Two-Year Is Enough(by Dan Alpert)

When voters of College Park take to the polls on November 5, not only will they have the opportunity to choose the leaders of our City for the next two years, but they will also be asked an important and consequential question: Should council member terms be extended to four-year terms?
As the Student Liaison to the College Park City Council, I know the right choice will be NO because extending terms to four years will not only limit student involvement but also make it difficult to hold the city officials accountable, thus diminishing the impact of the student voice.
Extending terms to four years will limit student involvement.
Before we vote on this referendum question, we will have to first ask ourselves the implications of extending the terms for the leaders of College Park.
As one could infer from a glance, the City of College Park depends on and interacts with the University of Maryland, and students are one of the biggest stakeholders in the city. In other words, what goes on in the city affects all students, since many of them reside in the city for the duration of their education at the University of Maryland. This means implementing four-year terms limits the opportunity for students to be able to change council members while they are still at the University.
In fact, passing this referendum sends a strong message to students that their voices are not wanted in the chambers of City Council. Beyond preventing students from serving on the council during their full time at the University, it places a barrier of entry for long-term residents who may want to serve their neighborhood on the Council for two years, or look forward to the election season as a time when uncomfortable but necessary discussions are had within their community.
Extending terms to four years will make it difficult to hold the city officials accountable.
In addition to what four-year terms could do for student involvement, it would also make it difficult to hold the city council members accountable.
When the Charter Review Commission took up this question just last semester, the residents of College Park made it clear that in order to maintain strong accountability and to increase voter participation in their civic duty, two-year terms should be kept.
I have been lucky enough to work with multiple different council members who have demonstrated their enthusiasm and passion to serve this city. However, in times when this is not the case, voters should have the opportunity to vote that council member out. Doubling the term would simply prevent the voters from exercising their civic duty of holding the city officials accountable in a timely manner.
I urge you to join me in voting no to four-year terms in order to maintain strong accountability and to do what is right for all residents of our city.
This story has been written by Dan Alpert, SGA City Liaison to College Park, and edited by Jinwook Hwang and Jasmine Washington, SGA Directors of Communications.