Diane Watts is starting to impress me
First, she wants to clean up Surrey like Giuliani cleaned up New York.
Secondly, she doesn’t want to get into the trap that Vancouver landed into by clearly explaining why she doesn’t want a safe injection site in Surrey.
Now, she has this gem of a comment, and she is absolutely correct – from CKNW:
The mayor of Surrey wants to limit how long mayors and city councilors can hold office.
Dianne Watts says a three-term limit would bring fresh ideas to local government.
Watts says she’s not trying to get rid of any specific long-standing councilors in Surrey.
“We’ve got some long-standing councilors that, you know have certainly contributed a lot to the city, but I think as we grow as much as we have, I think it’s important to bring on other people as well.”
She adds turn-over is rare because high name recognition virtually guarantees incumbents get re-elected.
Watts hopes to hold public consultations on the issue of term limits.
The only limitation I would suggest to this would be to make the provision “three consecutive terms”, implying that you can step out of the scene for a term and then come back to serve another three terms later.
Incumbency in municipal politics is such an advantage that it distorts the thinking of present councilors to a “risk mitigation” mode – re-election is guaranteed if you don’t ruffle the feathers of your constituents by doing or saying something stupid (and even then your chances of re-election are pretty good). This is compared to having a risk-taking mentality in terms of innovative public policy, of which the system punishes with corresponding bad press. There is a certain element of this in provincial and federal politics, but it is most strongest in municipal politics.