Vote YES to extend the Morgan Hill mayoral term from two to four years.
If we want our city to be led with more professionalism, and not with biennial political distraction, we need to take ourselves seriously and revise the city ordinance to provide the office of mayor with a four-year term in line with nearly all of our fellow cities in Santa Clara County.
It is increasingly important we do so as we grow in population and economic output. Whoever occupies the office of mayor needs to focus on their duties and be liberated from the unequal burden of campaigning, canvassing and fundraising disproportionate to their four-year-termed council district colleagues.
The “no” campaign is falsely suggesting that only by retaining a two-year-termed mayor do we ensure that everyone gets to participate in the mayoral election, as though the mayor would otherwise only run in the half of the council districts that are also up for election.
Their narrative is incorrect and misleading, for the mayor definitionally runs to represent the whole city every election, regardless of whether the election is every two or four years. I’m puzzled at the “no” campaign’s logic and misunderstanding of how the mayoral election works.
Related to this point, the ”no” campaign further suggests, erroneously and without backing, that implementing a four-year term for mayor would decrease voter engagement with city council elections that are not concurrent with that of the mayor.
As far as I’m aware, the lack of a mayoral election (or any much more significant, higher level political office for that matter) does not magically constitute a force field that makes it harder to bubble in your choice for city council member or any other local office. The only potential barrier to voting for other offices is the voter’s own willpower.
The “no” campaign is also concerned about losing the two-year election cycle system that provides every councilmember the opportunity to run in an off-year election, sparing them from having to make the choice of whether to risk their seat to run for mayor. The same effect could be achieved by providing the mayor a six-year term in line with the structure of the Mexican presidency (this being a satirical suggestion), or by having the mayor’s term cycle set to odd years (similar to Philadelphia).
Ultimately, the problem of deciding on whether to defend one’s seat, or risk it for another office, is for the mayor and council members to navigate, not us.
We need the mayor we elect to be able to focus on the job, and not be as the typical member of the House of Representatives, immediately re-entering the campaign cycle as soon as they are elected. Imagine all the mailers, online ads, signs and political dollars spent—we could save ourselves if we elected our mayor every four years instead of two.
Vote Yes on Measure B.
Enrique Navarro-Donnellan
Morgan Hill
