Reader says Non-partisan elections are simply elections where candidates do not identify themselves as part of a political party

The definition of non-partisan that people are using in these discussions isn’t accurate. Non-partisan elections are simply elections where candidates do not identify themselves as part of a political party. It has absolutely nothing to do with the particular issue being discussed. You are free to run for political office in Ridgewood as the “Pro-life, Anti-Gun, Pro-immigration” candidate you just can’t run as a “Republican.” Now it would be idiotic to run as the “Anti-gun” candidate because the village council has as much control over the gun laws as they do over the weather, but hey, if you want that to be your issue, you’re perfectly within your rights to run on that. And that is actually the point: without national parties, the issues tend to stay local not by law but because you can’t get elected without focusing on local issues.If you’re interested in snow day reading on the subject, here’s a reference: https://www2.pitt.edu/~cwb7/assets/papers/PB%2014%20article.pdf. That said, I do think that how the village government reacts to, funds security of, and otherwise supports peaceful protests is exactly the kind of issue that should be discussed among candidates. Oh, and I think any FB group that summarily dismisses non-trolling, otherwise polite members won’t be very effective at anything for very long.