SF State Professor Rich DeLeon and analyst David Latterman gave a presentation yesterday at SPUR about recent voting trends in City elections. DeLeon, who literally wrote the book on San Francisco politics, has collaborated with Latterman over the past five years in developing the Progressive Voter Index (PVI) – a statistical analysis of precinct-level results that measures “how progressive” San Francisco voters are. At yesterday’s presentation, the duo assessed how the City has changed in the past five years (in measuring PVI trends), compared last November’s election results with the PVI numbers, and offered predictions about what it means for San Francisco’s future.

“I’ve been saying for 10 years that San Francisco has peaked in its progressivism,” said DeLeon, “and that the City would inevitably drift away from the Left. And I’m being proven wrong every time.” In fact, both Latterman and DeLeon steered clear about drawing too many conclusions from the data results – letting the audience make up their own minds – but offered useful information about what the recent trends are showing.

The PVI is a collection of how San Franciscans voted by precinct in the last several elections – but only on ballot propositions – and assigns each precinct a “score” of how progressive it is. Therefore, the PVI is highly useful to predict voter behavior on a progressive ballot measure, but it is less useful (comparatively) in predicting how successful a progressive candidate will be. For example, the PVI does not incorporate the fact that many residential hotel tenants in District 6 voted for Chris Daly – but abstained on ballot propositions, which means that it probably underestimates the District’s overall “progressiveness.”

According to the PVI, District 4 (the Sunset) has now surpassed District 7 (West Portal) as the most conservative district in the City. “Given who they just elected,” said Latterman in reference to Ed Jew, “it’s a reflection of how conservative the District is.” Meanwhile, District 9 (Mission and Bernal Heights) is the most progressive, followed closely by District 5 (Haight-Ashbury.)

According to the PVI, District 6 (Tenderloin and SOMA) has now slipped from 3rd to 4th place in order of progressiveness – trailing behind District 8 (Castro and Noe Valley.) District 10 is next, followed by Districts 3, 1, 11 and 2. Again, this is strictly a measure of the election results in state and local propositions – whereas voters do not necessarily select candidates based on ideology. Click here for a map.

DeLeon and Latterman have compared the PVI results with demographic data – including the percentage of African-Americans, Asian-Americans and Latinos, LGBT voters, the median income of a precinct, whether it has a high number of renters or homeowners, and the percentage of voters above the age of 60. “A precinct’s median income,” said Latterman, “is not a reliable index in measuring how progressive it is – because you have wealthy people voting both ways. Whether people are renters or owners actually plays a bigger role in whether they vote for progressive measures.”

By incorporating demographic data, DeLeon and Latterman showed how some precincts will vote more or less progressive on certain issues than the precinct’s overall PVI score. For example, to nobody’s surprise, precincts with a higher percentage of tenants voted in higher numbers for Proposition H (Eviction Relocation Assistance) than the PVI score would imply. Proposition F (Paid Sick Leave) enjoyed unusually high support from precincts that have more people of color. What this means is that the issue of paid sick leave resonated more effectively in those communities than other progressive issues.

One proposition that showed an interesting deviation from the PVI index last year was “Question Time,” which makes it City policy to have the Mayor attend a monthly Board of Supervisors meeting. While its performance citywide generally correlated with the PVI (where voting “yes” was counted as the progressive position), it fared remarkably poorly in District 8 (the Castro). Latterman invited people to draw their own conclusion – but it shows how strong Gavin Newsom is in the LGBT community, even if LGBT voters are more progressive than the Mayor on most issues.

“One should not rely on PVI alone,” said DeLeon, “in candidate races – where race, ethnicity and rental/owner status can plays a bigger role.” Indeed, DeLeon and Latterman showed numerous examples of when candidates who were either progressive or ran against a progressive enjoyed higher support in certain demographic groups.

In 2003, Kamala Harris was not considered the progressive candidate for District Attorney – and her performance in that election by precinct had a strong negative correlation with the PVI. But she enjoyed higher support among progressive precincts that had a high number of African-Americans, probably because of her ethnicity.

Asian-American progressive candidates have crossover appeal among Asian voters who do not necessarily share their progressive politics. School Board candidates Eric Mar in 2004 and Jane Kim in 2006 both did better in less progressive precincts that had a high Asian population. However, said Latterman, we do not see a similar correlation with Latino voters – in part because most Latino precincts are already considered progressive.

On the other hand, some recent candidate races showed a very strong correlation among candidate performance and PVI index. In the District 6 race, Chris Daly did better in precincts with a higher PVI score – whereas Rob Black’s performance was the opposite – in what was a very ideologically charged race. “It was a classic battle of good and evil,” said Latterman, “depending on whose side you are on.” In the District 4 race, Jaynry Mak’s performance by precinct was strongly correlated with the PVI – but her opponents did not necessarily show an inverse correlation.

The PVI was created in 2002 – so Latterman and DeLeon offered some perspective on whether the City has become more progressive, and what parts of the City have changed. While the changes are small, District 11 (the Excelsior) has increased its PVI score – and to a lesser extent, so has District 10 (Bayview.) Meanwhile, District 6 has become less progressive – probably because of the influx of condominiums in SOMA.

At the beginning of the presentation, Latterman said that absentee voters are far more conservative than those who vote on Election Day. One audience member asked if this trend was changing – as more people vote absentee, and the progressive movement has made a concerted effort to register more permanent absentee voters. “The absentee vote has gotten a little more to the Left,” said Latterman, “but it is still more conservative than the rest of the City.”

Send feedback to paul@beyondchron.org