Sunday, October 18, 2009

County of Boulder 1D – DA Term Limits Extension to Three Terms

In 1994 Colorado voters approved an amendment to the constitution imposing term limits on state and local elected officials. The amendment allowed for voters to eliminate or modify the term limits. The new district attorney (first elected in 2008) asked the county commissioners to place this issue on the ballot to allow a Boulder County district attorney to seek and serve a third consecutive term. In 2005 county voters approved similar term limit extensions for the sheriff, clerk and recorder, treasurer, assessor, coroner, and surveyor,

Recommendation: YES

I tend to consider experience an asset in public office. In general, I’m in favor of the voters imposing “term limits” at the ballot box rather than the constitution imposing term limits. (An exception: If the officeholder appoints judges, e.g. the president and governors, then I am in favor of term limits.) We voters in Boulder County aren’t shy about exercising term limits via the ballot box, at least in primary elections. Witness the 2nd Congressional District CU regent race in 2002 and the county clerk and recorder race in 2006.


County of Boulder Ballot Question 1D (Approved Ballot Language)

DA Term Limits Extension to Three Terms

SHALL THE TERM LIMITS IMPOSED BY STATE LAW AND IN ARTICLE XVII, SECTION 11 (2), OF THE COLORAO CONSTITUTION ON THE OFFICE OF DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF BOULDER COUNTY, TWENTIETH JUDICIAL DISTRICT, BE MODIFIED SO AS TO PERMIT AN ELECTED OFFICEHOLDER IN THAT OFFICE TO SEEK AND, IF THE VOTERS OF BOULDER COUNTY CHOOSE TO RE-ELECT THAT PERSON TO A THIRD TERM IN OFFICE, TO SERVE A THIRD CONSECUTIVE TERM?

YES _____ NO _____


Resolution No. 2009-103 referring Ballot Question 1D to the voters
http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1764-2009-103_DA_term_limits.PDF

1 comment:

  1. I oppose this measure. There are a great many crimes for which there are mandatory sentences. Judges are no longer able to use their judgement anymore -- if there is a conviction, they have to put people away for a long time, even if there are extenuating circumstances. That doesn't mean there isn't discretion in the system anymore; it just means that all of the discretion is concentrated in one person's hands -- the person who decides what charges to bring to trial, DA. About the only way an incumbent DA will lose an election is if his opponent can paint him as "soft on crime." Therefore, a DA has a lifetime job as long as, whenever in doubt, he goes for the harshest punishment. This has resulted, in many counties and states, in some terrible miscarriages of justice, including some well-known cases where wives of criminals have drawn equal or longer sentences than the criminals themselves.
    Ideally, I'd like to see the mandatory sentencing laws revised. Until then, we need to limit the amount of time any one person can hold the power to absolutely destroy someone's life.

    ReplyDelete

Thanks for your comments. Please only make comments that add to a fruitful discussion.