I like term limits for
the Commissioners/council. I know there are a number of people in town who
dislike not being able to vote for the person they want. They would like term
limits abolished. They point out that term limits has eliminated several very
good commissioners who might still be in office without them. They say that the
lack of competition for the offices is a result of term limits.
I disagree for many reasons. I believe that the lack of competition at the polls is caused by the lousy pay. Term limits give minorities a better chance of being elected so we get a more representative government. Also corruption in government can be a problem. A turnover of elected commissioners/council members helps decrease this problem. Newly elected officials have enthusiasm and bring fresh thinking to city government. It does seem odd that it takes a majority of voters to re-elect an incumbent and a majority of voters would vote to keep term limits. But the voters recognize that just the fact that an incumbent is running again for an office prevents others from running. Term limits brings new people out to run for office who otherwise would not have done so.
I also think we will need term limits for the mayor. It is not in the current charter changes. However, because of the changes in charter review, I believe that it will be put on the ballot within a reasonable time period. Why do we need it? To keep honesty in government. When a public official holds a job for a very long time, the temptations that get thrown in his/her face regularly can be overwhelming.
Look at this site: http://home.fuse.net/inskeerj/legalopinion1.html
The following is the text of a memorandum given by the Mason (Ohio) Law Director to the members of the Mason city council dated November 22, 1993. This was 20 days after the passage of an amendment to the city charter imposing term limits upon members of council. The amendment was approved by 2,903 (69.2%) for and 928 (30.7%) against.