MUSKEGON, Mich. — The city of Muskegon is asking a judge to clarify a recently passed amendment that would implement 12-year term limits for members of city commission.
Voters passed the proposal on November 4. It reads:
To the Muskegon City Charter to Establish a 12-Year Term Limit on the Members of the City Commission
The Muskegon Charter would be amended to prohibit service on the Commission for terms or partial terms of more than 12 years. There are 6 former commissioners, one current Commissioner, and the Mayor who may be ineligible to serve if the Charter amendment is enacted.
Shall the Muskegon Charter Chapter III, Section 3 be amended to add that “A person may not serve on the City Commission for terms or partial terms that combined total more than 12 years” and to state that “ward elections become effective November 2, 1982”?
Mayor Ken Johnson, who has already served 12 years in these roles combined, was re-elected to a four year term on November 4. He faces a potential conflict between his election victory and the new term limits.
"You got one piece of the city charter saying, hey, no, you were duly elected by the electors of your city, you're entitled to serve your term. And this new piece is saying, hey, no, you served more than 12 years. You can't serve," Johnson told FOX 17 last week.
PRIOR COVERAGE: Voters re-elect Muskegon Mayor Ken Johnson while approving 12-year term limits impacting his seat
In a Wednesday news release, the city notes that the new Charter language can be interpreted in several ways. It filed a lawsuit Tuesday, asking a judge to confirm the following:
- All time served on City Commission counts toward the 12-year limit, not just time after November 2025
- Commissioner German, whose term runs from January 1, 2024, to December 31, 2027, may finish his current term but cannot serve after that date
- Mayor Johnson may serve until December 31, 2029
Before the election, the city asked the state to review the proposed ballot language. Letters from the Attorney General's office and the Governor flagged that the proposal may be inconsistent with state law.
The Governor's letter states, in part:
"Based on the review by the Department of Attorney General, I am notifying you that I do not approve the proposed amendment pursuant to the Home Rule City Act."
However, the Attorney General's office noted that because the amendment was proposed by initiative petition, state law required it to be placed on the ballot despite the Governor's disapproval.
The city has committed to sharing updates as the lawsuit progresses.
