Amherst, NY (WBEN) As voters head to the polls on Tuesday, one suburb's residents will have to decide on a term limits law that would limit officials to two consecutive terms.
Supervisor Shawn Lavin, a Democrat, says initially, the term limit was a vote by the town board in 2006. "The State Supreme Court of New York said the voters get to decide on term limits. That's their decision to make. It's not the body of the representatives, we don't," explains Lavin. "The board cannot dictate term limits. So the question then becomes: It goes on the ballot this fall because if residents think it's there, but it's not valid, putting it on a ballot measure, so they can vote for it, yes or no, whatever they decide is up to them. We're kind of abiding by what the Supreme Court asked mandated, so now people can vote what they decide they want for term limits." The court had ruled against a term limit approval in the Hudson Valley community of Clarkstown in 2023.
Lavin sys some confusion over what constitutes a full term because of changes to when elections happen for town offices. "I'm serving a three year term, so that's why you had some adjustments to the language. I want to be clear on this. When we did this, when we took on this measure to put on the ballot, I remember calling the president of the chamber of commerce and I said, "Do you have a name you can give me? I don't care what their decision is on term limits. I want them to think critically about the situation we're in and come up with a proposal." This individual sat, as did the other board members who appointed members of this committee, and they made that proposal to the board. The board had nothing to do with what their the decision they came to. This was them saying we think this is the proper course that people could relate to, and we would encourage us to be on the ballot. And that's what we did," says Lavin.
Lavin calls it a little lag because of the even years.
But Amherst Republican Committee Chairman Bob Davis says this is misleading. "There's nothing more dishonest about that referendum than term limit proposal. It's a term limit extension," contends Davis. "The current law was passed bipartisan Republicans and Democrats in 2006 to limit our elected officials in Amherst to two terms, this proposal on the ballot, this right now is during early voting, and next week on Tuesday, extends those terms, which means the current sitting town board members, the Democrats, will be able to continue to allow us to suffer because if this thing passes, their terms get extended."
He says iif voters say no, the existing term limit stays in place, which limits elected officials to two terms. "The new law will extend terms. The town clerk will go from a two-term limit to a three-term limit, and by the way, the current terms are not counted. So, for example, the town clerk would be able to run for another two terms, which would give her 16 years of service instead of the limit of eight. The highway superintendent gets another term. Next year, there's a there's a councilman whose term is up based on the 2006 law. If this thing passes, he can run for another two terms or another eight years. It's a term limit extension. Voters, voters, please don't be deceived by the by the misleading," says Davis.
GOP leaders say it will extend terms, Democratic supervisor says partial term for those elected before election year change won't count
GOP leaders say it will extend terms, Democratic supervisor says partial term for those elected before election year change won't count
