PROVO -- Almost 91 percent of Provo voters did not vote for mayor-elect John Curtis.

The winner, though, doesn't need a majority of voters, he only needs a majority of votes cast. Curtis got that majority, beating Steve Clark, who accounted for 47 percent of the 10,611 votes cast, which is 8.4 percent of the total voters in Provo.

For anyone counting, that's 18 percent of voters. It's low. But it wasn't unexpected. Brigham Young University political science professor Quin Monson said without the voucher question of two years ago and the big-money mayoral campaign between Lewis Billings and Dave Bailey in 2005, voters were less motivated to go to the polls. The campaigns lacked the intensity to get people involved.

City Recorder LaNice Groesbeck said in 2005, turnout was 29.13 percent, and in 2007, 36.99 percent of voters went to the polls. Take the weeklong TV ad push about vouchers away, lose the six-figure war chests pumping out slick mailers on a regular basis to get people emotionally involved in the mayoral race, and you're left with this year's turnout.

"Both candidates this time spent what one candidate spent last time, and I think that matters," Monson said.

There was more to Curtis's win than money, though, and more to Sterling Beck's upset of three-term Councilwoman Cindy Richards than StopCindy.com, and more behind what was on voters' minds as they were choosing candidates. Voter turnout might not be a surprise, but plenty of other factors were, Monson said.

District 5

Richards's loss was probably the biggest shocker, Monson said. Her victory four years ago was close, but these results still were unexpected. District 5 also had the lowest turnout, at 13 percent. So either Beck was more successful in getting his people to the polls or District 5 voters are unhappy.

"You don't expect incumbents to go down unless something's gone wrong, and apparently something has gone wrong with how she's perceived," Monson said.

Perception may be the problem, said resident Susan Fales. She voted for Richards because she has lived in the area for years and has seen all the good the councilwoman has done. She attributed the results to the negative campaigning that surrounded the race.

"I would call it the politics of ingratitude," she said. "People really didn't pay attention to what she really did, they only paid attention to what people said she did."

The negative campaigning was real in this race, Monson said; the Web site attacked Richards personally, not just her role as a council member. Compared to politics that swirl throughout the nation, it might not be considered too bad, but "in terms of what we're used to here in Happy Valley, it had a bit of an edge to it."

He could not say if this made a difference in the election, though. It could have angered some people so they did vote. It could have turned others off. It could have distracted some from the issues. Negative campaigning isn't a stand-alone issue; it's only seen in competitive races. That makes tracking the actual effect difficult, because voter behavior could be based on a number of different factors related to the intensity of the race.

Lisa Christensen never made it to the polls on Tuesday; she was planning to go in the morning but her husband wanted to talk about the candidates with her, and it didn't happen in time. She was pleased with the results, though; all the candidates she wanted to vote for won.

She leaned toward Beck because she felt Richards had been on the council too long and had concerns with some of the issues. She'd never been to StopCindy.com, but she'd received mailers from the PAC and agreed with some of the statements about iProvo and the new position created by the council. She is happy with Richards's work in rehabilitating old houses -- hers is even one of those -- but that's not enough.

"You can't keep someone in office because she's done one good thing," Christensen said.

Neighbor Carol Smith didn't know what Richards had done for her or what Beck wanted to do. She didn't vote Tuesday because she couldn't find the information that mattered on what the candidates actually planned to do in office. But she also believed 12 years was a long time for an elected official to be in office.

"I didn't feel like I knew what was going on in the elections," she said.

The city has 80 provisional ballots that have not yet been counted for this race; the voter must first be verified before the vote counts. The difference between the two is 78 votes, so a change is still possible. Utah County Clerk/Auditor Bryan Thompson said generally about 80 to 90 percent of provisional ballots are valid. There are 250 citywide to be counted.

"That's one where the provisionals might affect things, but if things trend out like they normally do, it probably would not," he said.

Mayoral matters

It wasn't the money that made the difference for Curtis, nor was it a race about zoning. The race wasn't a Republican-vs.-Democrat match, and the finger-pointing about who leaked what nasty rumor to the press didn't do much.

It was actually all of that put together and then some, Monson said. The most surprising factor in the mayor's race was that a voter's political party seemed to have no effect on how he or she voted. It's a nonpartisan race, yes, but the R or D by a person's name always seems to come up, especially in Republican-heavy Provo when one of the candidates formerly ran for office as a Democrat.

People talked about it, but didn't seem to care. With voters running the gamut from strong Republican to strong Democrat, the votes split about evenly between the two candidates. That means that Provo voters went to the polls with something else in mind than Republicans and Democrats.

"It's the first time I've studied an election where partisan identification doesn't predict the vote," he said.

That means people actually voted on local issues. One of the questions Monson asked in a pre-election poll was if the voter agreed or disagreed that the city's zoning laws were too strict. Generally, those who disagreed with that statement, or who thought zoning laws were good, voted for Clark. Those who agreed that the laws were too strict voted for Curtis.

More voters actually thought the zoning laws worked as they were, which probably made the final results closer, he said. Curtis, though, isn't viewed as anti-zoning by most, which may have softened the effect of this issue.

Monson also brushed off the negative campaign label. The information that was released was not personal, he rarely saw the candidates upset at each other, and during a debate he moderated last week, he guessed that not many people can really distinguish between the two on many of the issues.

The poll did query whether people thought Curtis or Clark was more negative. A third of voters thought Clark was, about 11 percent thought Curtis was, and the rest thought neither was negative or both were equally negative. The perception may have hurt Clark some.

"Most people didn't think it was really that negative, probably because it wasn't that negative, frankly," he said, adding the civility and the similarities led to these results. "It's understandable why six out of 10 voters were unable to pick one as more negative than the other."

No one aspect put Curtis ahead, Monson said. Curtis's planning and almost-year-long campaign, though, allowed him time to raise money and set up strategies on how to run. Curtis stuck to his campaign messages, he anticipated problems and he prepared himself to handle them. The Democratic run is a good example, Monson said. Curtis knew it would come up, and he knew he'd need a way around it to get elected. Clark brought it up and Curtis parried it easily.

"In the end, I think probably to Clark's dismay, those charges didn't stick," Monson said.

Next up is what city government is going to look like come Jan. 5, when three new council members and a new mayor become part of Provo politics.

• Heidi Toth can be reached at (801) 344-2556 or htoth@heraldextra.com.

Related

• Incumbent candidates fall in several Utah County cities
• Curtis wins Provo mayoral election