New York Law Blog

More reaction coming in over the last few days regarding changing the term limit law for New York City’s mayor and city councilmen. G. Oliver Koppell, a city councilman, claims that he has heard very little either way on the issue from his constituants.

“I have gotten much, much less commentary than I anticipated,” said Mr. Koppell, a Democrat representing the Riverdale section of the Bronx. “I thought I would get a flood of e-mails. We have gotten, maybe, a few negative phone calls. People that I’ve seen on the street tell me only that they saw an article with my name in the paper. But they don’t say anything else.”

A new group has formed in the wake of the term limit debate, the People Have Spoken Coalition, who are out to condemn the endeavor to extend term limits. The referrendum to extend term limits has been put on the ballot twice by New York in the 1990’s and both times was voted down by the people.

“As our name says, the people of New York have spoken overwhelmingly in favor of term limits and the people have spoken twice,” said Norman Siegel, the longtime civil liberties lawyer who is running for public advocate, in a telephone interview.

“The 22nd Amendment to the Constitution limits the president to two terms, not three,” Mr. Siegel said. “If it’s good for the president of United States, it’s good enough for the mayor and the City Council.”

Another issue brought up with the term limit extension? Hidden costs for the city that many are not aware of: lifetime retiree health benefits should anyone win a third term. Cost to the city? $12,600 a year per person.

Under current rules, city employees must work 10 years and pay into the pension system to become eligible for retiree health benefits. But the term limits law restricts members of the City Council, the mayor, public advocate, comptroller and borough presidents to two consecutive four-year terms — two years shy of the requirement.

Changing term limits to three consecutive terms instead of two, as Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg and members of the Council have hinted they might, would allow those officials — and members of their staff — to hit the 10-year mark without having to look for a new job with the city.

This entry was posted on Monday, September 15th, 2008 at 7:03 pm and is filed under Bills, Politics. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.