Voting Advice on Newport Beach Lease and Term Limits

I wish to add my voice in support of P, the term limit measure on the Newport Beach (Tuesday) ballot. I’ve come to this position after 20 years in city government as a city attorney.

Apart from the obvious arguments in favor of term limitation (i.e. having a turnover of members with new ideas and talents), there’s another reason even more important. It has to do with the council position itself, and the effect it sometimes has on an incumbent over a long period of time.

A council member holds a position of great power and prestige--being a part of a body that exercises a greater degree of influence over a citizen’s life than does the state or even federal government. I’ve seen presidents of major corporations stand trembling at a council podium while a council sits in judgment as judge and juror combined. Sometimes millions of dollars and the fate of important enterprises are involved.

This can be a heady experience to be suddenly catapulted from the status of ordinary citizen to a seat on a body that is the final arbiter of what can happen in the city. Fortunately, most members make the transition from civilian to public life easily and naturally without losing any personal perspective. But not all. It’s the exception that prompts me to recommend Measure P. I’ve seen the exceptions act imperiously and self-servingly--mainly because they can’t be unseated.

The argument most often used against term limitations is the democracy argument--let the voters determine the length of terms by voting out anyone not doing a good job. This argument ignores the pragmatic realities of politics. The longer an incumbent is in office, the harder it is to unseat him or her. Term limitation is a giant step toward good government. Currently 19 California cities (including San Francisco) have term limitation laws to stop careerism on their councils.

DONALD E. OLSON

Newport Beach