Term-Limit Compromise
- Share via
Just in case someone else takes up the issue of term limits for Los Angeles City Council members, I would like to propose that it need not be an either/or commitment. Oft times, a compromise is the best remedy. House Speaker Tom Foley pointed out that the ultimate term limit is the vote and, indeed, it may be more harmful than good to disenfranchise the voter from keeping a politician in office who is still popular and perceived as doing a good job.
My proposal, then, is to raise the plurality requirement for each election cycle past two terms. For example, to a 55% requirement for the third term, 60% for the fourth, and so on. This plurality must be reached on a first ballot, not in a runoff.
If any of our mayoral candidates want an issue on this subject without merely repeating the proposals of others, I hope they’ll hop on this. It’s an appropriate solution on the federal level as well.
JAKE ANGELIN
Los Angeles
Sign up for Essential California
The most important California stories and recommendations in your inbox every morning.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
