As we approach the November 5th general election, West Windsor Township voters face a critical choice: whether to transition from nonpartisan to partisan local elections. We’re voting “yes” to support this change, because it introduces much-needed ballot transparency—by providing voters crucial information about candidates’ party affiliations, which aren’t currently displayed for those running for Mayor and Township Council. This shift, championed by our grassroots group West Windsor Voters for Transparency and Representation, isn’t about dividing our community, as some opponents claim, but rather about empowering voters with clear, accessible information. Our interest in modifying the way we elect local officials is spearheaded by community members of all political persuasions spanning generations from GI to Gen Z. And we aren’t alone. Over summer, as the election came into view, we mobilized over 50 West Windsor residents to collect over 1,700 signatures in a matter of weeks. As we knocked on hundreds of doors in the heat of July, we were met with significant enthusiasm for this initiative. We believe that it’s time to modernize our Township’s elections by embracing a partisan system that promotes transparency and better representation—and is used in the overwhelming majority of New Jersey’s 564 municipalities, in three-fourths of Mercer County’s 12 towns, and in neighboring Plainsboro, with whom we share a regional school district. So what’s the problem with nonpartisan elections, then? The reality is that the current system, while well-intentioned, is failing West Windsor. It leaves voters uncertain and in the dark about where candidates stand on serious, important subjects that impact our daily lives. Every person, and therefore every candidate, has their own values and ideological framework—and their party affiliations tell us a lot about what those are. Hiding them, though, doesn’t make someone suddenly unbiased or “apolitical.” Yet “nonpartisan” elections deliberately conceal these party affiliations, thus confusing voters about candidates’ actual beliefs, especially when their opinions are vague or motives rarely known. This issue is magnified by a lack of coverage and scrutiny of municipal affairs through local journalism, debates, or town-hall meetings, leading voters—in the absence of party labels as helpful cues—to instead rely heavily on subjective heuristics, like name, gender, or race, when selecting among candidates. Research stretching back to the 1960s convincingly demonstrates that this pattern exists in nonpartisan elections, which are linked to additional troubling trends, including depressed voter turnout (“roll-off”), reduced minority representation, and fewer challenges to incumbents. Strikingly, for example, West Windsor’s recent voter turnout is regularly lower than that of nearby municipalities with partisan elections, such as East Windsor, Ewing, Hamilton, Hightstown, the Hopewells, Lawrence, Pennington, and Princeton. That, sadly, is civic disenfranchisement. Our opponents might argue, in response, that the present system “works,” since it enables “blind” voting and “collaboration” across party lines; unfortunately, this assertion is vastly exaggerated and without veracity. Indeed, multiple studies confirm that nonpartisan municipal elections don’t boost “bipartisan” behavior. Why? Because local issues—for instance, budget allocation, land use, commercial development, infrastructure maintenance, social services, public safety, and environmental protection—are all areas where policymakers’ political affiliations and ideologies still significantly influence their administrative decisions (or lawsuits!), as happens here in West Windsor. And the same is the case for appointments to key Township boards or commissions, like those for planning, zoning, and affordable housing. For this reason, it’s a myth that local government is magically free of, or disconnected from, politics: Parties are highly involved even in “nonpartisan” towns, given that they (plus interest groups) often continue organizing or secretly endorsing and funding their preferred candidates. But few are aware of these backdoor dealings, and “nonpartisan” elections conveniently obscure this fact. In the real world, however, partisan behavior doesn’t stop at municipal borders, or when you eliminate labels on ballots. The political values and principles that you proudly choose to bear matter—just as they do at the county, state, or national level. And that’s why West Windsor needs transparency through partisan elections. When candidates are open about their party affiliations, voters can best assess whether the former’s views align with the latter’s for shaping local government. Knowing candidates’ party affiliations prevents voters from being confused—either by silence or deception, come election season—and allows them to make informed choices, encouraging them to cast ballots for those running for Mayor and Council, rather than skip those columns altogether. The partisan system thereby offers greater accountability and fosters increased civic engagement, ensuring that local officials reflect residents’ core values. Second, contrary to misconceptions that partisan elections limit voters’ choices, they instead provide clarity in self-identification. Residents can still run under slates and as independents for Mayor or Council and win—and no candidate is excluded from the November general election based on party affiliation. Independent (“unaffiliated”) candidates are placed directly on the general election ballot after filing petitions, while party-affiliated candidates first compete in a public June primary election before advancing. Unaffiliated voters, per state law, may even vote in primaries the day of by declaring affiliation with the Democratic or Republican party at the polls and, if they want, can immediately return to unaffiliated status afterwards. Meanwhile, candidates’ ballot placements are also entirely unaffected. Consequently, there are no barriers to participating in partisan elections. In fact, they further empower voters by holding party-affiliated candidates publicly accountable to party platforms and the wishes of their constituency, in accordance with a transparent, consistent approach to local governance. And moreover, this change, permitted under the Faulkner Act, won’t cost taxpayers money or alter West Windsor’s form of government. It simply enhances electoral honesty by indicating candidates’ political affiliations on the ballot right by their names, like we similarly see for county, state, and federal positions. The current nonpartisan system was instituted over 30 years ago, but West Windsor’s population nearly doubled in that time—from approximately 16,000 to 30,000 residents—and its ethnic composition diversified dramatically. With this growth comes the need for a government truly reflecting and representing our community’s values and priorities. Moving to a partisan system will help guarantee that voters are equipped with the knowledge that they require to make decisions about our Township’s future, and may fully engage in the electoral process. Ultimately, partisan elections strengthen democracy by providing voters with transparent, reliable information that they can use to vet the candidates they’re asked to elect to offices of public trust. We urge our fellow West Windsor residents to vote “yes” on the Public Question and take this crucial step towards a more accountable, representative, and transparent local government. James Appenzeller, Henry Hsiao, Dale Lessne, Sweekrutha Shankar, Elizabeth Wagner, and Yingchao Zhang are members of the Committee of Petitioners advocating for partisan elections in West Windsor, along with Ben Finkelstein, Willa Inlender, Remi Meehan, and Grace Strom Power, who serve as the leadership team for West Windsor Voters for Transparency and Representation. For more information, please visit ww4representation.com.