Term-limit issue requires careful consideration

A debate at Tuesday's meeting of the Mat-Su Borough Assembly is bringing fresh light to an old and interesting quandary of representative democracy.

The borough has term limits on the books for the 25 boards and commissions that play supporting roles in local government. Entities such as the planning commission, platting board and board of appeals assist in the administration and enforcement of borough code. These bodies are staffed by residents who volunteer their time to help out.

Recently, it was discovered that many of those seated had stayed beyond the borough's limit of two three-year terms. The mass exit that ensued has resulted in several empty seats. To combat this, the assembly debated removing the term-limit requirement.

While we have great respect for any civic-minded resident who takes on the often thankless task of board or commission service, it is hard to be supportive of doing away with term limits. Hard as it can be at times to fill the seats, new blood means new ideas. Term limits also act as a safeguard against monopoly of power and service that tends more toward self-interest than public interest.

It wasn't too long ago that term limits were all the rage. In the absence of an actual law, legislators even took a term-limit pledge as a badge of honor while campaigning. Ironically, some who spoke sincerely a few short years ago about the perils of perpetual incumbency are still roaming the halls of the Capitol.

Volunteer public servants may be less likely to succumb to the multitude of money- and power-driven temptations that elected officials can be distracted by, but it doesn't change the fundamentals. Good responsive government, that's truly of, by and for the people, is better ensured through full access to board service for all citizens.

That said, the problem of lack of interest in empty seats remains. It is hard to argue for dismissing willing and qualified people when no one is standing in line to take their place. So the challenge becomes one of energizing citizens and encouraging participation, something that is much easier said than done.

The assembly will revisit the term-limit debate at its April 14 meeting. Perhaps a good compromise would be to allow people to serve a term beyond the limit if no one else is interested. But the bottom line of any policy change should prioritize accessibility and diversity of opinion.