The academic literature is overwhelming support of the argument that legislative term limits have zero value. They only lead to inexperienced, ineffective legislators.
It's not academic literature, it's an op-ed piece. And every one of the 5 reasons can be challenged.
Especially the "less choice" one.
I actually think the argument about committee chairing is a bit more credible than what's been said in this thread. Stability definitely can help nurture depth more than a parade of different positions.
Policy stability overall is valuable, but staggered terms can provide for continuity of policy without changes that are too rapid.
Agree with the other comment, cite this overwhelming academic literature.