double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs vietnamese seafood double-skinned crabs mud crab exporter double-skinned crabs double-skinned crabs crabs crab exporter soft shell crab crab meat crab roe mud crab sea crab vietnamese crabs seafood food vietnamese sea food double-skinned crab double-skinned crab soft-shell crabs meat crabs roe crabs
Opinion

The City Council’s term-limits pipe dream

One sure sign that the City Council speaker is chosen by the members, not the public: All eight candidates for the job support extending the limit on council terms from two to three four-year terms.

That position is a proven loser with the general public, but of course the office-holders love it.

Which may be why the candidates made some pathetic arguments for the change. Jumaane Williams (D-Brooklyn), for one, argues that the city needs continuity in government — but current law will force turnover of three-quarters of the council in 2021.

Huh? Adding a third term would just mean the same three-quarters turnover in 2025.

Robert Cornegy (D-Brooklyn) complains that it now takes 10 years to get fully vested in the city’s pension system, which you can’t do in two terms. How sad.

To be fair, these would-be leaders are only calling for a new public referendum on the “reform” — a referendum that would surely fail. After all, the voters punished the council members who backed the Bloomberg-era, no-public-vote end run of the term-limits law.

But we’d be happy to see the referendum — especially if the public also got to vote on the council’s recent 32 percent pay hike, from $110,000 to $145,000.