|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
In keeping with past years, Mountain View voters largely leaned left in the Nov. 6 general election, backing spending measures, rejecting the gas tax repeal and showing a more favorable view — however slight — on repealing constraints on rent control.
The tally, as of Wednesday morning, shows a clear pattern of Mountain View voters favoring the four state bond measures on the ballot, with more than two-thirds of votes cast in favor of Proposition 1, a $4 billion housing bond.
Mountain View voters even narrowly backed Proposition 3, the $8.9 billion water infrastructure bond, which was defeated at the state level with 47.6 percent of the vote. Residents in Mountain View, by comparison, voted 53.1 percent in favor of the measure.
One of the more divisive measures on the ballot, Proposition 10, would have repealed the Costa-Hawkins Act, eliminating many statewide restrictions on local rent control policies. The measure tanked, with only 38.3 percent of state voters supporting Proposition 10, but in Mountain View it received a more favorable 47.5 percent of the vote.
Where Proposition 10 triumphed or fell short in Mountain View depends largely on location. Precinct data shows the measure was handily defeated in the single-family residential neighborhoods in the southern end of the city, like Blossom Valley, Cuesta Park and Waverly Park, in some cases losing on a three-to-one margin.
Precincts in more apartment-heavy areas like North Whisman, Shoreline West, Castro City and North Bayshore — home to Santiago Villa mobile home park — showed a narrow majority of residents supporting Proposition 10.
The city was fairly homogeneous on every other proposition on the ballot, with nearly every precinct voting in unison for or against measures. Getting rid of California’s 2017 gas tax increase, including a 12-cent per gallon hike that went into effect last November, was extremely unpopular in Mountain View. Fewer than one in four voters, 23.6 percent, favored repealing the state’s legislation, compared to 44.7 percent of state voters.
City residents tended to back Democrats by big margins down the ballot, supporting Govenor-elect Gavin Newsom, Congresswoman Anna Eshoo and state Assemblyman Marc Berman. In the race between two Democrats for U.S. Senate, just over 60 percent of residents favored incumbent Dianne Feinstein over state Sen. Kevin De Leon.
Marshall Tuck, largely favored by charter school proponents during his campaign, won a narrow victory for state superintendent of public instruction, eking out 50.6 percent of the vote as of Wednesday morning. Mountain View voters, on the other hand, favored his opponent, state Assemblyman Tony Thurmond, with a 62 percent majority.
Mirroring results from June, Mountain View residents backed Laurie Smith in her bid for re-election as Santa Clara County sheriff, favoring her over challenger John Hirokawa by a nearly identical margin to the county as a whole.
Leans left, Yes.
But not Far left.
Goodbye far left Siegel.
Where do I find this voting data by neighborhood? I’m curious about the trends, especially with regards to the City Council election
Why did you take down the results board so fast? Palo Alto online still has their results on the home oage.
@Results,
Why you ask, was the results taken down so fast? Because it is totally embarrassing to the Voice who endorsed Siegel and Showalter, for them to lose so badly!
ELLEN KAMEI 19.20% 5,615
ALISON HICKS 17.76% 5,193
LUCAS RAMIREZ 17.67% 5,168
PAT SHOWALTER 17.23% 5,038
Siegel 15.59% 4,560
JOHN INKS 12.54% 3,668
Voters said no to the farther left (Siegel) and farther right (Inks).
They sort of lopped off the loonies on each end and we’re left with a somewhat left leaning but middle of the road council, which I think fits MV well.
I’m glad the Developer friendly Inks and RV friendly Siegel are out.
The visions and policies of both of them were in direct contrast with the what the voters wanted…Clearly. I’m also glad the Inks troll here got owned by the results. Dead last? Out of that field? Oh my.
That guy sure hitched his wagon to a losing candidate. Pretty clear that MV does not share his conservative opinions of development.
Congratulations to Ellen and Alison and congratulations to the voters of Mountain View for thinking for themselves instead of going lockstep with the tremendously out of touch Mountain View Voice.
I hope, if Lucas Ramirez is elected for the third spot instead of Showalter (and it looks like he will be) that he will shake off his attachment to the losers like Siegel and Showalter.
We look forward to a civil, constructive Council that will dial back the outrageous development we’ve had, clean up our City, plan more parks and open space, encourage more commercial instead of offices downtown and listen to what the people of Mountain View (not the outside influences) have shown we want for our City’s future.
@Interested – are you interested how politicos, actual elective office holders who have changed the direction of public policy think? Believe me, myself (Steven Nelson MVWSD retired Board member) Showalter and Siegel do not at all consider ourselves “losers” when we have won important battles. Ones that have changed direction. Maybe it is just Our Generation.
Sometimes we politico elders just get cranky – and sometimes we get cranky with the status quo. Sometimes we are courteous, and other times can’t wait for CLASH and Debates. But Showalter, Siegel, (even Inks) and I are out there spending parts of our lives fighting these battles! I can slap backs with Mike and Jon and dear sometimes-unexpected Margaret and Christopher and Alison and Lucas and …
IMO: It is good the next generation of politicos – Ellen and Lucas, are getting a chance to improve – or muckup – things around the city.
How odd it must be to live mainly in the narrow world of on-line commentary.
The ROV is the place to see …
The MV Council race RESULT is a moving target that all interested people should understand how to monitor.
The day to day position of the target can only be found by going directly to the Registrar Of Voters up-to-the-day unofficial count. Thanks to the Voice, every week, you will get a printed update. But that will always be several days old. The reasons for this? … your civics homework!
Santa Clara County Registrar Of Voters (Elections Results “City”) -load more-
https://results.enr.clarityelections.com/CA/Santa_Clara/92418/Web02.216033/#/
don’t mind me, this is not important, just ‘commentary’ of how I’ve seem close election go here
When Coladonato (MVWSD 2014) came from behind from election day – to two weeks after election day – it was not because of fraud at the ROV. His campaigning must have targeted the late COUNTED voters – who MAIL IN ballots on the last day or so. That tended to slightly shift his % and he managed to pick up about 200 votes (100 behind to 100 ahead).
Perhaps late mail-in are more fiscal conservative, or libertarian or … (there are comma-delimited precinct by precinct voting records for any amateur political analyst who knows statistical techniques.)
as of the last posting (Nov 7 5 PM) the Only demarcation line I look at is Elected or Not / Lucas or Pat.
There are only 130 Votes separating the two. You only need 1 vote more to win. (automatic recount will happen if this is less than 2% unless the person officially concedes to the ROV – I think).
WATCH THE DAILY TRENDING of THE COUNT DELTA- between Lucas and Pat.
So, when the ROV “certifies” the canvas of votes, all the mail-ins will have been counted (if valid) and all of the “provisional” will have been decided (accept or reject) and counted. This will happen on December 7 (if no problems).
{“Precincts Reporting 100%” only means the election day cast, not mailed, ballots have all been included in the count.)
Done.
“don’t mind me”
Done.
This thread? hahaha, yes.