Maybe I have grown up, but I have come to believe integrity does actually matter when choosing candidates.
But how do we define "integrity?"
The best approach to this question is to limit the definition of integrity to the type of issues that are actually relevant to the tasks and obligations of the elected officials. That's the type of integrity check I'd like to do before I vote for a candidate. I really don't care if a certain candidate likes to spend his spare time at the roulette table in Las Vegas. What I do care about is if a candidate claims to be an environmentalist, he is not driving a 12-cylinder German luxury boat to work every day.
The Glendale municipal elections in April will be a good arena for residents to do an integrity check on candidates. One of the things I'd personally like to see is if candidates can publicly stand behind some of the statements they make in tight and ultra-friendly circles.
As the population of Glendale has become segmented in the last few decades, it has become easier for candidates to preach and promise all sort of things to different sections of the population. The hope is that the word will never get out; maybe the candidates will have their cakes, and eat them too.
But as balkanized as our population may seem, it does not mean Glendale residents do not have ties to one another. We have friends, family members, co-workers, employers and employees who come for all races, ethnic groups and of course, the two genders. So the word gets out.
Some of the strategies candidates are using in the upcoming city elections have the potential to chip serious points away from their "integrity tank."
