Term Limit Proposition Before Council Tonight ( 1. July 2008, 09:43 by Derek Young) ~ Curious
So tonight’s city council meeting includes a a resolution (Resolution No. 37528 if you want to know), that we didn’t actually think would appear so quick. We first mentioned it a few months ago. What is it? Tacoma City Councilwoman Connie Ladenburg wants to eliminate the current ten year term limits. Time is running out to get it on the ballot, so … here it is:
“Providing for the submission to the qualified voters of the City at the special municipal election on Tuesday, November 4, 2008, a proposition to repeal Article II, Section 2.35 of the City Charter, removing the term limits for the Mayor and Council Members, to read as follows:”
PROPOSITION NO. 1
City Charter Section 2.35 states that no person shall be allowed to serve on the Council for more than ten (10) consecutive years, either as a Mayor, Councilman, or combination thereof. This proposition would repeal Section 2.35 to remove term limits for City Mayor and the Council Members.
Hmmm… This could be quite interesting tonight.
More at The News Tribune
Previously on Exit133
UPDATE – the vote is in
In Favor
Ladenburg
Talbert
Fey
Walker
Manthou
Against
Strickland
Anderson
Mayor Baarsma
Lonergan
Commenting Is Closed
Comments are allowed for two weeks from the posted date. If you want to make a comment or reopen this discussion, please contact us with your request. Thank you for visiting.
thanks for the tip Team E133. May the forces of light prevail.
1 | Posted by RR Anderson | Jul 1, 10:34 AM
Mr. Mayor says “No,” or at least “Not like this” (paraphrased).
(News Tribune)
Trivia: “Who was the last Council incumbent to lose?”
2 | Posted by DavidS | Jul 1, 10:48 AM
I think removing the term limits entirely is a terrible idea, but I also think 10 years is a funny limit when each term is 4 years long. In most cases that makes the de facto limit 8 years.
So my compromise is this: Raise the limit to 12 years. Let the councilmembers get 3 whole terms in.
I know big projects take a while to plan and build support, but if you haven’t gotten the ball rolling well enough in 12 years, you either started too late, you aren’t a good enough councilmember, or it isn’t a good enough idea. None of those are reasons to keep you in office indefinitely.
Answer to trivia question: Doug Miller in 2003. One could also credibly argue that had not changed his mind and chosen not to run, Tom Stenger was headed to defeat in 2007 as well.
There are good reasons for and against term limits. But the mayor is right, this is NOT how you change the charter.
4 | Posted by Lee | Jul 1, 11:44 AM
Just because a councilmember is not on council, does not mean that they can not continue by volunteering and working closely with current council members to see the project through. Most major projects should have several council members working on it and term limits force members to look at succession planning and bringing other into the process.
Changes like this should be brought forth through charter review, not council action.
5 | Posted by Vidiot | Jul 1, 01:38 PM
I was glad to see that at least 4 of the council members were against the term limit issue. Now what was up with the honorable Mr. Hill? Now he is sporting a shaved head.. I can only wonder what is next.
7 | Posted by pegsterdtown | Jul 1, 07:31 PM
I hope that Exit 133 members will join me in a mass e-mailing of the Council to let them know how wrong this is. To waste taxpayer funds, spread thinly as they now are, on an illegal Referendum is just plain stupid.
Thanks for posting the votes so that I know who to e-mail, BTW.
This is NOT the way to change the Charter. It is done with Public input. It is done in full view and with the public at the table. I was out of town and not able to attend the Council Meeting. Had I been in town, I certainly would have wanted to speak out against it.
Ladenburg slipping something in under the radar doesn’t surprise me. It goes with the last name to be underhanded. It’s in the nature of the beast. I expected more from Manthou, Talbert and Fey. But, then again, they all probably wanted another taste at the public feeding trough right along with Connie. Not one of this group will ever see another vote come from THIS household. (That’s 4 votes, and we ALL use them wisely)
I’m really angry about this. I hope that you all are too. To have the public kicked out of the process of changing the City Charter is just wrong. I don’t know if this is even legal. Apparently the City Attorney thinks it is, but we all know how wrong they have been in the past. It’s time to flex our collective muscle and let them know about this.
Honestly, how DO you all feel about this??
9 | Posted by J. Cote | Jul 2, 12:41 AM
Does anybody know a good resource for the arguments for and against the concept of term limits? In theory it seems like every elected official has to justify their continued service and that voters, as a collective, should be able to effectively “term limit” any official by simply voting to replace them. Do we institute term limits simply because we as voters don’t take the time or effort to get involved or be educated on issues and performance of candidates? I must be missing something here because that seems like a pretty flimsy justification. Why are some positions term limted (president, city council, etc.) and others not (Congress, school board)?
As I noted above, would like a pointer to a reasoned point-counterpoint on this issue – serious request.
And yes, I agree with J Cote and Mayor Baarsma. This is not the right process, regardless of one’s position on the bigger issue.
10 | Posted by Squid | Jul 2, 10:33 AM
From Wikipedia:
A term limit is a legal restriction that limits the number of terms a person may serve in a particular elected office. Term limits are found usually in presidential and semi-presidential systems as a method to curb the potential for dictatorships, where a leader effectively becomes “president for life”. There are different types of term limits. Sometimes, there is an absolute limit on the number of terms a person can serve, while in other cases, the restrictions are merely on the number of consecutive terms a person can serve.
11 | Posted by Marty | Jul 2, 01:36 PM
if incoherent/paranoid ramblings against the city manager form of government I suggest the Fred Crisman self-published novel murder of a city: Tacoma
which just so happens to be available in the northwest room of the Tacoma Public Library.
if you check this book out, make sure to read all the notes in the margins left by previous readers and UFO enthusiasts alike.
oh yes.
12 | Posted by RR Anderson | Jul 2, 03:27 PM
Strickland’s compromise for a 3 term cap (similar to comment #3 if I remember right) sounded interesting. It was also interesting watching how Baarsma derided her for not having his supreme grasp of historical context for operational procedures. My first time going to a meeting. Didn’t learn much of their politics, but I did learn who I do like, don’t like, and at least respect.
13 | Posted by David M Koch | Jul 4, 10:02 PM
Commenting is closed for this article.
