Partisan politics in non-partisan races.

Non-partisan city council races have a partisan undertone.

City Council candidates signal their party.

Ankerberg opposes him. Poythress and Dobrin, too.

Yesterday this blog wrote about partisan whisper campaigns in judicial races, where judge candidates do partisan signaling. Local judges are supposed to be non-partisan because there is a public interest in the idea of impartiality and equal justice for all. But partisan affiliation sneaks in.

Southern Oregon city council offices are non-partisan by design. Cities wanted to emphasize civic unity. Moreover, the issues that come before local governments simply don't match up with national party platforms. 

I know from personal experience as a County Commissioner here that there is almost no partisan position to inform local issues. There isn't a Republican or Democratic position on whether to extend an urban growth boundary in one direction or another. 

Local issues affect people, but they aren't partisan. Example: Striping a bike lane. A homeowner who parks his second car on the public street in front of his house cares a lot whether his handy parking spot becomes a no-parking bike lane. Meanwhile, people who would like to bike safely prefer a bike lane along that collector street. At first glance, one might assume a partisan approach, that the bicyclists are young environmentalist liberals and the person who wants to park on the street in front of his house with a pickup truck thinks bikes are silly, and therefore the issue divides by party. Democrats are bike people; Republicans think streets are for cars.

But the real world of local politics is messier than that.

Facebook post

At the public hearing on the issue of striping the bike path, a council person discovers that the person leading the effort for the bike lane is a disabled Iraq veteran missing an arm and leg, who bicycles on a special three wheeled bicycle from his home to the park where he leads a weekday morning group of fellow veterans in an exercise class. Meanwhile, the homeowner who wants to park his car on the street is a liberal who has weekly Indivisible meetings at his house and likes street parking to accommodate them, and has pro-gun-control signs all over the truck he parks in the street.

OK, so now what is the partisan answer regarding bike lanes?

The recent series of posts on a local Medford City Council race documents silent partisanship in this nonpartisan office. (The focus of the series was Ward One, because this is the campaign that includes the angry and disruptive provocateur, Curt Ankerberg. Ankerberg was sanctioned by the US tax courts for submitting fraudulent tax returns for himself, and he has a pattern of getting notoriety for angry and profane attacks on local citizens. This makes his name well known locally.) Three of the four candidates in the Ward One race specifically criticized Kevin Stine, a Council person in a different ward. 

Stine is a young husband and father, a Navy veteran, and he is employed by Rogue Community College doing veteran outreach. That sounds like the biography that would be acceptable to Republicans, but in fact Stine is a Democrat who has run for higher office as a Democrat.

That makes Stine a visible target for attack and partisan signaling.

Dobrin. Opposes Stine.

Those three candidates did not criticize Stine based on any actions or decisions he took as a City Council person. But he is a Democrat, hoping to have a future in politics, and that is more than enough. Alex Poythress listed Stine as one of three council people he said should be replaced--a significant house cleaning of the 8 person body. David Dobrin listed Stine as the single Council person he named to oppose, he said to me based on his having heard that Stine supported gun registration and that he disapproved of people holding an office while seeking a higher one. Each of them were firm in telling me they opposed Kevin Stine.

Ankerberg attacked Stine along with dozens of other people, including Republicans, Democrats, the media, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and most certainly me.

Two things are happening.

Poythress. Opposes Stine

One is partisan animus. Candidates for non-partisan office who are Republicans oppose people identified as Democrats. They are on the wrong team.  (A Republican city council person currently running as a Republican for State Representative, Kim Wallan, was not mentioned by Dobrin for disapproval, and was singled out for praise by Poythress as his "inspiration.")

The other is partisan signaling.  Voters who are Republicans get cued that Poythress and, Dobrin are part of the "GOP tribe." Honest, civic minded people can differ amicably on whether a four way intersection fronting on a fire station, a park, and a shopping center should be serviced by complicated signals or a roundabout, but there aren't established tribes on either side. So candidates don't campaign on such an issue. They campaign by demonstrating that they dislike something that some block of voters also know they dislike: Democrats, even a non-partisan office.


There is an alternative approach: signaling non-partisanship. One candidate is positioning himself saying he can work with different people with different points of view and parties. Steve Dickson listed several Council members he admired, including four council people and the mayor, all people with a different known political orientations. Dickson is a Republican but mentioned Stine, along with Dick Gordon, Tim Jackle, Kay Brooks, and Mayor Gary Wheeler as people doing a good job. 

Do voters actually value nonpartisan civic-minded cooperation? That is the underlying theory of non-partisan seats on a city council. 

Steve Dickson

That is the attitude Steve Dickson is signaling, but possibly there is no "bipartisan cooperation tribe" to attract, even in local races. Dobrin and Poythress are signaling they bring Republican partisanship to a local office, and it might be the smart approach. A secure block of voters know they dislike Democrats; they don't know what they think about local issues.

Still, there is some appeal--certainly to me--to the idea that, at least at the city level, we have a council that can work together cooperatively with civic minded non-partisanship. That appears to be Steve Dickson's approach as he voiced it to me. 

The question is whether voters actually value what he is signaling.

.