Term limits are a good thing.
There is probably a point, past which, any elected official ceases to be effective and goes to seed.
A legislated maximum number of years, however, is not the way terms should be limited because, in a democracy such as the Forest City, it’s the public’s duty to periodically pass judgment on the political class.
In other words, this isn’t so much an argument against terms limits as it is an argument in favour of the electorate’s right to impose terms limits, whenever voters choose.
If a mayor or councillor is doing a bad job, it’s up to voters to give that incumbent the boot.
Like it or not, that’s their job.
I doubt London voters are so lazy that they have to rely on provincial legislation to do what they are unwilling to do themselves; it’s up to voters to decide who is doing good work, then mark their ballots accordingly.
So if you don’t like the way this city is governed, get out and vote. Make your wishes known.
Municipal democracy is about expressing the will of the people, or at least the few people who bother to vote.
Although he has not yet officially announced his intention to run for re-election, it’s expected Mayor Joe Fontana plans to throw his hat into the ring again.
If Fontana does run again, and wins, who gets the blame or credit? The voters themselves, and no one else.
There’s no use squabbling about a system that “allows” incumbents to run again at the end of a their term. Ultimately, it’s the voters that allow politicians the privilege of governing.
All of which underscores a strange fact about politics and politicians.
It’s only in the political sphere that experience is seen as a liability.
The one comment I see most often on online comment boards is that Londoners should start over with a clean slate, that they should “Boot them all out” (or similar words).
But let’s say in this extremely cold weather you have a problem with your plumbing and a pipe bursts.
Would you opt to hire an experience plumber? Or would you rather have one who “thinks outside of the box” and “isn’t afraid to try new solutions”?
But hey, maybe it’ll actually happen.
It’s up to your imagination to create a mental picture of a city run by a council free of incumbents.
If institutional knowledge counts in such pursuits as, say, running a business, then surely it counts for something at City Hall? Or do only the newbies have the answers?
Besides, if recent developments are any indication, it appears city politicians are doing a good job of putting limits on themselves.
Council veterans Joni Baechler, Nancy Branscombe and Judy Bryant have all opted not to run again. Others may follow. So where’s the problem?
If you dislike the way your city is being governed, get out and vote.
Even better, offer yourself up as a candidate. That’s right, you.
Nominations close Sept. 12 for the Oct. 27 election.
