Two term limit better alternative to ruling out older candidates

Re: Replace councillors with leaders under 30- The Picton Gazette, February 20, 2020.

As critical and important as climate change is, Danny Celovsky’s radical proposal to limit councillors to under the age of 30 does a disservice to the millions of people actively trying to alleviate the climate situation.

Changing our local municipal government is an incredibly slow and difficult process as the recent attempt to reform council showed. Also, the 43.31 per cent turnout at the last election shows how little interest in local government we County residents have.

It is very difficult to vote out an incumbent councillor mainly because of his or her name recognition, which leads to situation of some councillors being voted back in time after time after time. Many councillors served (and some continue to serve) way beyond their ‘due date’.

What is needed is a regular turnover of councillors which would bring new ideas, new enthusiasm, new thinking. This could be achieved by limiting the number of consecutive terms on council to two. Someone who was a successful and popular council member could be voted back in after a four-year break.

The naysayers will condemn this claiming the new people will lack experience but people who stand for council usually have the smarts to fit in – otherwise they wouldn’t standing for office.

It is time for the County to drag itself into the 21st century and maybe this could be a starting point.

John Blake

Cherry Valley