Thoughts on Changing Elections from Odd to Even Years in Ludington?

[XLFD]

At the two Ludington City Council meetings in the month of March they had the first and second hearing about a resolution that would change the election years in Ludington from odd years, such as 2015 and 2017, to even years.  In times long forgotten in Ludington (and other Michigan cities), elections were declared to be held on odd years contrary to the county, state and federal holding elections on even years.  It is not clear what their rationale was for doing so back then, but our current group now wants to jump onto the even years.

 

At both of these meetings, exactly nobody in the public made any statements; City Manager Shay has noted in today's COLDNews that nobody has given him any phone calls or E-mail asking about it.  Nor has it been analyzed by the local news agencies, including this watchdog social network, until now.  I am asking the membership, what do you think of the resolution, are you for it, are you against it, or are you neutral or unopinionated on it?

 

I include the resolution below as it appears to the councilors, which explains what will happen because of the resolution, if it is passed:

Note that the savings predicted is quite substantial.  The incumbent elected officials will get an extra year in office.  Councilor Holman and Castonia will get to serve 13 years by the end of 2016 and 2018, respectively, while all other councilors and the mayor will be able to serve up to 13 years if they continue their career as city councilors.  Sounds like it could be bad luck in that regard.

In the city clerk's  supporting material for this change (p. 20-27 in this packet), analysis from the City of Wyoming showed the following 'sustainability' criteria:

 

But are there other considerations for the other side (i.e. maintaining odd year elections) that may offset some of the bonuses of changing?  I doubt whether a list of real good reasons would change the councilors from voting for this resolution and getting to sit an extra year, but it is worth considering.  As is any further reasons for the inevitable change of years.  Here's another quick reason for the change:  we would not have to worry about scenes like this every odd-numbered August and October:

 

[Willy]

Fiscally it sounds like a good idea but if this will give politicians more time in a position they were elected to I think this ordinance should be voted on by the people. How can  elected officials be allowed to extend their own term in office without voters approval. I think this sets a precedent for politicians to vote themselves extra years for other situations that may arise. Doesn't sound right to me. Let the people decide.

[AQUAMAN]

I also concur, and third your motions. Basically, $15,000 to the COL is chump change anyhow. They probably spent more on spy cameras for public bathrooms than this. But, as stated above, the main consideration is the illegal extension of term limits, esp. for so many that this affects. Henderson also tried and failed this when it came to voters, so, let voters decide again. That's the most fair and honest way, but, I doubt it will come about based on the history of these council members nowadays.

[XLFD]

Unfortunately, this is part of the state law that was passed earlier this millennium by state legislators, and hasn't been challenged successfully on its constitutional merits.  I agree that it should require a popular vote in this fall's elections until it gets considered by the city council, but the state has passed a lot of laws of questionable merit recently as regards public servants honoring their contract with the people.