Will "term limit on MoCo Council members" help MoCo schools?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The BOE is saying...

On June 1, the MCEA Representative Assembly voted to recommend the following candidates for Board of Education in Montgomery County’s general election on November 8:

District 2 – Rebecca Smondrowski
District 4 – Shebra Evans
At-Large – Phil Kauffman

VOTE NO ON PROPOSAL B

What Proposal B says

Proposal B would limit all present and future County Council Members and County Executives to 3 terms. Anyone who filled a vacancy mid-term would be treated as having served a full term.

Motives behind Proposal B

Last year Montgomery County Council, for the first time in 9 years, unanimously voted to increase property taxes, resulting in $40 million more for our children and schools. Opponents of public school funding are fighting back this year with Proposal B.

The Truth about Term Limits
?We have the power of term limits already: it’s called a vote! Creating term limits is saying that you, as a voter, don’t have the right to make your own decisions regarding whom you elect.
?Term limits do not increase the number of women and minorities elected to office. Elsewhere, more women and minorities were term-limited out of seats than were elected in. *
?Term Limits increase taxing and spending. Constant turnover creates a short-term fiscal view, leading to poor budgetary decisions. *
?Term limits do not decrease the numbers of career politicians. Studies have shown that 80% of term limited officials end up back in public office.

*please see: http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/crc/Resources/Files/termlimits20160810.pdf

You say that this is the Board of Education, but in fact as the post makes clear it is the MCEA. The BOE does not endorse other candidates for board positions, nor does it generally weigh in on political matters before voters. Particularly those that are not directly related to education.

Can you provide a link to an actual BOE press release that states that the BOE is against term limits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The BOE is saying...

On June 1, the MCEA Representative Assembly voted to recommend the following candidates for Board of Education in Montgomery County’s general election on November 8:

District 2 – Rebecca Smondrowski
District 4 – Shebra Evans
At-Large – Phil Kauffman

VOTE NO ON PROPOSAL B

What Proposal B says

Proposal B would limit all present and future County Council Members and County Executives to 3 terms. Anyone who filled a vacancy mid-term would be treated as having served a full term.

Motives behind Proposal B

Last year Montgomery County Council, for the first time in 9 years, unanimously voted to increase property taxes, resulting in $40 million more for our children and schools. Opponents of public school funding are fighting back this year with Proposal B.

The Truth about Term Limits
?We have the power of term limits already: it’s called a vote! Creating term limits is saying that you, as a voter, don’t have the right to make your own decisions regarding whom you elect.
?Term limits do not increase the number of women and minorities elected to office. Elsewhere, more women and minorities were term-limited out of seats than were elected in. *
?Term Limits increase taxing and spending. Constant turnover creates a short-term fiscal view, leading to poor budgetary decisions. *
?Term limits do not decrease the numbers of career politicians. Studies have shown that 80% of term limited officials end up back in public office.

*please see: http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/crc/Resources/Files/termlimits20160810.pdf

You say that this is the Board of Education, but in fact as the post makes clear it is the MCEA. The BOE does not endorse other candidates for board positions, nor does it generally weigh in on political matters before voters. Particularly those that are not directly related to education.

Can you provide a link to an actual BOE press release that states that the BOE is against term limits?

Nope. My bad. MCEA says...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In general, 12 years is more than enough for a MoCo Council member to hold office. I actually think 8 years would have been sufficient, but I guess we're lucky to even have this ballot initiative given that the current council members challenged the petition signatures to add this to the ballot.

If the question is added to the ballot and term limits are approved by a majority of voters, council members Roger Berliner, Marc Elrich, Nancy Floreen and George Leventhal would be forced out of office in 2018. I don't know enough about their specific attitudes towards public schools.

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/Web-2016/County-Council-Prepares-for-Possibility-of-Term-Limit-Question-on-November-Ballot/

Isn't there another way to get rid of Floreen? She is a disaster.

[Anonymous]

To run against her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In general, 12 years is more than enough for a MoCo Council member to hold office. I actually think 8 years would have been sufficient, but I guess we're lucky to even have this ballot initiative given that the current council members challenged the petition signatures to add this to the ballot.

If the question is added to the ballot and term limits are approved by a majority of voters, council members Roger Berliner, Marc Elrich, Nancy Floreen and George Leventhal would be forced out of office in 2018. I don't know enough about their specific attitudes towards public schools.

http://www.bethesdamagazine.com/Bethesda-Beat/Web-2016/County-Council-Prepares-for-Possibility-of-Term-Limit-Question-on-November-Ballot/

Isn't there another way to get rid of Floreen? She is a disaster.

Under the current system, the only way is to wait for her to decide to run for Executive or quit, because she is way too entrenched. The worst part is that she is probably odds on favorite to win County Executive in the next election.

[Anonymous]

Sometimes when things are so broken, the best we can try to accomplish to start from scratch. That is why I voted yes.

[Anonymous]

Yes, yes, yes. Term limits are good for everyone, republican/democrat/whig

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, yes, yes. Term limits are good for everyone, republican/democrat/whig

I guess you saw Hamilton? But yes, I agree that they are good for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Heard this "term limit" is on ballot now.

Will this benefit schools?

Anything Ficker is bad

I used to totally agree with the above statement (most of his proposals are nutty), but in this case, it's time to put some pressure on the county council to stop allowing over development without making developers provide the educational resources needed to serve the growing community. I voted for term limits.

[Anonymous]

I voted for term limits too. 12 years of a council member is enough, and hopefully this will spur some new blood to run for office (I think the average age of a council member is currently 65). Yes on B!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I voted for term limits too. 12 years of a council member is enough, and hopefully this will spur some new blood to run for office (I think the average age of a council member is currently 65). Yes on B!

Oh good. Lobbyists for developers can now stack the Board in their favor. Good job.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for term limits too. 12 years of a council member is enough, and hopefully this will spur some new blood to run for office (I think the average age of a council member is currently 65). Yes on B!

Oh good. Lobbyists for developers can now stack the Board in their favor. Good job.

Developers are already looking for candidates to replace their current windbags....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I voted for term limits too. 12 years of a council member is enough, and hopefully this will spur some new blood to run for office (I think the average age of a council member is currently 65). Yes on B!

Oh good. Lobbyists for developers can now stack the Board in their favor. Good job.

Developers are already looking for candidates to replace their current windbags....

All of the current incumbents are in the pockets of developers except maybe two. The current system entrenches those interests. While developers are likely lining up their own candidates to run, that doesn't mean that real communities cannot back one of their own to also run and hopefully win. There is no chance of that happening now.

[Anonymous]

Not a fan of the concept of term limits but voted for it anyway. 12 years is enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not a fan of the concept of term limits but voted for it anyway. 12 years is enough.

All that is needed to be known about why term limits are good is to look at PG County. A failed 2014 measure to extend them in PG county was supported by developers.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/dec/9/prince-georges-county-term-limit-referendum-drew-d/

The longer these people keep these positions, the more and more they become beholden to special interests.