Why so few California mayors make the leap to governor

from Robert GreeneCalMatters

This comment was originally posted by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Why do so few California mayors become governors?

San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan was a relatively late entry in the governor’s race, but was expected to shake things up. The business-friendly, centrist (for California) Democrat has reduced street homelessness in his city and benefited from the state’s post-pandemic pushback on criminal justice reforms. Tech billionaires like Sergey Brin and Stephen Huffman and more conventional billionaires like Rick Caruso gave generously to committees that supported him.

He became Silicon Valley’s young, capable “abundance” candidate. He was the potential unifying elixir for Democrats who just couldn’t muster much enthusiasm for Xavier Becerra (too blah), Tom Steyer (too rich) or Katie Porter (also Katie Porter).

And what happened? Maybe because Mahan waited too long to announce. Maybe it’s because all the billionaire dollars made the voters nervous. Maybe because California Democrats aren’t that centrist after all.

Or maybe it’s because he’s the mayor.

In the past, California mayors have had difficulty making political progress, a fact that seems illogical at first glance. Mayors are chief executives in the public sector with portfolios that include law enforcement, human services, housing, emergency response, economic development, traffic and a host of quality-of-life issues such as tree and pothole trimming. They manage budgets and salaries. They are political brokers, bringing together unions and business, police and civil rights activists. They understand daily news coverage, political fundraising and coalition building. They should be particularly attractive candidates for governor, a largely analogous position, albeit on a larger scale.

But few mayors of California cities become governors. Their skills may be perfectly adequate for the job, but those same skills, when exercised, may be the very thing that makes voters wary of them.

When he was mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa spoke candidly about his gubernatorial prospects. Progress would be difficult, he said, because big-city mayors do things that have consequences. They make choices and trade-offs that play out on city streets — and in city budgets and labor contracts. As a result, they often disappoint their supporters, infuriate their political enemies, and inevitably burn bridges. This is a trade-off for having meaningful executive power.

It’s easier for legislators, like members of Congress or state legislatures. They carry accounts and vote, but are rarely held individually accountable for decisions that directly affect their constituents.

There are exceptions, of course. San Diego Mayor Pete Wilson was twice elected governor in the 1970s and then elected to the Senate.

But most exceptions come with asterisks. Of course, Gavin Newsom was the mayor of San Francisco before he became governor. But in between, he served two terms as lieutenant governor, a sort of political purgatory that kept his name out of the headlines for eight years and helped burnish the public memory of his personal scandals and mayoral disputes.

Before the detour, Newsom addressed powerful California Democrats at the 2008 convention in Denver. He claimed that his mayoral power would make him the best governor. He cited his city’s universal health care program, living wage laws and environmental protections as models for the state.

“I promise you” a young, cocky mayor told the California delegation. “We have evidence. This is not a claim, this is not another political speech. I’m going to show you how it’s done. We did it in San Francisco. It can be done anywhere.”

It was something of a preview for the governor because it preceded his expected main challenger — Villaraigosa, the young, brash mayor of Los Angeles — to make his own move, despite his realistic assessment of mayors who want to step up.

But both mayors were kicked out of the 2010 race for governor by Jerry Brown. Yes, Brown was a former mayor of Oakland. But he’s a special case, isn’t he? To non-Oaklanders, his term as mayor seemed like a lark compared to his two previous terms as governor and his time in two other state offices besides.

Former Mayor Newsom, as Lt. Governor, had a low-profile but official platform during the Brown years that arguably fell somewhere between mayor before and mayor in your face, and he was elected governor in 2018, defeating former Mayor Villaraigosa.

Among California’s 40 governors, only four others have been mayors, if we include William Stevensmayor of Los Angeles for 11 days in 1909. Governor Hiram Johnson appointed Stevens lieutenant governor in 1916, but he became governor when Johnson moved to the US Senate.

Washington Montgomery Bartlett was mayor of San Francisco in 1880 before being elected governor and serving less than a year. James “Sunny Jim” Rolfe Jr was mayor of San Francisco for nearly 20 years beginning in 1912 before being elected governor in 1931.

Villaraigosa is bidding for a second time in 2026, but has consistently been near the bottom of the major league contenders list, as has Mahan. Both men conceded defeat after the polls closed on Tuesday night.

For Mahan, perhaps this was an early test and he will be back in four or eight years. But if so, it will be with longer experience as mayor – inevitably with more decisions that divide voters.

What about the mayors of other cities in California? Mayor of Los Angeles Karen Bass stated that she no longer has political aspirations and is also in a tough re-election battle and her political survival is by no means guaranteed. San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria is a potential gubernatorial candidate, but he’s been toe-to-toe in dealing with homelessness, as have Mahan and Bass. That’s right St. Francis Mayor Daniel Lurie. All four big-city Democratic mayors are struggling to find their political line as they try to appeal to both the pragmatic, home-owning center and the rapidly advancing progressive left.

Candidates like Steyer and Becerra have to walk that line, too, but they do so without the benefit and baggage of actually making city decisions on the ground and the spotlight that comes with it.

Mayors in the next tier of California cities lack the statewide presence and, as a result, the fundraising clout that could help them get to the next level.

This isn’t just a California thing. New York’s mayors run a city that has little in common with the rest of their state, and for many, city work is more important and visible. New York voters rejected the previously disgraced governor Andrew Cuomo when he ran for mayor.

South Bend, Indiana, Mayor Pete Buttigieg became a national celebrity and Secretary of Transportation. He is a former and potential presidential candidate. But as a liberal Democrat, he has a vanishingly small chance of ever being elected governor of conservative Indiana.

Mayors of big cities will probably continue to try to be elected governors because they have the right experience for the job. And they may continue to fail, because the right attempt to serve well as a governor may also be the wrong attempt to get elected.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.