Term Limits and Recalls (& Politics)

Term Limits - If you read the S-T "Our View" editorial today, you will see an outline of a rationale as to why people cry for term limits.  I have posted before that I am not opposed to term limits.  Will we be able to accomplish this in Fairhaven?

First, if anyone has found an example of a successful vote for the imposition of term limits in MASSACHUSETTS for ELECTED officials, please let me know.   I truly would like to see it.

I understand that some of you may view me as an insider.  Nonetheless, I will state that my decisions and opinions are not based solely what some consider the party lines.  I would be very receptive to any information which could move toward term limits for elective offices.

If I am being honest however, based on everything I have read, it would appear that it just simply cannot be done for elected office by simply adopting a by-law (in our case now a "code" amendment).  It would take more then just a town wide vote.

There is actually some serious question as to whether the enactment by the legislature would be allowable under the constitutional provisions.  Absent an amendment to the Massachusetts Constitution, the only possible way, would involve going to the state legislature.

Fairhaven's form of government is established by the adoption of a series of "special acts" approved by the state legislature and then subsequently voted by the town as a whole.  To change the form of our government, or segments of it, it requires the Town to first petition the legislature for enactment of a special act/law allowing us to do so.  The same would then be subject to a town wide vote.

This assumes three things, first a properly drawn article is that has been submitted to Town Meeting receives a positive vote; the legislature actually enacts it; and, the Town as a whole votes for it.  I think the first and third could actually be accomplished, the second may be the stumbling block.

Recalls - The biggest stumbling block to the proposed recall provision is the fact that the Town's present recall provision was in fact a "special act" amendment to what people commonly refer to as our Town Charter.  It cannot be amended simply by a vote of Town Meeting.  Again, a properly drawn article has to be submitted to Town Meeting.  It has to receive a positive vote.  It would then be submitted to the legislature.  If approved the Town as a whole has to vote for it.  On something of this nature, there is normally no issue from the legislature in approving the same.

As I understand it the proposal to be submitted to S.T.M. is to change the required number of signatures from 20% of registered voters to 10% and to change the number of days in which to collect signatures from 14 days to thirty.

I acknowledge I have previously expressed an opinion that I am against recalls except in certain circumstances.  Yet I have also said that since we in fact have a recall provision, I would look at any reasonable amendment to the same.

Fundamentally, trying to ignore my own bias on this issue, I would submit that 20% of registered voters in fourteen days is a bit unreasonable.  On the other side of the coin 10% in thirty dates becomes too easy.     I could support 20% in thirty days.  I am more then willing to hear other alternatives.

For me it just needs to be difficult enough so that it does not become a commonplace event.

I would hope that even the proponents of this article would acknowledge that the use of recalls should not be taken lightly.  Provisions to allow them should be difficult (not near impossible though).

As an aside, by the time all of the necessary steps are in fact followed to amend the provision, it may very well be sometime next calendar year before a successful petition could be mounted.

The first stumbling block may be the fact the proposed article would not pass legal muster (not just Town Counsel, but the A.G. and legislature).  The next, assuming the article receives initial Town Meeting approval, is the time it takes the legislature to act.  These are not high priority matters up in Boston.  Maybe someone could light a fire under them, but I have seen these things sit for months, and believe it our not "get lost". then the issue becomes the actual election it self.

Politics - I want to make one thing clear.  When I discuss politics, I mean politics and not government.  Some of you may not distinguish between the two.  I do.

I stand by my prior statements in another post.  There is nothing fair about politics, and probably never will be. Again, Politics, in my opinion, is the original blood sport.

For all of you non-politicians, the minute you lobby for public support, the minute you declare you are running for office, you start playing politics and become politicians.  You can protest otherwise, but it is reality.

That being said, while politics is a blood sport, government should not be.  We can debate that the two are inseparable, but they are not.  If you can see that, I can pretty much assume I am not going to convince you otherwise.

More to come later today or tomorrow.