Venice council to ask city voters to lengthen terms to four years, end odd-year elections

Correction: Sarasota County Supervisor of Elections Ron Turner answered a question about odd year and even year elections during a January appearance at a Venice City Council meeting. An earlier version of this story said he initiated the conversation.

VENICE – Venice voters will be asked to lengthen council members' terms from three to four years – a move that, if approved in a referendum this fall would eliminate elections in 2025 and 2027, as well as grandfather in one-year extensions in the terms for council Seats 3 through 7.

The controversial ballot question – which still must be drafted – was approved in principle on a 5-2 vote, with Council members Joan Farrell and Ron Smith dissenting.

Farrell, in Seat 1, and Smith, in Seat 2, who would not receive term extensions under the plan. Both would simply run for a four-year term in 2026. The Seat 3 and 4 candidates, who are on the ballot this year, would receive four terms if the referendum passes.

Smith – who was both a newspaper editor and state prosecutor earlier in his career – adopted the tone of a prosecutor when he criticized the prospect of the council adopting a plan that would mean that when voters decide on new representatives in Seats 3 and 4 they would weigh in on a referendum that would morph those seats into four-year terms, while also extending the terms for Seats 5, 6, and 7 (the mayor) by an extra year.

That means those three seats – occupied by Rick Howard, Rachel Frank and Nick Pachota respectively – would be on the ballot in 2026, along with the seats now occupied by Farrell and Smith.

In 2026, voters would pick the occupants of Seats 1, 2 and 5 for four-year terms; while Seats 6 and 7 would be picked for a transitional two-year term and be on the ballot again for a four-year term in 2028.

Smith – who echoed the thoughts of many speakers during public comment – took issue with the loss of an annual accountability to the voters, as well as the spotlight in those odd year races, when county, state and national seats are not on the ballot.

Smith used a combative tone to offer an alternative and voice his opposition.

What did Ron Smith say?

“If this is an honest effort, I do want to tell the council how it could easily accomplish the same thing without doing the most offensive thing of all – which is to extend incumbent council terms by a year for the transition,” Smith said. “This is how you do it in an honest way, in a non-corrupt way, very simple .. you make the rule that when a seat comes up next in an even year, you will be running for a four-year term.”

Predictably Smith's delivery did not go over well with a majority of his colleagues.

Helen Moore, who has not yet decided whether to run for a third term this year, turned to her left to face Smith and said, "I am angered by Mr. Smith’s use of the word of this ‘corrupt’ proceeding.

“There is no corrupt proceeding and I absolutely resent to the maximum degree that there’s some corrupt, nefarious, outsider influencing anything,” she added, referencing Smith’s attempt to tie the change to four-year terms to either a push from developers or political parties seeking to exert more influence in the non-partisan council race. “Nothing is jammed through – to also quote you – unless you consider sending things to the citizens who also can vote on election day as jamming something.”

Both Moore and Frank – who made the motion directing staff to bring back an ordinance to create the ballot question – asked for apologies that did not come.

Howard, who bested Smith for his spot on the City Council in the 2022 election, stressed that the voters will ultimately decide whether to modify the council terms and noted that regardless of the year, political parties already attempt to influence city elections.

“The blue and the red are everywhere,” Howard said, referencing the Democrat and Republican parties. “Both parties send out fliers, both parties do ads, both parties do the same thing."

Boldt, who has filed to run for his second term this November, also took offense at Smith’s statement as well as constant public comment that the majority of the council is either doing the bidding of developers or political parties.

“This is negative, everything is negative,” said Boldt, who added that he’s contemplating not running for a second term.

“The attitude that I see in this chamber, every time we have a meeting, it scares me,” Boldt said.

Why is there a push to change term lengths?

Sarasota County Supervisor of Elections Ron Turner answered a question about odd year and even year elections during a January appearance at a council meeting during which he asked the city to consider a moratorium on new annexations prior to elections. In the 2023 election, annexations resulted in one precinct having only two registered voters.

Changing to four-year terms would bring city elections in line with other local governments, including the city of North Port and Sarasota County.

In 2023, when Farrell and Smith won seats on the council, more than 40% of the 21,814 registered voters turned out to the polls.

On Tuesday, Pachota pointed out that was still more than 5,200 fewer voters than in the 2022 election – which included the gubernatorial race.

Frank earlier noted that the 2020 – which coincides with the presidential election −more than 70% of the city’s voters went to the polls.

“So we’re disenfranchising thousands of voters is how I see it but all we’re voting on today is to turn this over to our city residents to decide how they feel about the issue,” Frank said.

It also costs the city about $50,000 to stage an odd-year election.

“I see this very clearly as we are giving the voters the option to decide what they want,” Frank said. “Do they want us in office for nine years or only eight years? Do they want us to capitalize on the potential savings or not? Do they want to engage as many voters in each election cycle as it comes to the Venice City Council or not.”

Venice Thrives, an activist group that endorsed Smith in the 2023 election at the same time that it circulated a “clean campaign pledge,” expressed displeasure at the council decision via email.

"Venice Thrives is disappointed by City Council's vote today to pursue a referendum to change the city's election cycle in a way that does not benefit Venice voters,” Venice Thrives spokeswoman Jan Vertefeuille wrote. “We believe voters benefit from having the opportunity to elect fresh voices to Council every year.

“In addition, the approach that five City Council members voted for would cancel next year's City Council election and give an additional year in office to three of them. Fortunately, Venice voters will have the final say."

This article originally appeared on Sarasota Herald-Tribune: Referendum would ask Venice voters to change council term to 4 years