Mayoral election shift headed to ballot
By the end of this year, San Jose residents could decide whether to put future mayoral races on the same ballot as presidential elections and allow noncitizens to cast local votes.
The San Jose City Council voted 10-1 last week to place a measure on the June 7 ballot asking residents to shift the mayoral races from midterm election years to presidential election years beginning in 2024. The move, which has been years in the making, should help boost voter turnout and broaden representation in the city’s mayoral contests, according to advocates.
“This has been a long time coming,” Councilwoman Maya Esparza said. “Our current system was designed to suppress votes. It was designed to suppress certain kinds of votes and enable other votes.”
The council also agreed to consider other ballot measures for November’s election, including a contentious proposal to allow noncitizens such as undocumented immigrants and legal noncitizens who are green card holders or have the right to study or work in the U.S. to vote in local races.
Councilwoman Dev Davis voted against a change in the mayoral election cycle and possible extension of voting rights to noncitizens, saying she didn’t think it was the “fair or correct thing to do.”
If the June 2022 ballot measure is approved, the mayor elected this year would serve a two-year term and have the option to run for two additional four-year terms in 2024 and 2028. Victories could bring the new mayor 10 years at the helm, or two more than currently allowed.
The decision followed months of work and lengthy public meetings held by the city’s Charter Review Commission, made up of 23 council-appointed residents tasked with recommending potential changes to the city’s charter. The commission was formed after Mayor Sam Liccardo pushed for — and later abruptly backed off from — a “strong mayor” measure that could have granted him considerably more power and two additional years in office.
The commission’s final report, presented on Jan. 11 to the council, included 17 recommendations that range from expanding the number of council districts from 10 to 14 to removing citizenship requirements for board and commission members to implementing public safety reforms such as creating a police commission and giving the city’s independent police auditor subpoena authority and full access to unredacted records.
The commission did not recommend that the city pursue a “strong mayor” style of government. Nor did it discuss the proposal to extend voting rights to noncitizens who live in San Jose.
The council will hold two study sessions in the coming months to figure out what should go on future ballots. One meeting will focus on recommendations forwarded by the Charter Review Commission and another will center on expanding voting rights to noncitizens, as proposed by council members Magdalena Carrasco and Sylvia Arenas.
Across the U.S., more than a dozen cities currently allow noncitizens to vote in local elections. New
York City earlier this month became the largest city to allow legal residents who are not citizens to vote in all municipal elections, provided they are green card holders or have the right to work in the United States. San Francisco residents in 2016 approved a measure granting noncitizen parents the right to vote in school board elections.
Carrasco and Arenas said it would give a voice to those who have long been refrained from participating in the democratic process yet play an integral role in the community, including business owners, essential workers and consumers. “Some of these folks have been here longer than our own council members,” Carrasco said. “It’s a fantastic thing to allow our residents to have a say so in their democratic process.”
Santa Clara County is home to nearly 366,600 noncitizens, the majority of whom are legal residents such as green card holders or those have the right to study or work in the U.S., according to county records.
Dozens of residents who called in to support expanding the city’s voting rights said it would create a more “democratic,” “inclusive” and “racially just” city. They said requiring immigrants to pay taxes but not to vote is unjust.
“Immigrants here have helped to build our city’s infrastructure and wealth but we have left so many of them without a vote in local decisions that directly affect their lives,” resident Nicholas Hurley said.
But other residents strongly opposed the proposal, calling it “ridiculous” and arguing that immigrants should be required to go through the appropriate citizenship process before earning the right to vote.
“I believe it’s an attempt to have foreigners take over our city,” said a resident who identified herself as Brenda. “This is America — when you become a citizen, you get the right to vote.”
Throughout their discussion, several council members noted the issue “brought out the worst in people,” explaining that their inboxes had been flooded with “appalling” and racist emails about immigrants.