“Term limits make for sparse ballot,” reads a headline in this morning's newspaper. No, this didn't refer to Shorewood. “1 Cedarburg seat drew no takers,” except for the incumbent whose time is up because of term limits.

Shorewood doesn't have term limits. Our incumbents are eligible, but we don't have challengers. Its challengers that are lacking. We have ample number of incumbents.

The question for Shorewood, why no challengers?

Here's the spin: I think its because, there are no hot issues. We all seem to be doing all right. Schools are O.K. Property taxes are being paid. The usual grumbling is only about snow removal at the corners, otherwise all is well with the world.

As a result we will have 3 members of a 7 person board who have be unopposed for their seats, plus 2 who were opposed only by one person. So 5 out of 7 have either been minimally opposed or not at all.

As a theory we could conclude that Shorewood loves all those who “represent” us; that is why no challengers. That would be a good conclusion if we had a factual basis. That would be about as good a conclusion as, term limits makes for the lack of challengers.

Here is another conclusion, loving those we already have in government is the reason for no election this year. This is the way we show our love for our incumbents, by discouraging challengers. Thank you, incumbents. "And that's the way it is".  Until next time, "good night and good luck."