Limits Article III, Section 3-2, Hawaii County Charter

Home

Honorable Bob Jacobson May 26, 2004 Page 6 United States House of Representatives from Arkansas; providing that any person having been elected to two (2) or more terms as a member for the United States Senate from Arkansas shall not be eligible to appear on the ballot for election to the United States Senate from Arkansas; providing for an effective date of January 1, 1993; and making the provisions applicable to all persons thereafter seeking election to the specified offices. U.S. Term Limits, Inc., supra, 872 S.W.2d at 351. Similar to the 1996 Hawai'i County Charter Amendment, the above cited language from the Arkansas Term Limitation Amendment was silent on the issue of whether terms served are counted in determining whether a candidate is eligible for reelection. The Arkansas Supreme Court held the constitutional amendment was prospective; in other words, only terms served after the passage of the amendment were to be counted in the term limit calculation. The Arkansas high court opined as follows: Constitutional amendments operate prospectively unless the language used or the purpose of the provision indicates otherwise. Dennen v. Bennett, 230 Ark. 330, 322 S.W.2d 585 (1959). We have also held that with respect to an amendatory act the legislation will not be construed otherwise. Lucas v. Handcock, 266 Ark. 142, 583 S.W.2d 491 (1979); see also Gannett River States Publishing Co. v. Arkansas Indus. Dev. Comm'n, 303 Ark. 684, 799 S.W.2d 543 (1990). The same rule of construction is equally applicable to a constitutional amendment. The Amendment in this case is vague and ambiguous on the point of when to begin counting terms. As already stated, two proponents of the Amendment, U.S. Term Limits, Inc. and the State of Arkansas represented by the Attorney General's office, interpret it to apply prospectively. Arkansans for Governmental Reform took the same position before the circuit court. Because of the vagueness in the Amendment on this point, we agree. Only periods of service commencing on or after January 1, 1993, will be counted as a term for limitation purposes under Amendment 73. U.S. Term Limits, Inc., supra, 872 S.W.2d at 361. The rationale followed by the Arkansas Supreme Court was the same followed by our County Clerk in interpreting the 1996 Hawai'i County Charter amendment. In Mr. Konishi's written findings, he states at page 5 as follows: This office is empowered to act in accordance with the letter and spirit of the law. However, any law seeking to impose limits on the constitutional