The race for Memphis mayor is well under way. Now both national pundits and aspiring politicians are talking about our city’s crime, economic hardship and education.

These are certainly among the most pressing of our concerns. To make progress, we need good long-term leadership. For this, we need nonpartisanship in both city and county elections.

Opinion: Arming teachers won’t make schools safer

For much of our history, we had had nonpartisan elections at both of these levels. In recent decades, the separate Shelby County government took a different route, choosing a partisan structure.

Last year, this question arose anew for the city when Councilman Martavius Jones sponsored legislation suggesting a partisan structure for city elections. This proposal died in the city council chamber, failing to reach the ballot box as a referendum.

As our next city elections approach, however, this debate has remained alive, with public officials and community members chiming in on both sides as they debate how best to ensure good leadership for Memphis.

I believe we ought to maintain a nonpartisan city and, also, pursue the same for our county. This can ensure our community is focused on the local rather than the national and the candidates rather than the parties. It will also bring about united civic attention to good leadership. It is then that we may unite more as Memphians than divide on other issues.

Opinion: It is time to lay ‘brilliant at the basics’ to rest

Firstly, although political parties may be helpful indicators of positions on national issues, these positions do not translate to the local level. Here in Memphis, we have an entirely different set of hot buttons, interests at play and work to be accomplished. A “D” or an “R” on the ballot would not tell me which candidate can better fix our potholes or improve public transit — efforts Memphis certainly needs.

Adding national party affiliations into local elections merely infuses confusion into the electoral atmosphere and is unhelpful to voters. It elevates the most nationally partisan candidates — a measure that is, at best, irrelevant to local governance. It allows for laziness at the polls. And it is not determinative of competent leadership selection, the criteria for which ought to include a very particular focus on Memphis.

Secondly, there is an advantage to voting for the candidate rather than the party. In August, I was able to speak to a candidate about this at the polls. He was running for his party’s nomination for state representative. When I said “candidate over party,” his bouncy, gregarious demeanor lit up with anger. How could I suggest taking away those informative “D’s” and “R’s” and thus take away “power” from the voter?

Of course, those letters are not synonymous with voters’ power. To be informed on a vote — beyond having one letter next to your name — is true empowerment, as is having political leaders who mitigate crime, grow the economy, improve education and provide efficient services. Elected leaders who are tuned into our issues, who lead well for the betterment of all of Memphis, empower us.

Opinion: The serious risks of an ‘insufficiently robust’ search for MSCS superintendent

Surely, we can imagine a scenario in which a member of one’s preferred national party is simply not a great choice to effectively administer his or her office. His or her opponent, although a member of the other party, may be far more capable and prepared to get to work on Memphis Light, Gas and Water or Memphis Area Transit Authority or the flourishing of our city.

In fact, we do not have to imagine such a scenario. There have been many examples on both sides. This helps explain the phenomenon of “crossover” voting, such as we experienced in Cheyenne Johnson’s 2014 election for Shelby County assessor. When we narrow our sights from the national to the local, we can then focus on electing inspiring and effective candidates, irrespective of their national partisan identification.

Finally, nonpartisan voting at the local level will contribute to a unified civic attention to detail. Committed voters will be encouraged to research local candidates, unable to rely on those party letters. And incentivizing a more informed electorate is a good way to elect better leaders.

This can provide a unity against those candidates who would clearly do a poor job and for those who we assess to be very capable. It may move the dial towards a more issue-based local discourse. All of these would be productive ends for our city and county.

Opinion: ‘No conspiracy’ with Grizzlies stats crew

Ultimately, to unite Memphians around solving Memphis’ problems for Memphis’ future, we need nonpartisanship. We need to keep nonpartisanship in City Hall and bring it back to our county government. Party platforms do not solve the specific local problems we face — and have faced for generations.

It is time to shift our focus from the national to the local, from the party to the candidate, and toward a united civic attention to filling our offices with the best possible leaders. Partisan actors may well oppose these measures — in good faith or otherwise. But it is only when Memphians elect capable leaders dedicated to our flourishing that we will move our city forward.