The Minneapolis City skyline, including City Hall, as seen from the back of the U.S. District Court. (Glen Stubbe, Star Tribune file/The Minnesota Star Tribune)

Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Only one office will appear on the Minneapolis election ballot this fall — City Council member. Municipal-only races typically attract lower turnout, but those who watch closely know the stakes are high.

This election will give voters their first opportunity to weigh in since the reformation of roles and relationship between the City Council and mayor. Further, it's possible the balance of power could shift from a slim majority favoring a more moderate Democratic stance to viewpoints further left, including Democratic Socialist. Issues such as rent control and other economic regulation hang in the balance.

As a candidate on the more moderate side of City Council politics, challenging a moderate incumbent, my race might seem of less consequence. But politicos and pundits who frame up the election in such narrow terms are not asking a key question: What is pulling the electorate further to the left?

The question forces a squirmy, inward look. I believe any true measure of attraction to further left ideas is at least equaled by significant failures of the status quo to deliver the basic functions of government. However uncomfortable it makes us to challenge conventional thinking, perhaps it's time to consider that the enemy of progress in Minneapolis is ... mediocrity.

Take last year's complete breakdown on snow removal. This led to a nine-week, one-side emergency parking ban. Residents who rely on street parking were left to search for a legal spot, often blocks from home, often in the dark. In addition to locating parking with 50% fewer options, residents still faced the requirement to move for snow emergencies. Over that period even the most civic-minded among us might have found herself on the wrong side of the wrong street at the wrong time, gotten a ticket or had a vehicle towed. Meantime, the council increased contracts with towing companies by over a million dollars, to tow all the cars they had failed to plow the streets for.

Was there an apology? A council audit? Neither. When essential city services fail, for those with lower income — i.e., renters — the misery is compounded.

Bryant Avenue's $27 million reconstruction is both an example and a metaphor for the city's planning and execution failures. This and future road projects prioritize bicycles over vehicles. However, in moving a route, planners didn't consider the needs of residents in a senior community who rely on direct access to a bus to move around the city. Parking was removed such that local businesses were made inaccessible. Neighbors struggled to exit their driveways and snowplows couldn't maneuver.

When the Fire Department sent a memo advising that Bryant is now too narrow for firetrucks, city officials had to acknowledge that they, and I quote, "missed it." There has been no audit by the council, no accountability or apology. City Council continues to approve contracts with the same design firm, while those paying for it watch the two-lane bikeway get plowed before the street.

And then there's the handling of public safety by the city — in itself a crime. Council moderates have been slow to get behind the Behavioral Crisis Response (BCR) alternative to armed policing. History isn't on their side. Originating in the beleaguered Office of Performance and Innovation, and championed by the left on the council, a more robust BCR is what the Department of Justice wants to see. Sooner implementation of such modern public safety practices could be reducing the workload of our depleted MPD ranks today. Instead, sworn officers still answer too many calls in circumstances neither the cops nor the community wants.

On an all-Democrat spectrum, Minneapolis is led by moderate-leaning elected officials, the same folks favored by conventional thinking downtown interests, election-to-election. But when comfortable relationships are prized over results, the bar is set too low. When there's failure to deliver on the most basic functions of a city — safety; roads free of potholes, garbage and snow; safe and convenient access to businesses and amenities — it seems reasonable that voters would seek other options. People with money can move, or use their resources to patch their way to the city-life they want. Those without resources may choose the uncertainty of policies further left over the certainty of their disappointment.

If the more moderate side of the council won't provide accountability to the electorate for when the city fails them, we will find that complacency comes at a price. Absent a compelling vision for the city, there exists a vacuum of leadership. But not for long. Someone is going to fill it, and the vision that prevails may hold a rebuke to the status quo with a long tail of consequences.

In this framing, choices between moderates at the ballot box in this election seem a lot more interesting.

Kate Mortenson is a candidate for Minneapolis City Council in the 13th Ward.