Re "A push for term limits hits the streets," Jan. 14
West Hollywood already has term limits. They're called elections.
West Hollywood is 1.9 square miles and has fewer than 40,000 residents. The city works. It is safe and has a large social services budget. We have many regular neighborhood meetings; we are a walkable city with many opportunities for political dialogue. Our elections do not require huge sums of money for television and radio advertising.
The incumbents have the power of incumbency, but they also have to answer for their actions. Candidates for City Council have many opportunities to meet the voters and convey their ideas.
This isn't an endorsement for any City Council incumbents or other candidates. They are good people with good intentions. Term limits — in essence voting out incumbents because they are incumbents — is not a workable way of governing.
If these local activists feel that West Hollywood is so badly served by the City Council that the majority elected, why aren't they campaigning for something that has a more immediate effect? Instead, all their energy and time has been spent on this frivolous campaign for term limits, which wouldn't take effect until 2025.
If this attempt at embarrassing the incumbents passes, we'll all be stuck with it, just as California and Los Angeles are, and with disappointing results.
West Hollywood has low voter turnout. Because of that, the people who vote know the issues and who they're voting for. Term limits would take away our choice to elect who we think is best for the job.
Letters: Cracking down on corrupt doctors
Letters: Disregarding Huell Howser's wishes
Letters: A level playing field for gay athletes