History > 2005 > USA > Laws > Towns, Cities

Council Wants to Extend Term Limits

December 4, 2005
The New York Times
By WINNIE HU

Twelve years after New York City voters adopted term limits for many of their local officials, the City Council is poised to allow its members to serve one more term, - without asking voters how they feel about changing the term limits law.

A majority of the Council supports a change that would allow the members to serve another four-year term in office, instead of the current limit of two terms. Six of the seven members vying to become the next Council speaker said last week that they favor making the change through legislation rather than putting it before voters, and the seventh did not rule out such a step.

Term limits were imposed after a 1993 citywide referendum, and reaffirmed by voters in 1996 when the Council similarly sought to allow a third term. In doing so, the voters largely swept aside political tradition and party loyalties to impose new limits on how long the mayor, other citywide elected officials, and council members could serve.

But now, council members, who are considering increasing term limits for themselves but not the mayor or other officials, say the two-term limit has left the Council bereft of experienced leadership and undermined its ability to act as a check on the mayor. They also say such matters should not be decided by the voters, claiming that the referendum process has often been corrupted by moneyed special interests.

While the Council's opposition to term limits is not new, it has taken on more impetus, as nearly two-thirds of the current members will be forced to leave office by 2009. It has emerged as a rallying point in the contest to succeed Gifford Miller, the speaker, who will leave the Council at the end of this month because of term limits.

The new speaker, who will set the legislative agenda for the city, will be elected on Jan. 4 by a majority vote of the Council.

As a political matter, supporting an extension of term limits is popular not only with the other members, but also with influential union leaders and political party bosses whose interests would be furthered by longer relationships with council members.

"It sounds as if they're ready and raring to go," said Douglas Muzzio, a professor of public policy at Baruch College, who moderated a Nov. 17 public forum with the candidates for speaker. "It's going to happen unless the firestorm beforehand burns them enough that they don't go through with it."

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg vigorously criticized the Council for even considering going against the voters' wishes on the issue. "The public wants term limits, and if that's what they want, we should all learn to live with them," the mayor said at a recent news conference. "The issue is not whether term limits are right. The issue here is whether the public has a right in a democracy to have government the way it wants."

The Council's efforts have also stirred vigorous opposition among powerful advocates for term limits, led by Ronald S. Lauder and government watchdogs like the Citizens Union, which opposes the Council acting on its own. Dick Dadey, the group's executive director, said there were legitimate concerns about term limits, but urged the Council to appoint a special charter commission to study the issue.

"It not only is undemocratic, but amazingly brazen for the Council to think that it can extend term limits without going back to the voters," Mr. Dadey said.

Mr. Lauder, the cosmetics heir who spent $4 million on the two earlier referendums on term limits, said that he would not just stand by while the Council tried to change the law. "It's like déjà vu all over again," Mr. Lauder said. "This was exactly what term limits were meant to stop - people getting comfortable in their jobs and not wanting to leave."

Council members, who earn $90,000 a year, contend that serving three terms would allow them to develop expertise on particular issues, and would lead to more effective government. "If you really want to make a difference, it does take a little bit more time," said Councilwoman Gale Brewer, of Manhattan, who is drafting the legislation to extend term limits for council members. She plans to introduce it this month, followed by extensive public hearings.

In addition, council members say that allowing a third term would encourage them to work together as a unified body rather than to focus on individual, short-term political goals. Indeed, a frequent criticism of Mr. Miller is that he has been unable to control his members, especially lately, given that he is facing the end of his tenure.

"It's a downhill road for any future speaker as long as term limits remain in effect," said Peter F. Vallone, who was speaker before Mr. Miller. "From the moment they are elected, they're lame ducks." Mr. Vallone, a longtime opponent of term limits, said that he had approached Mr. Lauder recently to enlist his support for a three-term limit in the Council, but Mr. Lauder remained unswayed.

Mr. Miller said through his spokesman, Steve Sigmund, that while he opposed term limits in principle, he believed that any change should be put before voters. "Gifford is clear that no action on term limits will be taken while he continues to be speaker," Mr. Sigmund said.

It would not be the first time, though, that the Council has acted directly to modify term limits. In 2002, the Council passed legislation allowing its members to serve two full terms in office, or a maximum of eight years, since occasionally Council terms are shortened to two years to accommodate redistricting after each new census.

The change, which allowed Mr. Miller and five other members to serve an additional two years in office, was upheld by a state court. It was that precedent that council members cite in saying that they can alter the term limits law without bringing the issue before voters.

Some legal experts suggest that the Council-even if it wanted to hold a referendum on term limits-would not have the authority to do so. Eric Lane, a Hofstra University law professor who advises Mr. Miller, said the Council's 1996 referendum was "highly questionable," since state law allows only certain topics to be put before voters by local legislatures. He contends that extending term limits was not one of them.

Others, like Mr. Muzzio, who personally opposes term limits, are understandably cautious about what could be perceived as ruling by legislative fiat.

"To do it legislatively is a big mistake," Mr. Muzzio said. "It's bad policy to explicitly overturn the judgment of the voters, and it's bad politics because they're going to get hammered, and rightly so."

Council Wants to Extend Term Limits, NYT, 4.12.2005, http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/04/nyregion/metrocampaigns/04term.html