Anyone who has ever seen Disney's The Lion King remembers Rafiki, the crazy baboon with the blue butt and constant words of wisdom.

One of his most memorable sayings is a simple four words.

"Ahh. Change is good."

But is it all the time?

Some members of the State College Borough Council seem to think so.

The borough council has discussed the idea of lifting a current regulation that prevents members on the board from serving more than two consecutive terms in office.

Under the new proposal, officials elected to serve could be on the board indefinitely, assuming that he or she received enough votes to win each election.

We know Rafiki would have something wise to say here, but is it a good idea? While it does have some positives to it, like limiting time in power, we feel that more may be accomplished with a longer period of time in which to do it.

If the same person is elected year after year, as long as he or she is the best candidate for the job, he or she should be appointed.

However, the flip side of staying in office for multiple terms is that issues may be prolonged. If an official had a plan to help boost State College's economy, but had just eight years to put it into effect, it would be a lot harder to sidestep the issue than if the same person had 28 years to fulfill their promise.

During the academic year, the town of State College has thousands more people living within its borders because of the Penn State student population. And while that means students make up the largest number of people affected by any decision, those same students will most likely be gone from the town just four years later.

Having long-term State College residents in office for longer periods of time could be beneficial for pushing local issues and not just those that concern students. In order for this to work, however, people would be forced to become well-informed voters. This would mean reading the local newspapers every day to stay up to speed on the different issues at hand, as well as being responsible enough to lobby for a change in office if necessary, because the calendar won't do it for you.

This can be compared to the annual All-Star voting in baseball. People like shortstop Derek Jeter and catcher Jason Varitek get voted in simply because their names are recognizable to even the most novice fans, even during seasons where they may not be the most deserving picks.

As long as the temptation to procrastinate on platforms and the possible complacency of voters is addressed, we think the borough council members should be able to offer their comminuty some stability by staying in office as long as they are reelected.