While the arguments that pro term limit groups make are relevant in certain cities, they do not pertain to Boulder. Boulder’s City Council has long done an excellent job serving the people of Boulder, and has helped embrace sustainable growth and prosperity in the city. Our elected City Council officials will continue to do an excellent job, and forcing them out of office and unknowns into office through the political mechanism that is term limits would undoubtedly slow the progress and excellence of Boulder. It is obvious to all the residents and those familiar with this city that comparing its needs to those of the whole country will not be helpful in the long term.

Creating term limits in Boulder would push non-corrupt officials with a good track record of helping the city out of their longtime held and well-earned positions. In the case of Boulder, David Alpert of the Washington Post makes a very relevant point.
“Here’s a plan that is sure to improve the quality of your local hospital: Fire all the doctors and nurses with nine to twelve years of experience. Just kick them all out. Or why don’t we fire every Apple software engineer who has been at the company that long? That’ll surely yield better iPhones. Or fire every Post reporter with a decade under his or her belt.”
These are all horrible ideas, and enacting legislation that forcibly removes officials that have been doing a great job running the city up to this point is equivalent action. Putting term limits at a position in government such as City Council will undoubtedly lead to inexperienced lawmakers being put into power that will likely make mistakes as they are learning the reigns. The city of Boulder does not need to be a learning center for such politicians. Furthermore, adding term limits would likely make politicians lazy in their final elected term, which would prevent politicians from doing good work.