Term limit compromise beats hashing it out in court (Editorial Board Opinion)

We're glad that the executive and legislative branches of Onondaga County government averted a costly legal fight by agreeing to a compromise on term limits. If County Executive Ryan McMahon signs a bill passed unanimously by the legislature, voters will see two competing propositions on their November ballots. The options are: limiting the county executive and comptroller to three terms of four years, for a total of 12 years; limiting those same officials to four terms of four years, for a total of 16 years. The proposition that gets more votes will prevail. Usually, ballot propositions are 'yes' or 'no' questions. This time, voters will have to answer twice. This is an unusual arrangement that appears to be untested in New York state. That befits the unusual circumstances that made it necessary in the first place. Recall that McMahon vetoed term limit legislation passed by the legislature — and also signed it into law. The approval was delivered to the clerk of the legislature by mistake. The Democratic and Republican elections commissioners split on whether to put it on the ballot, sparking a lawsuit. The editorial board had urged the Democratic-led legislature to accept a Republican compromise and pass a local law changing the term limits for executive and comptroller. The majority insisted on a public referendum. Under the deal brokered by Judge Joseph Lamendola — as messy and confusing to voters as it is — everybody can claim a win. The Democrats get the referendum they wanted. Republicans get a shot at a 16-year term limit, which was their preference. McMahon gets to see the compromise he proposed on the ballot. And taxpayers aren't on the hook for legal fees. That's how divided government is supposed to work.