☆ Finding the elusive center: Oliverio's post-election analysis

A disappointing election for the local progressives, as Chavez loses a close one and Bien Doan prevails in D7. Labor/left is spinning all sorts of excuses, but are there any real structural conclusions to be drawn, or is it all just the efficacy of ground games? Planning Commissioner Pierluigi Oliverio discusses with Opp Now co-founder Christopher Escher. An Opp Now exclusive.

Opportunity Now: Union talking points to explain their election losses got trotted out pretty quickly: Low turnout in ESJ is the culprit. We'll do better in 2024 with increased turnout for the presidential election. This is just a two-year term, and Matt won't be the fresh newbie in 2024.

Pierluigi Oliverio: Every side of a political issue will apply its spin. And perhaps it's an effort to put a cloud over Mahan's first term. However, each side of a political contest knows what it needs to do to get elected. Campaigns are focused on "likely" voters and not "maybe" voters. If one side allocates significant resources on individuals who have a weak voter history, rather than focusing on people who have a history of voting, then that would be a mistake. The voter turnout for November was actually significant. More people voted for mayor in 2022 than in any previous mayoral race.

ON: I have a marketing background, and 50% is usually considered to be a pretty darn accurate sample size.

PO: I would concur. Unless voting is made compulsory with jail or fines, there is no way to get to 100%. We have made it super easy to vote. We have election month instead of election day, permanent absentee, and free postage. It is unclear to me that greater turnout in ESJ would guarantee a Chavez victory, as these voters may be more socially conservative--especially with the hot-button abortion issue (Prop 1 at the top of the ticket in November 2022), which brought out lots of progressive voters.

Special elections tend to have low voter turnout; however, when they have been conducted in SJ, that's when we tend to get people of color and women elected to city council. These differences in turnout are not always determinative, in my opinion.

ON: A lot of the union commentators and media are suggesting that Mahan won because he was able to position himself as untainted by all the local gov't failures, especially around homelessness and public safety. That feels like deflection to me.

PO: I think it's fair to say that when you've got a situation of a candidate with a long term tenure versus one with a short term tenure, it's easier to hang the problems of society around the neck of the long-term candidate.

ON: I guess what I'm suggesting, though, is that the differences between Matt and Cindy weren't just length of tenure.

And while they both agreed on a lot of policy issues--remember, they're both Democrats--there was substantial daylight between them on housing strategy and public safety policy. Matt clearly is more critical of the Housing First strategy that has characterized City and County policy for a long time, and he's no fan of catch-and-release. Cindy is more supportive of Permanent Supportive Housing solutions and is warmer to at least some of the decarceration agenda.

Those are top-tier, compelling issues, and there were meaningful differences between them, though local media whiffed on reporting those differences.

PO: The county Democratic party does not support the big tent concept of the national Democratic party. However, while both candidates--as you noted--are Democrats, there are notable differences between Democrat candidates on local government issues.

I think what Matt did effectively as a communicator and candidate was to provide powerful, illustrative examples of his policy direction instead of just talking about it at the abstract level: So when he says, "let's utilize a portion of the fairgrounds for a homeless navigation center," to most residents, that sounds like a compassionate and effective idea. Especially because they're frustrated with homelessness in their neighborhood, limiting their use of parks, trails, libraries, and dealing with the traffic impacts caused by countless homeless encampment fires along freeways.

Matt effectively positioned himself more to the center, and in a city like San Jose, most of the voters are in the center, not on the extremes.

ON: Before the election, you drew parallels between LA and SJ. Rick Caruso lost in LA after a spending blowout. Are you still seeing similarities?

PO: Caruso ran similar messaging around homelessness as did Mahan. But Mahan didn't have the huge amount of self-funded money Caruso had, nor sitting council member endorsements and various union endorsements the way Caruso did. And yet Matt won and Caruso lost.

I think the main reason Caruso lost was because he was formerly registered as a Republican and was a significant donor to Republicans as well as Democrats. Matt was never a Republican like Caruso and did not have to contend with litmus test voters. SJ seems more politically moderate than Los Angeles.

ON: A lot of people are predicting that union-aligned CM's will be cooperative with Mahan until noon on his first day in office, then be obstructionists.

PO: Whoever won was going to have a short runway because it's a two-year term. A new mayor will look for quick wins--and so must the new councilmembers. People have disdain for obstructionism at the federal level, and I believe they will not tolerate it at the local level. The entire collective elected body of San Jose and Santa Clara County needs to at least be perceived as willing to compromise and negotiate.

My recommendation for whomever would have been elected is to hold an open discussion with the CM's to understand their specific district priorities. Generate a public list of what they want to accomplish for their districts, as often CM's want common things such as a park, a trail, traffic calming, etc. This should be an open dialogue about those projects and how the elected body can collectively help each other and their respective districts. This is something that typically happens behind closed doors, and the general public would now be aware. In this way, the Council can achieve things collectively and mutually respect what is shared by the elected district representatives, as they have the best knowledge of the district priorities.

Transparency is good, and this concept supports transparency and I believe good will.

Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity