Voters must examine a candidate’s leadership, not involvement with partisan politics
The news of Clovis Mayor Jose Flores’ retirement and Councilmember Bob Whalen’s election to the Superior Court bench has started a flurry of activity around the November election. The upcoming election provides both unique leadership opportunities and strategic risks for our City Council and our community.
Service in local government has its roots in the very meaning of the word community — defined as a “unified group of individuals, often living in the same geographic region, with shared interests.” For generations, the civic responsibility of Clovis City Council members has been one of building a sense of community, ensuring the safety and well-being of residents, and operating from a shared vision for the Clovis community of future generations.
Through all of the national and state clamor and partisan divides, Jose, Bob and the rest of us on the council have worked to serve all who live in Clovis without concern for party affiliation, voting preference or a person’s position on any number of the divisive issues of the day. We have not always agreed and not always gotten it right, but we have always worked together.
By design, local government was intended to be nonpartisan. When you dial 911, no one asks your political party. Abortion rallies do not improve roads. Protests for or against gay marriage don’t hire more police officers. Those issues — ones over which local government has virtually no control — further divide the communities we serve. Residents can spot a local leader a mile away who is just repeating “party lines” to create greater acceptance with political party loyalists or to seek a higher profile for their next ambition.
As the November election approaches, I have gotten many calls asking me who “the best” Republican or Democratic candidate would be for the city of Clovis.
That is the wrong question.
A left, right or center political viewpoint certainly could reveal something about a local candidate — perhaps their views on fiscal responsibility, public safety and the like. But, as we have learned over the years, political parties tell us little about the competencies needed for actual governance. What has proven true, as the late Mayor Harry Armstrong demonstrated over decades, is that a fundamental skill in Clovis’ local government is the clarity and the discipline to “stay in your lane” — to exercise true “local control” over issues that we are elected to oversee — water, streets, transportation, parks and public safety, among others.
As Clovis voters choose our next councilmembers, I hope that a demonstrated commitment to Clovis and proven track record of community leadership will be more important than party profile; and that the skill of listening to learn is valued more than passionate generalities or partisan certainties only suited for sound bites. Because past is prologue, focus, discipline, a history of working for shared outcomes and a candidate’s record of service to Clovis will provide the clearest path to our future.
Twenty years ago, Harry told me that the moment Clovis shifted to a partisan exercise in governing —regardless of whether that was to the left or the right — our community’s strength and success would begin to decline. He encouraged me, and all of my colleagues who had the privilege to serve with him, “to do the right thing” and to make decisions around what is best for Clovis and this region.
So back to the question: It is not about who is the best Republican or Democrat for Clovis.
Serving on the Clovis City Council should continue to be, first and foremost, about who is the most prepared and most competent, demonstrated by a record of civic engagement, a commitment to our community’s values, and a dedication to leave Clovis better than when they found it.
The decisions we make in November will begin a new era for Clovis and have a huge impact on our city today and for generations to come.
