Memphis City Council members put off a first vote Tuesday, April 19, on a ballot question that would introduce partisan primaries to city elections for mayor and City Council next year.

But they got another ballot question started toward the August ballot that would expand council members to a limit of three consecutive terms but not the Memphis mayor.

The two referendum ordinances were introduced by council member Martavius Jones without advance notice Tuesday during the council’s executive session.

MATA gets dedicated funding source in Strickland budget proposal

But according to several council members they had discussed the proposals in broad terms starting several months ago.

Jones’ intent is to have the proposed ballot questions on the August ballot. But as the council debate widened Tuesday, he said he might also seek to put them on the November ballot if there is a delay that means they can’t make the August ballot.

The 60-day window to get wording done and public notice given after three votes over three meetings by the council — all by mid-June. Early voting in advance of the Aug. 4 election day begins in July with absentee and military ballots sent out earlier.

The charter amendments, which would have to be approved by voters in a citywide referendum, are not new ideas but the debate reflected a deeply divided council.

The move to add the referendum ordinance on partisan primaries to the Tuesday agenda for the first of three “readings” or votes failed on a 6-6 tie vote.

Voting yes were: Michalyn Easter-Thomas, Cheyenne Johnson, Jones, JB Smiley Jr., Chairwoman Jamita Swearengen and Patrice Robinson.

Voting no were: Ford Canale, Chase Carlisle, Frank Colvett, Edmund Ford Sr., Worth Morgan and Jeff Warren.

Council member Rhonda Logan abstained.

City Council Scorecard: Chairman undercurrents, lots of gas

The first reading of the term limits measure was approved as part of the council’s consent agenda after a move to take it off the consent agenda was called off.

The consent agenda vote including first reading of the ballot question was 12-0.

Voting yes: Canale, Colvett, Easter-Thomas, Ford, Johnson, Jones, Logan, Morgan, Robinson, Smiley, Swearengen and Warren.

Not voting: Carlisle

But Morgan and Warren said they intend to amend the terms of the ballot question on second reading at the May 10 council session.

Morgan would amend it so that the extension from two consecutive terms currently to three consecutive terms would not apply to current council members. And he would make the wording clear that council members are currently limited to two consecutive terms.

‘Drafting error’ in term limits question draws fire from Herenton

Warren would amend it to extend the three-term limit for the mayor as well.

Jones said he would leave the mayor’s office at a limit of two consecutive terms to change the charter to make the mayor’s position by the charter less of a “strong mayor” form of government intended when the charter was drafted and approved by voters in 1966.

“It was deliberately done to have the council to serve three terms,” he said of his proposal. “Just the council.”

Warren said the council comes with a “steep learning curve” for those elected to the body — a term used frequently by advocates of no term limits or more than two.

“That same steep learning curve is probably in the mayor’s office too,” Warren said. “Citizens would probably prefer to be able to vote whether they prefer to extend the mayor and the council.”

November ballot questions join long line in last decade

Jones argued that council members are considered part-time and that being mayor is a full-time job with the mayor more immersed in day-to-day affairs of city government.

Morgan objected to how suddenly the proposals were brought to the council for a vote and said it would limit public debate in a city where voters rejected a 2018 ballot the council put to them pushing for an extended three-term limit for both the council and the mayor.

Morgan said the wording of the 2018 measure was also misleading by “limiting” council members to three terms in its wording but making no mention of the two-term limit already in place.

Like the current proposal, the one in 2018 would have allowed council members currently in their second term to run for a third term if the question had been approved by voters.

Some public officials are trying explain away the recent referendum results

“There was almost an inherent absence in the question that was put forward on the ballot,” he said. “There was a perception from the public … that the city council lost the narrative battle about why they were proposing it.”

Jones, who is one of five current council members serving their second term, countered that the public debate began when he introduced the measures earlier in the day at City Hall.

“Any of this deliberation and discussion automatically takes place in the public sphere,” he said. “I don’t think it’s accurate to say if we don’t do something today that it’s not going to take place in the public sphere.”

The debate was more intense on the ballot question that if approved by voters would allow the local Democratic and Republican parties to call for primary elections for council and mayor — something currently barred by the charter now but which has been the case for 30 years in county government.

City Council Scorecard: Party lines, residency majority holds and a new code

And much of the debate was about county government’s experience with a partisan county commission.

“We didn’t create the partisan environment that we live in and I don’t think this would do anything to exaggerate what would be the state of affairs here,” Jones said. “We are a blue dot in a sea of red in our state. I want us to be a progressive city. I don’t shy away from that.”

“If you inject partisanship into this body what you see on the county commission is just the beginning,” Colvett countered. “When your party can pull you — quite literally threaten your membership unless you follow the herd — they are going to inject themselves into your votes.”

County Commission Scorecard: COVID tests, CHOICES playground and Juvenile Court

Smiley, who is running for governor in the August Democratic primary, said party labels shouldn’t prevent working across a partisan divide in which council members are already identified informally as Republicans or Democrats.

“It’s clear which side of the aisle we are on,” he said. “The only reason you would not be able to work across the aisle is that council members do not have the backbone to do what is right.”

Morgan said the primaries draw a lower voter turnout than general elections and the primary voters are “engaged and motivated by partisan issues.”

“If you have that as the most likely voter, you are going to get that as the most likely candidate,” he said. “It’s going to be the end of moderation on the City Council. It’s going to be the end of the moderates.”

County Commission Scorecard: Cash Policy and the Pandemic Divide

“Aren’t you running in the primaries for Shelby County right now?” Jones countered, referring to Morgan’s candidacy as the lone contender for Shelby County mayor in the May Republican county primaries.

“I just find is disingenuous from somebody who is participating in a primary now who finds it so offensive that we want to do this on this side of the street,” he said.

Carlisle told Jones that if both ballot questions get on the ballot and fail that Jones should resign from the council. Carlisle also said that if they both passed he would resign from the council.

“This idea that partisan politics is a helpful thing is in my opinion ridiculous,” Carlisle said. “I don’t hear a single thing from another Republican elected leader about a single item in front of this body. But I can assure you if we go partisan and we get a Republican on (the council), the member will have to be partisan and that will happen on both sides.”