Saturday, June 1, 2013
ENDING TERM LIMITS - THE TIME IS NOW!!
Anita Buchanan sends the following
Opponents of Amendment to End Term Limits say:
“Delegates Can’t Be Trusted”
Since the petition to end term limits for all UCO officers was defeated in February, many people asked us to try again because there was so much chaos around the vote. A second petition with over 100 signatures is headed to the Executive Board on Monday, June 3. If approved, it will be published in the July issue of the UCO Reporter before it goes to the Delegates Meeting in August for a vote.
The purpose of the amendment remains clear cut: We don’t have enough people willing to run for office in the Village. We need to remove term limits to give proven officers a chance to run for election, win or lose, beyond the current terms stipulated by UCO by-laws.
Opponents of lifting limits for all officers say that we should instead impose term limits on all officers. How in the world would that solve our problem? Instead of giving proven officers a chance to extend their service, they want to shut down every officer’s chance to serve again. We don’t have enough interested candidates, so let’s limit the pool even further?
Opponents also say we have to shut out incumbents because delegates are afraid to vote for someone new. I personally hope all delegates are insulted. How destructive to think that the delegates we elect to speak for us should be controlled because they can’t be trusted to make good choices and “we” know best. A good candidate will be heard and understood. A weak candidate will lose. Disrespecting the delegates will backfire. This is our democracy and we should spend time informing our delegates, not disparaging them.
There are all kinds of arguments against ending term limits, but they all miss the point. We need the best talent available for these responsible but thankless jobs that bring boatloads of criticism and grief. How lucky we are to have intelligent, proven officers willing to absorb the abuse and keep on fighting for us – and willing to run for reelection knowing full well how ugly and stressful campaigns in the Village can get, and that they may well lose.
And at the risk of repetition: If we don’t want officers to continue serving us, we won’t vote for them. End of story.
What are the opponents of this proposal afraid of? And why do they continue to distrust our delegates?