Ummm... kiddos! Term limits. Remember?

Not so sure I agree with term limits - for city council or POTUS.

Not having term limits does not limit our, the voters', ability to replace poor performers.

Having term limits makes it impossible to retain outstanding ones as long as they continue to perform or will run for the office.

Being aware and voting for the best candidate - or against the lesser one - is both our right and our responsibility. Or perhaps we're attempting to use term limits legislation to do by chance what we're unwilling to do for ourselves by design.

Ernie

Blue Book:
Dont get so testy man. You are the one who said Martinez would "deal with Hagan," not me.  If you dont like people being critical of your choice of words-then don't choose them.  "Deal with Hagan" is just the kind of comment that is made routinely by members of a council and their supporters who bully, intimidate and speak down to anyone who dares disagree with them.  I hope you didn't mean them as they sounded.  I have only met Hagan once and briefly at that so I don't know him, but I think he has said repeatedly that he is running for reelection and I have never heard or read anything about him running for Mayor. Unfortunately, I don't even think the Mayor's postion is up for reelection until 2010. If it was up for grabs now, I personally would surely like to see Hagan run for the spot .  Dozens of my friends and nieghbors have said the same thing.  Lord knows that we need to replace our rude and arrogant incumbent Mayor who cares nothing about taxpayers with someone who has a proven record of fiscal responsibility.. Hagan would be a great Mayor, but that is just my wishful thinking, not something that I think he has ever said. 

Little Blue Book:

If you don't like Hagan then you must obviously like the other members of the council because he stands in stark contrast to them.

More important however is your comment saying "James will deal with Hagan."

Just what does that mean? Deal with Hagan?

It almost sounds like a threat. The same kind of bullying tacttics emplyed by the Mayor and his cronies. If you disagree with them about the projects they "advocate" they verbally abuse you.

I hope Mr. Martinez is a better man than that and will not allow his campaign to devolve into childish threats.

Perhaps the reason more qualified people don't run for city council is that it is often a thankless job. Just look at the comments on this site over the last year about all of them - Negative, Negative and more Negative. They could all be replaced over the next couple of years and some folks are still going to be complaining about something.

Little Blue Book:

I find it highly ironic that you include a book about courage to identify yourself on this blog and then attack David Hagan who is the only member of the council to exhibit any. You obivously weren't at the same council meetings that I attended or else you have just chosen to tune out what Hagan has said. He has indeed offered alternatives, just not the ones you seem to support. His alternative proposals include paying for the Chief of Police's legal fees if he would temporarilty take a leave of absence with pay until his case was adjudicated. Another alternative he advocated was scrubbing the budget to see where spending could be reduced before the council voted to increase the tax burden on the citizens of Victoria, and he advocated returning surplus funds back to the taxpayers who provided them rather than spend unbudgeted tax dollars on unneeded downtown sidewalk improvements. The problem isn't that David Hagan isn't offering alternatives, but that you just don't like his alternatives. That is certainly your perogative, but you really ought to think about Mark Twain's description of courage and what it means before you you defend the spinless cowards on the council who walk in lock step with the Mayor even when they know he is wrong and before you attack Hagan who exemplifies the ideal of courage that Mark Twain so admired.

If you are one of the one's deadset on starting fresh with a newly elected city council with the exception of Haagen-Dazs, I say this.......everybody out, and I mean everybody, PERIOD. Let's elect an entirely new council and start fresh, of course this is just my opinion, and you what they say, everyone has one......

Bundy: 82% of the vote is a rather bold estimate. I know Mr. Martinez and I wouldn't be so sure on your bold prediction. Mr. Martinez has a large following and from what I understand, he has a very solid backing coming into this election. I predict he is going to give Hagan all he can handle. I guess we will just have to wait and see. Good luck........

The present council with the exception of Hagan is on the way out....thank God. I too wish the Mayor could immediatly be dismissed...he is rude, condescending, arrogant, and obviously does not vote to serve the citizens.

Term limits would not be a bad thing. Maybe the city council would not have the good ole' boy attitude if that were the case. Maybe the staff would not be able to abuse their power either. New council=turn over=better do you job and do it right.

LBB,
1. You will see exactly how many "bandwagoners" Hagan has come May. I predict he will collect 82% of the vote.
2. Have you attended a City Council meeting since Hagan was elected? He has cast very few "no" votes. The problem is that NONE of the other members of the Council EVER vote "no", so his votes stand out. He votes appropriately and accordingly. The man is a pragmatist. He only votes against waste, not expenditure. I suggest you give him a call and talk to him. I have had the pleasure of talking to him at great length both in person and on the phone, and you should do the same.
3. If everyone is so unhappy with the pay situation on the Council, then why do they all (save Hagan) oppose term limits? Why would you want to do a job you don't feel properly compensated for, in perpetuity?
4. The reason it is difficult to find good people to run for City Council is because they don't want to associate themselves with the scum that currenty resides on the Council. If there were fresh faces at least every 6 years, perhaps more citizens wouldn't have this view. I know several people who could easily be elected and would serve honorably, but they are not about to get caught up in that cesspool downtown. It has gotten to be a culture.

Term limits are a good thing. If they alternate the terms of the council members it would help keep consistency wile providing fresh and new ideas.

Mayor Will Armstrong is the best arguement that can be made for term limits. There is no elected offical that cannot be replaced with someone else. I agree with Mr. Pruitt. If we can replace the President after two terms, we can certainly replace the Mayor of Victoria after serving two terms. It is important that we encourage fresh faces to serve on the city council. Unfortunately, the comments by the former Mayor about the low pay echo the sentiment of the majority of the current council. They should not be serving because of the amount of money they are paid, but rather because they want to give something back to their community. I only wish we could replace the Mayor immediately. His steadfast refusal to respect the wishes of the people he was elected to serve should disqualify him from further service. The good news is that even without mandatory term limits, he will be gone soon. The voters will see to that. I respect David Hagan who understands that term limits should apply to all of the council members, himself imcluded, and that even though he is providing thoughtful, well reasoned representation on the council, he too should one day be replaced and someone else given the chance to do better.