Let the Voters Decide: Stratford’s Term Limits Deserve a Public Debate, Not a Political Shortcut

Stratford’s Board of Education term limits are once again in the headlines – this time not just as a matter of legal process, but as a troubling case of political self-interest as the end-of-term BOE Chair directs the Board’s attorney to review the issue with town attorneys. What was once a recurring policy debate has taken a turn that undermines public trust, erodes democratic norms, and damages our credibility as a town.

Few issues in Stratford resurface as reliably, and as politically charged, as term limits. First adopted by referendum in 1991 and amended by voters again in 2004, term limits now apply to members of the Town Council, Board of Education, and key land-use boards. But for all the voter input that went into creating them, there’s long been legal uncertainty about whether these limits are even enforceable under state law.

This isn’t new territory. Most recently in 2023, three outgoing officials raised the issue of Stratford’s restrictive four-year term limit, the only one of its kind in the state. In a letter to the full Town Council and during public comments, they proposed extending it to two terms and asked for a review of the law.

The town attorney confirmed his office was exploring options, including potentially placing the question on a future ballot via referendum. The proposal was discussed at two more meetings but once the town budget came up for a vote, the issue quietly disappeared from the agenda. It was less about reform and more about running out the clock. Same old tired politics.

During that time, the Stratford Democratic Town Committee also sought legal guidance from one of Connecticut’s foremost municipal law experts. Their conclusion was clear: under the legal reasoning established in Simons v. Canty in the 1980s, municipalities lack the authority to impose term limits by charter or ordinance. Doing so likely violates the state Constitution.

If term limits in Stratford are truly unconstitutional, let’s settle it the right way – through the courts and in full view of the public. If they’re legal, we honor them. And if change is needed, let the voters decide just like they did in 1991 and 2004.

What we can’t allow is an elected official using their position to prompt legal action that benefits themself – again – on the taxpayers’ dime. This isn’t how democratic reform happens. It should be resident-driven, not politically engineered.

Let me be clear: this is not about fearing any candidate running for reelection. Not even close. If the current Board of Education Chair wants to run again, so be it. A candidate like that? Bring it on. Stratford residents are ready to move past this type of manipulation and controlling dysfunction and it is surely not the future we’re offering and envision for our town.

For months, our committee has been doing the work: recruiting a diverse, capable slate of 29 candidates… residents stepping up to serve as mayor, town councilors, board of education members, commissioners, and constables. It hasn’t been easy, but it’s been honest. Meanwhile, our Republican counterparts are reportedly turning to registered Democrats to fill their gaps after exhausting their own bench.

Now, weeks before party endorsements, we see a sudden push to eliminate term limits. And not through a public vote, but through a legal maneuver. Ironically – or not, the person demanding the removal of term limits has defended them in the past when it was politically convenient to do so.

This kind of backroom opportunism is exactly what erodes public trust in our institutions.

Let’s respect voters enough to put the question to them. The public deserves clarity, fairness, and a voice in shaping the rules that govern us all.