Local elections deserve focus on community issues, not national politics

Minnesota’s local elected offices are legally nonpartisan — no party labels on the ballot, no partisan primaries, no formal majority-versus-minority caucuses once people take office. That structure matters. But during campaign season, the legal framework meets the reality of campaign season, and candidates and voters have to navigate the gap between “legally nonpartisan” and “functionally nonpartisan.”

This is where things get tricky, and where strong leadership — from candidates, voters, and even party units — can make a meaningful difference.

Legal reality meets First Amendment

Candidates can have party affiliations. Local party units can endorse. And they will. California tried to ban party endorsements in nonpartisan races in the 1980s, and the courts struck it down as unconstitutional. Parties have the same First Amendment rights as any other organization that’s legally allowed to participate in campaigns. (A few groups, like 501(c)(3) nonprofits and churches, are prohibited from endorsing candidates.)

So no one can outlaw endorsements. But we can choose how we behave around them.

What candidates can do differently

For candidates, they hear, “What party are you?” at the doors more often than most of them would like. In fairness, that question is rarely hostile. It’s shorthand — a quick way for voters to place a stranger into a familiar category. But shorthand can flatten people, and it can pull local races into national narratives that don’t fit the work of the office.

Candidates can answer honestly without letting the conversation get stuck there. Something like: “I’m happy to share my general political leanings, but this job isn’t about national politics. It’s about parks, public safety, zoning, and street repairs — the things closest to home. I’m running to focus on the work this office actually does.”

That’s not evasive. It’s responsible. It reminds voters why the office is structured the way it is.

Voters have power in local elections

Voters, too, have a role. Supporting the nonpartisan nature of these races doesn’t mean pretending politics doesn’t exist. It means evaluating candidates based on the issues within the jurisdiction of the office — not the ones that dominate cable news. A city council member doesn’t set federal tax rates. A school board member doesn’t negotiate international treaties. But they do make decisions that shape daily life: how safe a street feels, how a park is maintained, how a school district plans for growth.

When voters reward candidates who stay focused on those responsibilities, they reinforce the purpose of nonpartisan offices.

Party restraint as leadership

Party units — along with people who see themselves as community leaders — have a unique opportunity. They can endorse, but they don’t have to. In fact, one of the strongest ways to support nonpartisan governance is to show restraint. Choosing not to endorse in these races doesn’t weaken a party. It strengthens the community. It signals that some roles are not designed to align with partisan identity, and that the absence of party labels on the ballot is intentional, not accidental.

Amplifying the reasons behind nonpartisan offices being nonpartisan (even as someone who is firm in their values, convictions, and yes, political party membership) is an enormously servant form of leadership.

It helps candidates emphasize their qualifications based in experience and community involvement rather than their ideology. It helps voters focus on the work rather than the team.

And it helps local government remain what it was designed to be: the part of democracy closest to home, where public servants serve the entire public — not just a party.

Legally nonpartisan is the starting point. Functionally nonpartisan is the goal. And during election season, how we talk, ask, endorse, and vote can determine whether our community can achieve that ideal. We all have a part to play if we’re willing.