What a term-limit change means for upcoming election.

Here’s how it used to work in Sacramento: Lawmakers could serve no more than 14 years, split between the Assembly (up to six years, in three two-year terms) and the State Senate (up to eight years, or two four-year terms).

In June of 2012, voters approved Proposition 28, amending the California Constitution to alter term limits. The new system allows elected officials to spend their entire tenure in Sacramento in just one seat. The new maximum, 12 years, is just slightly lower, but legislators can spend that entire time in one house – either three Senate terms, or six Assembly terms.

That means District 30 Assembly candidates Peter Leroe-Muñoz and Karina Cervantez Alejo, who would be elected under the new system, could serve a full 12 years in the Assembly. (The current assemblyman, Luis Alejo, terms out in 2016 after six years.)

Anna Caballero, who is running against Leroe-Muñoz and Cervantez Alejo, could serve a maximum of one term in the Assembly since she’s already served two under the old system of term limits. But she could then run for state Senate in 2018, which she did unsuccessfully in 2010.

The idea behind the new system, proponents said, was to reduce politicking and lobbyist influence, allowing officials to settle in and develop expertise over time instead of immediately contemplating their next upward move.

Opponents argued that by allowing lawmakers to serve their entire 12 years in just one house, it effectively lengthened term limits for candidates who might not be successful in bigger Senate districts. “This measure actually allows every member of the State Assembly gets to serve twelve years instead of six – doubling their time in office!” according to the no on 28 website. (Real estate mogul Howard Rich and his Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, family members spent about $426,000 bankrolling the opposition campaign. Rich is the founder and chair of U.S. Term Limits, a group that advocates for shorter term limits at all levels of government.) Unions and pro-labor PACs were large donors to the yes on Prop. 28 campaign.