Wednesday, Aug. 16, 2006 | Why am I not surprised to see the expensive-but-tepid Kroll Report used to justify your call for ending the progressive practice of district elections?

District elections were finally passed by a vote of the people in 1988 because it had become intolerable that – surprise – big developer money determined who got elected to what public office in San Diego’s costly city-wide elections.

District elections are cheaper than citywide races; they bring the advantage of more ethnically diverse grass-roots candidates from neighborhoods; and they offer much more local control of the entire process.

No political reform is without flaws, and it could be argued that too many greedy, ambitious and weak political hacks have held office lately in our city. But then, how to explain our recent mayors and previous City Attorney, all of whom were elected citywide?

Let’s not blame district elections for the mess. It’s the content of our elected officials’ character – or lack thereof – that’s the trouble.

Leave a comment

We expect all commenters to be constructive and civil. We reserve the right to delete comments without explanation. You are welcome to flag comments to us. You are welcome to submit an opinion piece for our editors to review.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.