I often get asked whether the Ledger Dispatch makes official endorsements in political races, big and small.

While no staffer who writes for this page tends to be vague about their personal stances, officially the paper does not endorse candidates or positions. The reason is pretty simple: we have no editorial board with which to weigh these crucial positions, and basing them on the opinions of a few - even those as sophisticated and unimpeachable as ours - would be both presumptuous and unhelpful.

The paper used to have an editorial board, but I've heard tales that it was an unruly and unwieldy beast.

The current lack of one won't necessarily prevent me or publisher Jack Mitchell from offering our personal views, but readers should recognize we're not speaking for the paper, only ourselves.

This endorsement policy has been much easier this year, what with an underwhelming slate of candidates in many local races. Don't get me wrong - there are plenty of passionate, capable Amador County residents throwing their hats into various rings. But there are even more who are not, and several contenders who seem in over their heads. I know running for local government posts can be a grueling, expensive slog, and occupying them can be even worse - thankless jobs with little or no pay except the unique lucre that comes in endless amounts of grief - but is this really the best we could do, Amador?

Because election seasons are incredibly sensitive times for voters, office holders and would-be office holders, I'll try not to bruise anyone's feelings by getting specific. But I would like to offer my own, unofficial impressions about the tendency this year to back slates of candidates without weighing the competency of each individual.

That doesn't mean those looking for real action to take place shouldn't consider a slate of candidates that reflect their own positions, just that differences of opinion shouldn't by themselves disqualify otherwise worthy office seekers.

For instance, looking at the six-way race for Jackson City Council, why couldn't the same voter back incumbent Wayne Garibaldi, the Bank of Amador president who has of late exhibited some leadership on the council, and candidate Judy Jebian, an outspoken but sensible critic of sprawl. I realize businessman Garibaldi and preservationist Jebian may seem like contradictory choices, but the last thing any elected body needs is an absence of healthy dissent. When everyone drinks the same Kool-Aid, that's when the trouble starts. And Garibaldi and Jebian seem like individuals who can disagree about the points without holding grudges, something the current council and its candidates haven't always achieved.

The options are markedly more interesting when it comes to the Amador Water Agency Board of Directors, where nine people are competing for four seats. And again, I gravitate toward an eclectic body of smart, engaged people who may not agree with each other all the time. In fact, I hope they don't. That's why I like the idea of brainy agency watchdog Bill Condrashoff and either community activist Debbie Dunn (also a Ledger Dispatch contributing writer) or outgoing Sutter Creek Councilman Brent Parsons occupying the same dais with District 2 incumbent John Swift and former pump/irrigation system tester Don Cooper, who has extensive experience in water and energy management with Pacific Gas and Electric Co. It's true, Condrashoff will clash with Swift, but water may well be the single most important issue in Amador County, and it would be beneficial to have intelligent people working out the best way to progress. In other words, checks and balances to replace the rubber stamp.

It gets even trickier trying to apply any standard for selection in Plymouth. Again, many will try to simplify the race as being between anti-casino incumbents and pro-casino challengers.

With water access issues, frozen development projects, an expensive pipeline to ponder and Plymouth's near-secessionist attitude toward the county, there's too much at stake for city leaders to continue on as they have. Residents will take their cues from those they elect. If you foster a spirit of cooperation, engagement, and honest but respectful dialogue, good things can happen in Plymouth.

Even if there's disagreement about how to proceed.