'Lauder Clause' Finds Its Way Into Term Limits Bill

A week after Speaker Christine Quinn said that the Council doesn't typically write in any "Lauder" options into its legislation, critics are saying that Mayor Bloomberg's proposal to extend term limits has done just that. The mayor's proposal introduced Tuesday has been amended to explicitly say that the law will revert back to two terms if voters come out in favor of the current law in a 2010 referendum. Lauder, the most vocal backer of term limits, only wants to see the law changed in order to keep Bloomberg around amidst the current financial crisis. While Speaker Quinn defends the amendment as necessary to assure that "this legislation would be superceded by a revision to the Charter," many see it as another sign of the fellow billionaires being in cahoots to skirt the will of voters. Bloomberg responded to critics of the term limit extension on his radio show yesterday saying, "I find it fascinating, those who are arguing against, argue against it because they will have competition that they don't want."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Billy Parker in News on October 11, 2008 6:57 PM

Comments [rss]

JanetG

We lived through the aftermath of 9/11 without Rudy and we'll survive this "financial crisis" without Bloomy. He can be a Deputy Mayor advise the Mayor at the same dollar-per-year salary if they both think he's valuable. If he won't be anything but the Big Boss, it makes it clear we are changing not just the term limits the voters chose, but our form of government from democracy to monarchy.

For the record, I didn't support term limits, always believing them to be anti-democratic and a quick-fix substitute for citizens' active participation so as to prevent the existence of a "permanent government".

blablanyc

Editrixie - I don't believe those polls. Not with all of the anger and frustration you encounter throughout the city. The pollsters are not the views of certain segments of the population. Take it from a native. Trust me.

JacqueMehoff

while that may be true regarding the polls

from what I've seen in the daily news and post sites, the natives are not happy with bloomie.

Editrixie

blablanyc said: Bloomberg has quickly lost the trust of NYers. During Bloomberg's second term, more people had become upset with the direction NYC is going in.

You don't speak for all New Yorkers. Lots of people are still happy with Bloomberg. Wasn't there a recent poll that showed most New Yorkers would like him sticking around?

west side Michael

Quinn should run to be mayor now.

What kind of deal with Bloomy is

she likely to get for whatever from Not

speaking out on this lousy Mayor we have

had who destroyed this city with Economic

Segregation,Small building owners got such

an inflated tax rise that they had to sell

to Bloomies developer friends in Real estate

now that market has gone Kaboom and we want

this guy to come back??????

Gregory56

I really don't see how getting Lauder involved is a bad thing at all - the man is Mr. Term Limits, and he has always supported an extra term for Bloomberg. Besides, he has been involved in public issues for a long time in NYC and he would be great on a charter review commission for a million different reasons. I really think that NYC will be better off with him on the commission.

blablanyc

It doesn't matter. Bloomberg has quickly lost the trust of NYers. During Bloomberg's second term, more people had become upset with the direction NYC is going in.

longacre

The public referendum is the democratic election that he will have to win in order to get a third term. You'll remember Chavez LOST the referendum that would have made him ruler for life, so the comparison isn't real accurate unless Bloomberg loses the election.

ides_of_march

If Bloomberg wants his third term to have any democratic validity, he really should do this by public referendum. Otherwise, he'll look like the New York Hugo Chavez.