bloomberg gets his 3rd term wish..

[2ND COMING]

Council Schedules Thursday Vote on Term Limits
By DAVID W. CHEN
Published: October 21, 2008
Setting up a showdown over one of the most divisive issues in recent political memory, Speaker Christine C. Quinn announced Tuesday that the City Council would vote Thursday on Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s plan to revise the term limits law so he can pursue four more years in office.

Skip to next paragraph
Times Topics: Term Limits
 Graphic: Positions on Term Limits at the City Council
Related on City Room: Council Sets Term Limits Vote for Thursday
The Hearings on City Room: Thursday Afternoon | Thursday Evening | Friday Afternoon
 Video: A Forum on Term Limits
 Leave a Comment on City Room Supporters of the change said the move reflected Mr. Bloomberg’s and Ms. Quinn’s confidence that they have gathered the 26 Council votes needed to pass the legislation.

There are also signs that public opinion is tilting against the change, and privately some allies of Ms. Quinn say she is anxious, if not desperate, to hold the vote before an advertising campaign opposing the change takes hold.

“If it’s not on Thursday, they’re in trouble,” said one council member who supports the bill, speaking on condition of anonymity so as not to upset the mayor or the speaker.

The vote would come just three weeks after Mr. Bloomberg announced his plan to change the law, saying he wants to steer the city through the economic troubles resulting from Wall Street’s crisis. Opponents have complained that Ms. Quinn is rushing the measure through for the mayor. Late last week, two days of public hearings attracted standing-room-only crowds, and most who spoke argued against the bill.

A close vote is expected, and both sides intensified their lobbying efforts Tuesday, as if in the final strides of a campaign. Inside City Hall, council members shuttled in and out for meetings with the speaker and with the mayor, while out on the steps of City hall, a rotating band of opponents took turns denouncing the plan.

The law, which has been approved in public referendums twice in the last 15 years, now limits city officials and council members to two consecutive four-year terms, and if Mr. Bloomberg’s bill passes, they would be allowed three terms.

But if the bill fails, it would be a stunning defeat for a popular mayor who has rarely failed to sway the Council to his side of an issue.

The outcome will affect the political fates of more than 40 officials whose terms are scheduled to expire at the end of 2009. These include Mr. Bloomberg, 35 of the Council’s 51 members, the public advocate, the city comptroller and four of five borough presidents.

As of Tuesday evening, 17 council members favored the bill, 21 were opposed, and the remaining 13 were undecided. But administration officials, and their allies, said that they were confident that they would prevail.

“The votes are there, the votes are there,” said Councilman Kendall Stewart, who represents Brooklyn. “It’s going to be 28 or 29 for, and 4 or 5 abstain and the rest against.”

One key constituency is the 16 council members who are not scheduled to be forced out of office. While Bloomberg allies have said that they would like to allow those first-term members to serve three terms, too, the cosmetics heir Ronald S. Lauder may complicate matters.

It was Mr. Lauder’s money and advocacy that originally paved the way for term limits, and it was only recently that Mr. Bloomberg convinced a reluctant Mr. Lauder that the economic crisis necessitated a third term for the mayor. In exchange for Mr. Lauder’s support, Mr. Bloomberg promised him a seat on a charter revision commission that would probably try to restore the two-term limit in a subsequent referendum, likely in 2010.

“I believe very strongly that the mayor should get the extra term and the City Council should get a third term,” Mr. Lauder said in an interview. “That is part of the deal. But I never spoke about the first-term council members.”

Mr. Lauder’s views certainly weighed on several first-term council members who attended a caucus meeting on Tuesday morning.

Councilwoman Letitia James of Brooklyn said that since Mr. Lauder was casting doubt on the assurances the mayor and the speaker have given to first-termers, “freshmen are beginning to feel very uncomfortable. There are no guarantees that they are protected.”

Ms. James was among those council members heartened by a Quinnipiac University poll released Tuesday morning. By 89 percent to 7 percent, city residents prefer changing term limits by referendum, according to the poll; 51 percent oppose extending term limits altogether, even if it means denying Mr. Bloomberg a run at a third term.

For Mr. Bloomberg, though, the poll offered the good news that he is still very popular: voters approve of his job performance by 75 percent to 20 percent.

Asked about the public’s preference that term limits be decided through referendum, Mr. Bloomberg said it was too late and too legally problematic to call for a special election or referendum. He also dismissed suggestions that he chose to work through the Council since he could be more confident of the result.

“I’m not trying to manipulate the system for an outcome,” he said, during an event at the P.S. 1 Contemporary Art Center, announcing the economic effect of the recent East River waterfalls.

Back at City Hall, though, Mr. Bloomberg was doing his best to persuade council members to go along with his plan. One of those he encountered, Peter F. Vallone Jr., of Queens, announced his support afterward.

“I’m doing what I think is right,” said Mr. Vallone, the son of a former City Council speaker who is also an avid supporter. “This is actually against my own personal interest. What I’ve done is in the best interest of the people of the city.”

As Mr. Vallone walked out of the parking lot, he was greeted by Councilman David Yassky of Brooklyn, who is among those yet to make up their minds. He and two other undecided council members were scheduled to meet later with Ms. Quinn.

Reporting was contributed by Michael Barbaro, Sewell Chan, Jonathan P. Hicks and Fernanda Santos.

[2ND COMING]

when youre worth BILLIONS and have your own tv network i guess you can throw away the rule book...

these fuckers denied people to vote on the amendment to change term limits

nice..

[muscleforlife]

Guiliani probably is spitting nails about now.
Sandra

[2ND COMING]

Guiliani probably is spitting nails about now.
Sandra

i wonder what the implications will look like

the richest governor in the largest city wants to change the rules...without voter approval. He'll still have to campaign..but i'm certain he will win....the principle just irks me.

[marcus]

We need term limits in Chicago. 

[2ND COMING]

Bump for anyone interested.

[Soul Crusher]

Bump for anyone interested.

Bro, I live on the Border of the Bronx.  The LAST THING I WANT IS DAVID DINKINS #2. 

[brooklynbruiser]

Bro, I live on the Border of the Bronx.  The LAST THING I WANT IS DAVID DINKINS #2. 

Are you talking about Bill Thompson? And if so, are you opposed to him because he is black?

[Hugo Chavez]

Are you talking about Bill Thompson? And if so, are you opposed to him because he is black?

[Soul Crusher]

Are you talking about Bill Thompson? And if so, are you opposed to him because he is black?

        

Bro, do you remember the early 90's in NYC?

Bloomberg carried forward everything Rudy did and has kept this city stable, fiscally sound, safe, etc.

Thompson promised more tax increases and surrounded himself with rabble rousers like Charles Barron, etc. 

[brooklynbruiser]

For me, the 90s in NYC sucked. Clubs were closing, rents went up, and Starbucks started popping up on every corner. The end of an era in which everything that made NYC unique gave way to box stores, franchises, and ridiculous rents/estate prices. Giuliani tried to call himself loads of things, but I'd call him another load of things.

The reason why I brought up the black thing is that some people tried to connect Thompson to Obama/Dinkins' term/performance by virtue of skin color. I personally don't see them as similar in any way. Still, one could argue that Dinkins got NYC in pretty much the same shape that Obama got the US. BAD condition. Yet, people pretend as if things went south as soon as they hit office. There's more to it, but I'm not trying to further press the whole race thing when it might not even be the issue.

I don't dislike Bloomberg, but I was open to see what ANYONE else could do. It's not as if he's added value to NYC by his individual presence or actions. The fiscally sound thing is a bit arguable. The books aren't even cooked anymore. They're BURNT. The sheer audacity of him pulling that third term crap tells me a lot about his personal agenda. Sooooooo...yeh.