Term Limits? Well, Something Here is Limited.

In a recent discussion about the election, which devolved, as they sometimes do, into a dodge about the Charter in general, Bryan Cooper sort of offered a suggestion.  I say "sort of," because Bryan seemed to say it was someone else's idea, not his.  As is typical for him, however, he never says who the someone else is, so we never know where he gets his material.

As a frame of reference for this discussion, Bryan gives every indication that he does not think we should move the election.  He's gone so far as to say that he thinks it's of great value to have elections in which abnormally few people vote, because these elections attract, according to Bryan's argument, a specialized class of voter. Bryan thinks these voters are the really devoted and presumably knowledgeable ones.  He announced in a Commission meeting that he actually doesn't want the rest of us voting.  (Oh yes, he did.)

Bryan's suggestion, or the suggestion from whoever provides Bryan's material, is that we should have term limits for Commissioners.  Now I have to say, I don't know what Bryan, or his handlers, or the brains of the operation, meant by this suggestion, since as far as I could tell, Bryan was looking directly at Bob Anderson when he said it.  So it's an open question whether Bryan, or whoever, just thought no Commissioner should serve for a very long time, or if he/they meant this personally about Bob.  But since Bryan, etc, proposed this as a possible Charter change, it's clear he/they are OK with applying it to everyone.

But here's the problem.  If Bryan (+?) wants to impose term limits, then what he/they is/are saying is that the voters are too timid, brain dead, sheepish, or whatever, to impose limits them/ourselves,  simply by voting out people who are no longer doing the Village a service.  Bryan, and whoever props him up, evidently think the voters need to be saved from them/ourselves.

I guess you can see the flaw in the "logic."  If Bryan and his thinkers think we attract such knowledgeable voters, and so much so that their brilliant efforts should not be "diluted" (yup, that's the word Bryan used) by the dimwits of the neighborhood, which is most of us, according to Bryan, then why does he think we're so stupid that we don't know enough to vote out someone who is no good?

And what about the people the voters seem perfectly capable of not re-electing?  How is it we're smart enough to bounce those, but too moronic to refuse to re-elect others?

I think Bryan's suggestion needs some serious work, and Bryan should probably go back to the people who filled his head with this idiotic nonsense, and ask them for something a little more coherent.  And Bryan should care what I think.  I'm one of the geniuses who come out to vote in BP elections.