Seeing both sides of: four-year council terms

The case for

Three-year terms are funny beasts. You spend the first year learning the ropes and the players, the second trying to implement changes and the third putting things on hold because there is an election taking place.

Four-year terms would allow for much greater consistency, much more actual governing to take place.

And isn’t good governance what we elect them for?


The case against

Four years may make sense to those glass-half-full folks.

The rest of us have a bigger concern: what happens if we elect a bunch of duds?

How do we protect ourselves from the amount of damage they can wreak during a longer term in office.

No four-year term should be acceptable without a mechanism in place that allows for recall.

We encourage an open exchange of ideas on this story's topic, but we ask you to follow our guidelines for respecting community standards. Personal attacks, inappropriate language, and off-topic comments may be removed, and comment privileges revoked, per our Terms of Use. Please see our FAQ if you have questions or concerns about using Facebook to comment.

You might like ...

Parker inks five-year extension
CFL legend Calvillo guest speaker at Spartans fundraiser
Titans take the title as Langley places three in top five
House fire draws big response
Chiefs regain first place with Salmon Arm win
Chiefs pound Prince George to snap three game skid
Bandits slap down Kodiaks
Local body builder takes home second place trophy
Kodiaks douse Flames 4-3

Community Events, November 2014

Add an Event

Read the latest eEdition

Browse the print edition page by page, including stories and ads.

Nov 18 edition online now. Browse the archives.