February 10, 2003

In the early 1900's, citizens who were fed up with corruption in local government demanded change. Many states, including California, banned political parties, and partisan politics in general, from city and county governments.

Reformers understood that allegiance to a national political party was a poor method of selecting qualified people to govern locally. Also, the incursion of national politics, which almost always means partisan politics, into local governance detracted from the attention and focus mayors, supervisors, and council members must have if the potholes are to be filled, fire stations properly staffed, and local ordinances and policies implemented and enforced.

Unfortunately, from time to time, individuals or groups, who don't understand California's system of local government or who do not consider all of the ramifications before acting, seek to engage city government in a national political debate. Some of these efforts involve highly charged, emotional issues such as abortion, gun-control, and recently, whether or not to go to war.

These are issues that are decided on a national or state level of government. The political parties, or their constituent factions, are often divided on what course to pursue. There is no doubt that all of these issues significantly impact cities, their residents, and their governments. Nonetheless, a public debate at a city council business meeting that leads to the taking of a position by city council members resolves nothing but widens and solidifies emotional divisions in the community - - divisions that can spill over and impact a city council's ability to manage the city.

We do not choose our local officials based on their expertise in foreign policy, military strategy, nor on their personal opinions on national issues. Bringing these issues into the local forum of a city council risks shifting the basis for electing local officials. Instead of criteria such as their personal integrity, history of community involvement, and their knowledge and expertise in solving our local problems, many of us will begin to "like" or "dislike" an elected official based on their political party membership, their position on going to war, on abortion, on the death penalty or on a host of other issues that, despite their importance, give the local voter little insight into the kind of job an individual can do as a mayor or council member.

I don't want my ward's council member to decide how he/she is going to vote on the issue of building a new fire station based on how his/her fellow Republicans or Democrats on the council are voting, on the fire chief's political party, nor on whether or not the low bid contractor donates to the council member's political party - - even though such considerations frequently determine how members vote in Congress and in our state legislature.

I applauded the Mayor for arranging a forum on the important and emotional issue of whether or not we should go to war in Iraq. It was appropriate for those residents who wanted to express their views to be given an opportunity to voice them at a public gathering in our city - - not at a business meeting of the City Council.

San Bernardino was here before and after the Civil War, the Spanish American War, World Wars I and II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War and the First Gulf War. We will also be here after the Second Gulf War - - and the potholes will be here too, if those charged with filling them spend our time at council meetings arguing national issues instead of doing the job the voters elected us to do.

James F. Penman

City Attorney