More on elections (from experience)

Jon also wrote about the truncated campaign season and the difficulty is poses for him as an editor. As one who ran four campaigns for City Council, I can validate his concern from a candidate’s perspective. When I ran my first successful campaign for council in 2001, voting was at a polling place on a fixed day and few voters used absentee ballots. Absentee voters were not a group a campaign could afford to ignore but because the deadline for requesting one and the date they would be mailed out was fixed, it was an easy factor with which to deal. 

In my last campaign for re-election in 2015, the emphasis on absentee ballots had grown and the window of opportunity to receive one and return it had expanded. It meant a shorter period of time for candidates to get their message out and it created thousands of moving targets, each one being the voter who requested a ballot, received it and then voted with it any time up to and including Election Day. In today’s climate, I cannot imagine how difficult it has become. It is particularly unfair to the new candidate and I believe it is a disservice to the voter who wants to be informed on the candidates and the issues before them. 

There’s one more issue about campaigning I would like to touch on and it is somewhat related to a topic Mark Simon mentioned in his column, “Election Season.” Mark wrote about the loans or funding that candidates give their campaigns to get them off the ground. There is much I could write about this topic but I will limit it to just a few thoughts.

First, I am surprised at the amount of money it takes these days to run for local office, even in the smaller Peninsula cities. I know inflation would change this figure but when I ran in 2001, I don’t think my campaign spent over $7,500. Each successive campaign, the figure would climb somewhat but, so far as I remember, it never went over $20,000. Today, however, campaigns throw a huge amount of money at local races. I think it’s unfortunate that “the mother’s milk of politics” has become such a factor. Does the task of raising money keep many good and viable candidates out of local races? I think it might. Asking for money is one of the least enjoyable tasks for any candidate. The higher the financial bar, the more daunting the unenjoyable task becomes.

Lastly, (and this is tangent to what Jon Mays wrote about regarding the shortened campaign season), a candidate who loans their campaign seed money is going to want to be paid back after they gain funds from donors. Who are those donors? Well, they are reported publicly but, if you vote too soon, you may never know, or know too late.

A former member of the San Carlos City Council and mayor, Matt Grocott has been involved in political policy on the Peninsula for 17 years. He can be reached by email at mattgrocott@comcast.net.