The latest election results revealed Mayor Larry Klein ahead by a wide margin over Councilmember Russ Melton for a chance to govern Sunnyvale for the next four years, and Alysa Cisneros and Eileen Le were leading the race for City Council seats in Districts 2 and 6. Meanwhile Charlsie Chang, who is running uncontested in District 4, has comfortably secured her spot on the council.

As of Wednesday morning, incumbent Klein held a significant lead over Melton, with 72% of the vote. In District 2, incumbent Cisneros had about 67% of the vote, well ahead of former Councilmember Jim Davis, and Le in District 6 was racing ahead with 54% of the vote.

Klein, who has served as mayor since 2020, is known by residents for navigating the city through economic hardships brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic. His priorities for the upcoming years include initiating more sustainability, affordable housing and safe parking projects.

District 2, where Cisneros leads, encompasses neighborhoods and areas in downtown Sunnyvale near West El Camino Real. The council member prides herself on advocating for building more multifamily housing units, and improving Sunnyvale’s response to homelessness. Up north, District 4 covers several neighborhoods near Moffett Field. Le currently serves on the Sunnyvale Education Foundation and is a trustee on the Sunnyvale School Board. She competed against residents Richard Lesher and Beverly Blau for a council seat.

In addition to candidates, Sunnyvale voters also cast ballots on whether to allow the city to issue general obligation bonds of up to $290 million to construct a new public library. As of Wednesday, the measure was leading with about 58% of the vote.

Another city initiative, Measure F, proposed three changes to Sunnyvale’s charter, including removing voter registration and citizenship requirements for all city boards members and commissioners; replacing gendered references throughout the document with gender-neutral language and allowing council meetings to be held 24 times a year instead of two per month. The measure was failing Wednesday morning, with 63% of the vote.

In an effort to bring residents a new public space, Measure E proposes utilizing $290 million in bonds — a form of long-term borrowing authorized by the state to fund public improvements — for a new library near Sunnyvale City Hall. The city will repay the money using annual property taxes levied on all taxable property within the city.

Supporters of the project assert that the main library building no longer meets the demands of the city and has insufficient facilities. Measure E opponents, however, believe the taxable properties, which includes condominiums, town houses and apartments, could potentially increase rent in the area. City leaders have rebutted the argument, stating that the bond won’t increase rent or the properties’ market value.

Sunnyvale residents also voted on whether the city’s charter needs updating. The most contested amendment of the three proposed includes removing voter registration and citizenship requirements for residents who wish to become board members and commissioners.

Supporters say this amendment would allow the city to leverage the best talent from the city’s diverse community. Several residents in opposition to the change say there is no city data indicating issues in recruiting, “qualified, talented and diverse applicants” under the current requirements. They also worry that removing the citizenship requirement, which ensures an applicant is a resident of Sunnyvale, will create a loophole for nonresidents to apply.

However, supporters maintain Measure F will not allow for nonresidents to lead Sunnyvale. Commission service will always require Sunnyvale residency, which can be verified during the application process.

Measure F also proposed changing any “he” and “she” pronouns in the city’s charter to gender-neutral pronouns including “they” and “their.” Those in favor of the change state the document will be more inclusive. There is no formal opposition to the language change.

Finally, the measure suggested allowing the council to choose how to space out their meetings, so long as they are no more than six weeks apart and total 24 in a year. Currently, the council needs to meet two times a month. Supporters of this initiative said it will be easier for council members and residents to accommodate for religious holidays, school breaks and potential unforeseen circumstances while ensuring city business continues. There was no formal argument against the meeting change.