Chavez and Mahan Run Away from the Field in San Jose Mayoral Primary

Election results have been updated, as of 5pm June 9.

The Election Division of the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters continued to count ballots today, and reported that as of 5 pm June 9, approximately 30% of the city ballots remained to be counted.

Santa Clara County Supervisor Cindy Chavez and City Councilmember Matt Mahan will likely be the two candidates for mayor of San Jose on the November ballot, based on unofficial, incomplete returns.

With Measure B approval holding steady at 55%, the winner of the General Election will serve for two years, and be eligible for re-election to another two four-year terms. The measure will shift the city's mayoral elections to presidential election years, shifting from the current gubernatorial election calendar.

With 97,121 votes counted as of 5pm June 9, the vote totals for the two big spenders in the primary campaign, Chavez and Mahan,  held steady, running away from the field by substantial margins.

Chavez had 39% of the vote, with 38,161 votes, compared to 32.6% for Mahan, with 31,832, according to the latest unofficial returns reported by the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters Election Division.

The other five candidates, council members Dev Davis and Raul Peralez, retired San Jose police officer Jim Spence and students Travis Hill and Marshall Woodmansee split the remaining 28 percent of the early returns. Davis had the third highest total at 10.5%.

The top two candidates, in terms of campaign spending and fundraising, Chavez and Mahan, reported they had spent 824,000 and $760,000, respectively, as of May 21.

All candidates collectively raised more than $2.6 million and PACs contributed another $1.5 million.

For the latest updates, visit the Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters election results website.

Three decades of journalism experience, as a writer and editor with Gannett, Knight-Ridder and Lee newspapers, as a business journal editor and publisher and as a weekly newspaper editor in Scotts Valley and Gilroy; with the Weeklys group since 2017. Recipient of several first-place writing and editing awards, California News Publishers Association.


  1. How much money ‘raised’ by both leading candidates may differ from money ‘spent’ on campaigns.
    SJ Inside should comment on ‘total’ of monies at the disposal of the leading candidates.
    San Jose ‘Voters’ never really get a choice as to who represents their interests.
    Sure the faces change but…’the song remains the same’.
    Either the Unions and or the Downtown Association cabals rule San Jose.
    To run a successful, independent campaign-one must be personally wealthy and or win a big ‘Lotto’ prize.
    Good-luck to the candidates!
    My condolences to the rest of San Jose.
    David S. Wall

  2. Cindy has lingered on the political scene long enough to become the frontrunner. Meanwhile, the “Bellarmine Mafia” continues to produce candidates.

  3. I will be voting for Cindy as I support welfare and housing for anyone legal or not. I also believe camping on sidewalks is a right, and criminals should not be prosecuted as they have been discriminated against throughout history. Oh and let’s not forget doing away with single family zoning. Vote Cindy and hold on to your wallet.

  4. I just want to know how Mahan got so many votes when he ran such a ridiculously bad campaign. Some things don’t add up. And he is a liar.

  5. I really want to compare the policies of the two candidates, and am having trouble getting Mahan’s staff to respond to any questions. He wants ‘accountability,’ but doesn’t say how he might achieve that, except for installing software that might do that. If you are diligent and pay attention to documents already published, you can get a lot of data letting you know what’s going on. Mahan’s website states that the unhoused must accept whatever housing they are offered, but in order to make sure people stay housed, a lot more has to go into placement than just insisting they take it. Long term housing, work and health has to be the goal. He makes vague claims about the high cost ‘per door’ of housing efforts, but the data behind that claim is nowhere to be found. It just seems to me that someone with less than one term on the council claiming he can quickly solve problems others have worked on for decades seems ‘off’ without specifics.
    I see a lot of fear-mongering in his communication, and I think we have enough of that. I’m happy to look at new ways to solve longstanding problems, but I need details. Also, I think someone running the city might benefit from a lot of experience working with state, regional and county agencies. Knowing the in’s and out’s of the scope and responsibilities of each entity, knowing where funds can be obtained–so that economies can be maximized–is really important.
    Many say it’s ‘labor’ vs ‘business,’ but it’s more complicated than that. I hope we can all get the information we need to make informed decisions.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *