For proof that the election season is upon us, look no further than the front yards in Everett’s neighborhoods. Signs supporting candidates for mayor and city council dot the landscape, and for good reason: City politics matter at the neighborhood level.
That’s why a city policy that discourages neighborhood associations from having candidates appear at their meetings seems particularly misguided.
The Office of Neighborhoods policy, which has been in place since 1994, asks neighborhood groups not to allow political candidates to speak at their meetings unless they’re already in elected office. Incumbent candidates are asked not to engage in electioneering, but aren’t discouraged from reporting on city business. In addition, the city won’t pay for the mailing of neighborhood association newsletters if they include notices of candidate appearances — with the exception of an upcoming candidate forum being hosted by two neighborhood groups.
Some candidates are crying foul, and for good reason. Neighborhood meetings are a natural venue for citizens to find out where the candidates stand on various issues, and may be the only place to hear their views on issues that are unique to a particular neighborhood.
The policy is also unfair, in that it can benefit incumbents at the expense of their opponents. Explaining city issues without electioneering is a fine line that can be hard not to cross, and simply appearing unopposed before a group during a campaign can offer a significant advantage. At its worst, the policy leaves the perception that incumbents are trying to protect their jobs by shutting out the opposition.
City Councilwoman Marian Krell, who used to direct the Office of Neighborhoods, says that candidate speeches can detract from the meetings’ main purposes: to solve neighborhood problems and get to know the people who live nearby. Why should the city presume to know what’s best for each neighborhood association? No one is forcing the associations to host candidates. But if citizens are eager to hear candidates discuss issues of particular importance to their neighborhood, the city should help make it happen.
Another argument made in defense of the policy is that politics could cause divisions within neighborhoods, which suggests that citizens need to be protected from themselves. Neighbors will disagree about a number of things from time to time. Learning to get along despite such differences is a hallmark of democracy.
If citizens want to learn more about key issues through their neighborhood associations, good for them. The city shouldn’t stand in the way.
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.
