MoCo term limits- convince me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm surprised anyone needs convincing. They have similar term limits for counties throughout MD with no ill effects.

Any positive effects?

Howard County has the same 3 term limit for councilmembers and a two term limit for executive. I don't think anyone could rightfully argue that it is being mismanaged. In fact, it is probably the best run county government in the state.

That is good to know!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a Robin Ficker amendment, which alone is just about enough to convince me to vote against it.

But if you want a more nuanced view, here is what the Washington Post has to say about why they're a bad idea for county governance:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/term-limits-would-pointlessly-purge-montgomery-county-council-members/2016/10/19/394ed9e8-9600-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.8ab134b11497

Yeah, I bought the "anything Ficker is bad" line from the nice ladies outside my polling place many years ago. After seeing this County go downhill; we need a change. Traffic, taxes, school system - all bad and getting worse. Meanwhile our local politicians and Board of Ed spend time on things like divestment and protesting Labor Day start instead of LISTENING to voter concerns. (Real voters, not the transient people recruited by Planning Board to participate in planning "happy hours." Voting for term limits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a Robin Ficker amendment, which alone is just about enough to convince me to vote against it.

But if you want a more nuanced view, here is what the Washington Post has to say about why they're a bad idea for county governance:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/term-limits-would-pointlessly-purge-montgomery-county-council-members/2016/10/19/394ed9e8-9600-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.8ab134b11497

Yeah, I bought the "anything Ficker is bad" line from the nice ladies outside my polling place many years ago. After seeing this County go downhill; we need a change. Traffic, taxes, school system - all bad and getting worse. Meanwhile our local politicians and Board of Ed spend time on things like divestment and protesting Labor Day start instead of LISTENING to voter concerns. (Real voters, not the transient people recruited by Planning Board to participate in planning "happy hours." Voting for term limits.

NP and long-time resident here. I've also rolled my eyes at Ficker over the years and refused to sign his petitions. But this time, I agree with him. It's time for some changes. We need to get some new blood in there, people who aren't in cahoots with the developers and who will listen to the citizens. At least we know we'll be getting a new county executive, as Leggett said he won't seek a 4th term.

[Anonymous]

If not term limits, then I say we need to referendum the hell out of all of this stuff. BRT? put it on the ballot. Tax increase? Put it on the ballot. Build new schools? Put it on the ballot.

The current council is out of touch and guilty of sitting in the seats too long to understand how the county has changed or shouldn't change.

Maybe term limits and more actually putting the direction of the county to a vote of its population.

[Anonymous]

I am a Dem, and voted straight Democratic this year, with one exception. I, however, very much favor this amendment. Montgomery County needs new blood. Too many Old Big Govt Thinking types.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am for it. The current political environment has become stale and entrenched with many council members becoming unaccountable. The only way to get rid of a bad council member now is through a primary, but no person who wants a political future as a Democrat in this county would primary any ther Democrats. Therefore, we get the farce that we had last time Berliner ran where he was only opposed by a developer backed candidate as retaliation for his ten mile creek vote. Now Berliner has not seen a since development he has saw fit to oppose, like a Chevy Chase Lake, Westbard and downtown Bethesda. Despite significant opposition from communities.

So you see that as the political alliances become more entrenched, it becomes harder to get them out. While at the same time they become less accountable to residents. If someone had to form a coalition and raise campaign money today in District 1, I can guarantee you the outcome would not be a Roger Berliner and our District would not continue to be represented by someone living in Potomac while making life miserable for everyone else in the District.

So if that doesn't convince let me put it another way. Do you want more great public policy like 10% increases in property tax while continuing developer impact tax exemptions for roads and schools? Because if you want more of that, then vote no.

I myself will be voting yes.

This. In an ideal democracy, all good candidates should be able to get traction to run. But the party machine in MoCo and the flow of money to incumbents makes it impossible to get new blood to replace the incumbents in the pockets of the machine. I am very tired of an electorate that only knows the issues superficially and buys the wink and nod from people like Berliner, who "fought" Westbard (and other development) in name only, voted to tax the crap out of us, and doesn't give a damn about those of us that need to live in the county.

Who says we need BRT on Old Georgetown? Isn't it parallel to the Red line? can't we just have sufficient public transit to the metro stations? Why do we have to narrow Old Georgetown Road at Rockville Pike? Oh, to make it safer for pedestrians since we are bringing thousands of more cars because of the development. Why do all of our neighborhoods have "drive like your kid lives here" signs? Because no one on the council wants to deal with all the development pushing traffic off of main roads onto residential streets because we won't invest in infrastructure or have developers invest in it at the time they are developing.

Seriously, the current crew on council doesn't care. there is no ability to support a run to oppose. term limits make sense in this environment, although I have heard developers are standing ready to field their own set of candidates to replace the dead wood that'll be leaving.

+1000.

The only thing that concerns me about voting in favor, is the risk that half of the council we be lame ducks, rejected by voters, therefore further unaccountable while positioning themselves for their next jobs. While that prospect does scare me, along with the risk that there are developer supported candidates out there that could gain traction, something has to be done to change the status quo and I am willing to give this a shot. I am so irate about how this county is run that I would even donate a significant amount of money to any candidate for District 1 that actually supports communities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am for it. The current political environment has become stale and entrenched with many council members becoming unaccountable. The only way to get rid of a bad council member now is through a primary, but no person who wants a political future as a Democrat in this county would primary any ther Democrats. Therefore, we get the farce that we had last time Berliner ran where he was only opposed by a developer backed candidate as retaliation for his ten mile creek vote. Now Berliner has not seen a since development he has saw fit to oppose, like a Chevy Chase Lake, Westbard and downtown Bethesda. Despite significant opposition from communities.

So you see that as the political alliances become more entrenched, it becomes harder to get them out. While at the same time they become less accountable to residents. If someone had to form a coalition and raise campaign money today in District 1, I can guarantee you the outcome would not be a Roger Berliner and our District would not continue to be represented by someone living in Potomac while making life miserable for everyone else in the District.

So if that doesn't convince let me put it another way. Do you want more great public policy like 10% increases in property tax while continuing developer impact tax exemptions for roads and schools? Because if you want more of that, then vote no.

I myself will be voting yes.

+1 Next step is finding good candidates & cutting the bureaucracies in Rockville. MoCo should really have more local representation similar to the ANCs.

Absolutely. First of all, I think the District alignments need to be seriously reconsidered. Second, I fully agree that there needs to be more local representation at the council. Otherwise, the only other alternative is for unincorporated parts of the county to incorporate themselves. Unfortunately, it is probably too late for Bethesda because effective control through the BUP has been ceded to developers and businesses. But if it was able to incorporate I think it would be possible to get a "Bethesda mayor" from the E. Bethesda neighborhood.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a Robin Ficker amendment, which alone is just about enough to convince me to vote against it.

But if you want a more nuanced view, here is what the Washington Post has to say about why they're a bad idea for county governance:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/term-limits-would-pointlessly-purge-montgomery-county-council-members/2016/10/19/394ed9e8-9600-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.8ab134b11497

Yeah, I bought the "anything Ficker is bad" line from the nice ladies outside my polling place many years ago. After seeing this County go downhill; we need a change. Traffic, taxes, school system - all bad and getting worse. Meanwhile our local politicians and Board of Ed spend time on things like divestment and protesting Labor Day start instead of LISTENING to voter concerns. (Real voters, not the transient people recruited by Planning Board to participate in planning "happy hours." Voting for term limits.

NP and long-time resident here. I've also rolled my eyes at Ficker over the years and refused to sign his petitions. But this time, I agree with him. It's time for some changes. We need to get some new blood in there, people who aren't in cahoots with the developers and who will listen to the citizens. At least we know we'll be getting a new county executive, as Leggett said he won't seek a 4th term.

On the one hand, thankfully Leggett is leaving. On the other hand, the next executive is going to come from the current council. We need to get better people on the council in order to get better people as executive. Term limits is our best chance to do that. Otherwise we can see the future of the county now: Floreen replaces Leggett, then Navarro replaces Floreen. Can somebody explain to me how this is democracy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a Robin Ficker amendment, which alone is just about enough to convince me to vote against it.

But if you want a more nuanced view, here is what the Washington Post has to say about why they're a bad idea for county governance:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/term-limits-would-pointlessly-purge-montgomery-county-council-members/2016/10/19/394ed9e8-9600-11e6-bb29-bf2701dbe0a3_story.html?tid=a_inl&utm_term=.8ab134b11497

Yeah, I bought the "anything Ficker is bad" line from the nice ladies outside my polling place many years ago. After seeing this County go downhill; we need a change. Traffic, taxes, school system - all bad and getting worse. Meanwhile our local politicians and Board of Ed spend time on things like divestment and protesting Labor Day start instead of LISTENING to voter concerns. (Real voters, not the transient people recruited by Planning Board to participate in planning "happy hours." Voting for term limits.

NP and long-time resident here. I've also rolled my eyes at Ficker over the years and refused to sign his petitions. But this time, I agree with him. It's time for some changes. We need to get some new blood in there, people who aren't in cahoots with the developers and who will listen to the citizens. At least we know we'll be getting a new county executive, as Leggett said he won't seek a 4th term.

Have to agree here. Just because Ficker was the one that got the petitions in, doesn't mean that it is a bad idea. We all know that he hopes it will mean more Republicans on the council. I personally don't really care about that. What I care about is that there are competing voices to ensure that we get better public policy. Is it such a bad thing to have just one anti-tax person on the council? Is it such a bad thing to have someone on the council that is anti-development in District 1? It is an easy vote for council members to have big development occur far away from their constituencies.

If Berliner was a better council member for District 1 residents, I would probably vote against this. But the guy is a schmuck and I am voting for it because this is basically the only way to get rid of him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am for it. The current political environment has become stale and entrenched with many council members becoming unaccountable. The only way to get rid of a bad council member now is through a primary, but no person who wants a political future as a Democrat in this county would primary any ther Democrats. Therefore, we get the farce that we had last time Berliner ran where he was only opposed by a developer backed candidate as retaliation for his ten mile creek vote. Now Berliner has not seen a since development he has saw fit to oppose, like a Chevy Chase Lake, Westbard and downtown Bethesda. Despite significant opposition from communities.

So you see that as the political alliances become more entrenched, it becomes harder to get them out. While at the same time they become less accountable to residents. If someone had to form a coalition and raise campaign money today in District 1, I can guarantee you the outcome would not be a Roger Berliner and our District would not continue to be represented by someone living in Potomac while making life miserable for everyone else in the District.

So if that doesn't convince let me put it another way. Do you want more great public policy like 10% increases in property tax while continuing developer impact tax exemptions for roads and schools? Because if you want more of that, then vote no.

I myself will be voting yes.

This. In an ideal democracy, all good candidates should be able to get traction to run. But the party machine in MoCo and the flow of money to incumbents makes it impossible to get new blood to replace the incumbents in the pockets of the machine. I am very tired of an electorate that only knows the issues superficially and buys the wink and nod from people like Berliner, who "fought" Westbard (and other development) in name only, voted to tax the crap out of us, and doesn't give a damn about those of us that need to live in the county.

Who says we need BRT on Old Georgetown? Isn't it parallel to the Red line? can't we just have sufficient public transit to the metro stations? Why do we have to narrow Old Georgetown Road at Rockville Pike? Oh, to make it safer for pedestrians since we are bringing thousands of more cars because of the development. Why do all of our neighborhoods have "drive like your kid lives here" signs? Because no one on the council wants to deal with all the development pushing traffic off of main roads onto residential streets because we won't invest in infrastructure or have developers invest in it at the time they are developing.

Seriously, the current crew on council doesn't care. there is no ability to support a run to oppose. term limits make sense in this environment, although I have heard developers are standing ready to field their own set of candidates to replace the dead wood that'll be leaving.

Do you think "the machine" or "the money" are going anywhere? No, they aren't. So instead of having seasoned pols who understand the issues and might be persuaded to evaluate them on their merits, you have a series of newbies who never gain the experience to push back. By the time they learn job, they become term limited. The apparatchiks and powerful interests actually gain power from term-limits. Stupid idea.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am for it. The current political environment has become stale and entrenched with many council members becoming unaccountable. The only way to get rid of a bad council member now is through a primary, but no person who wants a political future as a Democrat in this county would primary any ther Democrats. Therefore, we get the farce that we had last time Berliner ran where he was only opposed by a developer backed candidate as retaliation for his ten mile creek vote. Now Berliner has not seen a since development he has saw fit to oppose, like a Chevy Chase Lake, Westbard and downtown Bethesda. Despite significant opposition from communities.

So you see that as the political alliances become more entrenched, it becomes harder to get them out. While at the same time they become less accountable to residents. If someone had to form a coalition and raise campaign money today in District 1, I can guarantee you the outcome would not be a Roger Berliner and our District would not continue to be represented by someone living in Potomac while making life miserable for everyone else in the District.

So if that doesn't convince let me put it another way. Do you want more great public policy like 10% increases in property tax while continuing developer impact tax exemptions for roads and schools? Because if you want more of that, then vote no.

I myself will be voting yes.

This. In an ideal democracy, all good candidates should be able to get traction to run. But the party machine in MoCo and the flow of money to incumbents makes it impossible to get new blood to replace the incumbents in the pockets of the machine. I am very tired of an electorate that only knows the issues superficially and buys the wink and nod from people like Berliner, who "fought" Westbard (and other development) in name only, voted to tax the crap out of us, and doesn't give a damn about those of us that need to live in the county.

Who says we need BRT on Old Georgetown? Isn't it parallel to the Red line? can't we just have sufficient public transit to the metro stations? Why do we have to narrow Old Georgetown Road at Rockville Pike? Oh, to make it safer for pedestrians since we are bringing thousands of more cars because of the development. Why do all of our neighborhoods have "drive like your kid lives here" signs? Because no one on the council wants to deal with all the development pushing traffic off of main roads onto residential streets because we won't invest in infrastructure or have developers invest in it at the time they are developing.

Seriously, the current crew on council doesn't care. there is no ability to support a run to oppose. term limits make sense in this environment, although I have heard developers are standing ready to field their own set of candidates to replace the dead wood that'll be leaving.

Do you think "the machine" or "the money" are going anywhere? No, they aren't. So instead of having seasoned pols who understand the issues and might be persuaded to evaluate them on their merits, you have a series of newbies who never gain the experience to push back. By the time they learn job, they become term limited. The apparatchiks and powerful interests actually gain power from term-limits. Stupid idea.

Counter argument: Is elective office supposed to be a career? 12 years is a very long time to hold any one job. If we take this argument to the extreme, then why not make these positions life-terms, like the Supreme Court? Why not let council members pass them on to their children, who they will train from an early age to do the job and therefore be "more experienced" than anyone else?

[Anonymous]

I'm against it and I work closely with people who will be affected, but I'm non partisan if that makes sense. So take my opinion in context.

I see it as a limit on a voter's ability to choose. At the local level, it gives staff like me more power because new politicians don't have much subject matter expertise. I do. But you can't fire me. You can "fire" politicians by not voting. And apparently studies show term limits make politicians rely on lobbyists more, again for the expertise.

And I have amazing respect for a few Councilmembers, who I don't want to leave, because they are truly good for the county. They learn the issues, understand the broader policy implications, and know how to compromise.

Practically speaking, 4 of 9 will soon leave office to run for County Executive. So you are cleaning house anyway. Maybe 5. And if that one leaves I'll cry.

Objectively, limiting Council to 3 terms is better than 2.

I have less problem limiting the Executive to three terms. I'd be fine with two like we have for governor and president. Most of the heavy lifting is done in Council. They are the final appropriation authority.

You might look harder at public campaign financing. Might help elect some at/large members from upcounty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm against it and I work closely with people who will be affected, but I'm non partisan if that makes sense. So take my opinion in context.

I see it as a limit on a voter's ability to choose. At the local level, it gives staff like me more power because new politicians don't have much subject matter expertise. I do. But you can't fire me. You can "fire" politicians by not voting. And apparently studies show term limits make politicians rely on lobbyists more, again for the expertise.

And I have amazing respect for a few Councilmembers, who I don't want to leave, because they are truly good for the county. They learn the issues, understand the broader policy implications, and know how to compromise.

Practically speaking, 4 of 9 will soon leave office to run for County Executive. So you are cleaning house anyway. Maybe 5. And if that one leaves I'll cry.

Objectively, limiting Council to 3 terms is better than 2.

I have less problem limiting the Executive to three terms. I'd be fine with two like we have for governor and president. Most of the heavy lifting is done in Council. They are the final appropriation authority.

You might look harder at public campaign financing. Might help elect some at/large members from upcounty.

This is nonsense. Limits choice? What choice do we have now? What person who wants a career in county politics would primary a sitting councilmember? Because that is the only way your supposed choice is ever going to happen. Once in their seats, it becomes increasingly harder to displace them due to name recognition and apathy.

The only person to run against Berliner in 2014 was a developer funded candidate because the developers were upset about his vote on 10 mile creek. After that, he has since done everything in his power to do everything developers want. He doesn't advocate for the people of his district, to the contrary. He has the wealthiest district in the county and doesn't even bother reaching out to actual residents in his district for fundraising. Why, because he doesn't have to when developers are handing him checks. It's amazing. I can guarantee you that there are plenty of potential District 1 candidates out there that could actually run with strong community support, but they will not until Berliner is gone and it is a clear field. The power of incumbency is that strong.

Furthermore, many of the current crop of council members are fully non-responsive to the constituents they are supposed to represent. Go ahead, send an email. See how many respond. Berliner is top of that list, but only one at-large member ever responds to constituents at all.

The idea that we have to wait for county executive to open up for council members to move on is ridiculous. Ike Leggett pulled in over a million dollars in contributions during his last campaign. Who can challenge that when the executive decides to stay in power?

The sad fact of the matter is that for current council members it is very easy to pick up checks in the thousands of dollars from developers, industry groups and unions. So much so that they don't even bother going out with ideas and a platform to their constituents and fundraising from them. How hard would it be to find one person in each community association in their district to host a couple hour meet and greet where they could say if you like what you hear, please donate 10, 20, 50, 100 bucks or whatever? The current campaign finance model means that they don't even need to do that.

Under the current system, there is no room in this county for outsider candidacies and insurgent campaigns. This is a shame and needs to change. Term limits will do that.

The fact of the matter is, if Question B does pass, this current council and the ones that lose their seats will only have themselves to blame. They have sat by over the past 5 years while our roads have deteriorated to the point where only 41% of them are considered good quality by DOT. They have sat by and done nothing while our schools have overcrowded. And they have actively championed projects that communities do not want, while similarly protecting their own narrow interests.

By the way, where is the downtown Takoma Park sector plan? Why is all the new development there only occurring on the DC side while MD is supposedly leaving all that revenue on the table from development? Where is the Kensington MARC station sector plan? Ridership on MARC is low, adding businesses and density around that station with a direct link to downtown Silver Spring and Union Station would be strategically smart and brilliant. I can tell you why, Nancy Floreen is council president and the former mayor of Garrett Park and we have 3 at-large council members from Takoma Park plus Tom Hucker.

If Bethesda and Chevy Chase are indeed the economic drivers of this county, not to mention the largest population center, then it needs more representation on the council. And it needs it now.

[Anonymous]

Look, a lot of counties in Maryland that are well run have it. It won't hurt us at all and it will breath life into our politics for once.

I don't think this is a partisan issue either, I was driving on Fernwood yesterday and say a number of houses with Yes on B signs. One of those houses also had a Green Party sign as well. Can't remember who the candidate was though.

This current council over the past term has proven themselves nothing short of incompetent in governing. Local government isn't that complicated, it is supposed to provide for public safety, schools, and roads/transit as its top priorities. After that, there are other good amenities like parks and garbage collection/sanitation, etc. But on these core issues, public safety, roads and schools, does anyone have faith in the direction we are headed?

I'm voting yes.

[Anonymous]

Also a thread in MD Public Schools on this:
http://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/588800.page