This time of year often is called the “Silly Season.” The phrase aptly describes the weeks leading up to an election because it’s the time when candidates and political leaders sometimes hurl outlandish accusations against one another, and when otherwise civil public servants turn negative, nasty and mean.

The Silly Season is in high swing in Stonington. It is truly unfortunate Democrats in that town chose a topic of political discussion that does little to advance public discourse in a manner constructive to helping voters make informed choices at the polls next month.

Last month, the Stonington Democrats announced the party was capping its campaign spending this season at $6,000. The party announced this cap, which it said represented about $1 of spending per anticipated vote, in a written statement rife with warnings about big money infiltration.

“It’s time to reclaim our democracy from the grip of big money,” First selectman candidate George Crouse, who decisively lost that race two years ago, was quoted as saying in the statement.

The Democrats also challenged incumbent first selectman candidate Rob Simmons, who is a Republican, to also adhere to the $6,000 cap. The Stonington Republican Town Committee left the decision about the challenge up to Simmons alone. He rejected it.

In issuing the challenge and responding to it, members of both political parties made some valid points. Democratic Chairman Scott Bates said his party believes local candidates should succeed at the polls because of the strength of their messages, not because they can afford to hire a slick advertising firm. He also contends the high cost of campaigning discourages potentially dedicated public servants from running.

Simmons, on the other hand, called $6,000 an arbitrary figure. He points out that the true cost of campaigns is complex. While he raised $33,195 to Crouse’s $5,125 in 2015, he didn’t have support from wealthy organizations such as labor unions, he said. Such organizations, he rightfully pointed out, are known to provide support such as providing lawn signs or making get-out-the-vote calls. He also didn’t flout support from high-profile party members in his campaign, while local Democrats had the likes of the governor and lieutenant governor to bolster their side.

But largely the discussion over a spending cap was beside the point. It may have produced a few headlines and a flurry of social media comments, but it distracted from what the candidates on both sides of the political aisle should be emphasizing: their stands on issues of importance to Stonington voters. And there is no doubt there are important issues facing Stonington. To name just a few: adapting to dwindling state aid, declining student enrollment and addressing needed road, bridge and sidewalk upgrades.

The Democrats say they raised the issue out of concern that campaign money threatens to obfuscate message, but we suspect the proposed cap has much to do with recognizing Simmons and the Republicans would out fundraise them again this year.

Most important, both Bates and Crouse said they couldn’t point to outside big money groups that influenced Simmons’ 2015 campaign. We tend to agree with Simmons that the Democrats’ decision to raise this specter is more akin to a smear campaign than it is to any evidence-based problem. It also could be interpreted as fear-mongering – an action Democrats often are quick to accuse Republicans of employing.

Yes, it’s disheartening to see the Koch brothers and other big-money types funneling piles of cash into state house and even county campaigns across the country. Of course in those cases, the cash unfairly tips the political scales. But with admittedly no evidence this is occurring in Stonington, Democrats stepped onto a proverbial slippery slope with this challenge. We hope they scramble off the slope and we urge both parties’ candidates to serve their constituents best by keeping the campaign focused on actual issues.

The Day editorial board meets with political, business and community leaders to formulate editorial viewpoints. It is composed of President and Publisher Timothy Dwyer, Executive Editor Izaskun E. Larraneta, Owen Poole, copy editor, and Lisa McGinley, retired deputy managing editor. The board operates independently from The Day newsroom.