Today Houstonians woke up sounds of (soon to be erstwhile) Houston City Council member Carol Alvarado railing against terms limits in Houston's paper of note. And this performance after she joined Ada Edwards in complaining about term limits in Council just days ago.
What actually promoted the Wizard to write this epistle was not Ms. Alvarado's diatribe against term limits. It was a statement that she wrote in her editorial:
I believe that neighborhoods advocate through their elected officials. Their elected officials are accountable and they want them to be knowledgeable about city government. They want their elected officials to use their knowledge and experience that they have gained to help make their neighborhood and communities better and safer.
The Wizard knows many things. I now shall share a story with you gentle readers about a conversation that I had with a pair of gentlemen whom I met at a Christmas party that I attended about 10 days ago. These two men told me that they live in downtown Houston and therefore happen to live in District I, which is the district that Carol represented. They proceeded to tell me of a tale where they had some small issue they wanted help with (they did not exactly share with me what that issue was), so they contacted Ms. Alvarado and asked for her to handle the matter. According to these two gentlemen, who happened to have central (or eastern-central) European surnames, Ms. Alvarado then asked who they were. Upon learning their names, she then proceeded to hang up on them. In their words, "if you don't have a Hispanic surname, then she wouldn't lift a finger to help you."
Hmmm. So much for neighborhoods advocating through their elected officials.
But what about term limits? The Wizard is actually a bit of a fence sitter when it comes to setting arbitrary tenures on a politician's time in office. Ms. Alvarado joins former Mayor Lee Brown and a few others who have whined about the various ills allegedly surrounding term limits, including not having enough time to learn the ropes, worrying about future unemployment, not having enough time to push through projects, and so forth. Those are some interesting charges, but one forgets that the Wizard is a historically minded fellow and hence it is time to pull out the lens of history to see how well these charges hold up.
To note, Houston has had term limits on public officeholders since 1992, when we Houstonians passed them, having been caught up in a wave of term limiting ballot measures which briefly swept the country in the early 1990's. The Wizard remembers, in a long forgotten piece of American political lore, that some explored during that time whether members of Congress could be term limited. However that idea seems to have sunk under U.S. Constitutional arguments.
But I digress. What of major projects being held up due to term limits? Intercontinental Airport (oops - George Bush, I'm showing my age here) has been expanded since 1992. The City has completed (albeit with vast cost overruns and delays) street reconstruction of downtown Houston and various sports temples. The first section of the Kirby storm sewer project was done during 2001 - 2004 and the next awaits. I'm not really sure I can buy that argument.
And to continue, if one views the completion of such major projects like Intercontinental airport, we see that it was Mayor Louis Cutrer's administration who started the project, but Ms. Alvarado's assertion that the impetus and continuity on public works projects is lost through term limits - or on the really important ones - just doesn't hold up. In fact it is amazing that anyone who is as intimate with politics as Ms. Alvarado is would make such a statement. As it was, it was Louie Welch's administration that oversaw the completion and opening of the airport. Big important public works projects take on a life of their own, apart from that of any particular officeholder.
Moreover, shining the lens of history on term limits, I introduce into the record, some very helpful websites on Houston's history. This page shows Houston's mayors since 1900 (here is another one), and this website shows Houston's City Controllers. A cursory glance at Houston's mayors shows that only 3 of Houston's 19 mayors between 1900 and 1992 survived to serve more than six consecutive years in office at a stretch before the imposition of term limits. That matters due to Houston's strong mayor form of government. The Wizard thinks that this is some pretty solid evidence of fierce political competition for a powerful job.
A similar exercise, when carried against the City Controller's office, shows that of Houston 14 Controllers since 1903, six served for six years or longer, though the individuals who held the job have had a much more varied history in terms of their tenures.
It is a bit taxing to investigate the fates of Houston's council members over time, but I do know that District A was represented by Larry McKaskle for 20 consecutive years before being unseated by Helen Huey in 1991. However, there is the infamous example of Ben Reyes, who served from 1979-1995, but was convicted of taking over $50,000 in order to influence the outcome of the downtown convention center.
And then there is the issue of the items she lists as being of importance; garbage, streets, parks, sports venues, and so forth. One does have to remember that it is quite possible for private society to provide for these goods. There is nothing written in stone that says that government is to make for provision of these things. I live in a condominium complex where we contract for our own trash pickup. Despite Peter Brown's recent compulsion to force developers to provide for park space, one has to remember that Houston has for generations had benefactors donate park space for the city. The wealthy benefactors of sports venues could very easily afford to build their own temples.
A better question as to the effects of term limits would be to ask what really would have been different had term limits not been imposed? Term limits were imposed in 1992, when Bob Lanier was elected. One possible outcome had not term limits been implemented would have been that Lanier would have bled Metro's $750 million cash horde completely dry through the transfer to police provision. It is quite possible that the Main Street rail line would not have been built. It may have been that the City's financial problems, which were substantially racked up during the tenure of Lee Brown, might not have been as acute as they are now. Some aspects of the Smart Growth agenda may have been delayed or not implemented.
One notable aspect to the term limits question is what I perceive to be a lack of political competition once an officeholder gains office. Since 1992, once a Mayor has won election, there has been only one really competitive mid-term challenge, that of Orlando Sanchez who challenged Lee Brown in 2001. Lloyd Kelley lost the Controller's office after one term in 1997, but mostly after he committed a number of political missteps. Most council members have not faced substantial challenges during their tenures once they gained office.
Another fear is that given that an officeholder will only have a limited time in office, they may try to use that time to plunder the public purse as quickly as possible before their time runs out.
Then there is the issue of them looking forward towards their futures rather than concentrating on what they are doing today. It would seem to me that the officeholder's future rests substantially on whether the officeholder in question really has any job skills they can fall back on once they leave office. Mr. Cutrer was a practicing attorney who returned to private practice, as did Fred Hoffeinz. Bob Lanier has long been in the real estate development business. The logic here is that the people who do not have established careers outside of public office would be the ones who would be shouting the loudest about being term limited for fear of unemployment.
So, I would submit that a compromise to the term limits question would be to extend the time of tenure to perhaps 10-12 years. This would reopen the issue that if an officeholder gains office, then opponents would have to consider the fact that they would have to deal with their opposition holding power for that period of time, rather than merely waiting for a few years, watching officeholders come and go until the next person comes along. It is quite possible that most officeholders would not even make it through their entire tenure because of reinvigorated political competition. Surely a decade or a bit more in office should be enough time for those who wish to pursue municipal office to accomplish at least some of what they want.
Then there is the issue of why people seek office to begin with. Alvarado has made a number of statements to the effect that she is concerned with pollution issues in the East End. To me, that signals that she should have been running for a state representative post where she would have more say over such matters, rather than that of a municipal City Council seat. Maybe, as Anne suggests, the City's loss will be the state's gain. As one person noted, there you go Carol. It's time to turn the page and for you to run for Mr. Noreiga's seat.
Sigh...
Wizard
Posted by The Mighty Wizard at December 30, 2007 03:21 PM