As part of a new proposal to boost voter turnout by moving San Jose’s mayoral races to the same year as national presidential elections, Sam Liccardo would hold the city’s highest elected office an extra two years.

Liccardo will begin his second term in office in January and could end up serving a total of 10 years under the proposal.

In a new memo, Vice Mayor Magdalena Carrasco and her council colleagues Sergio Jimenez, Don Rocha and Chappie Jones call for a ballot measure to push the mayoral election back two years to 2024 to take advantage of the higher voter turnout that is typical during presidential elections.

“We value our electorate,” Carrasco said in a statement, “and believe that with increased voter turnout we will be able to elevate the Office of the Mayor and capture a more diverse constituent that is reflective of our city.”

But the suggestion has sparked concern from some of the city’s more right-leaning residents. Councilman Johnny Khamis, one of the council’s most conservative members, said he had received a number of phone calls from unhappy people who see the move as a “power grab” by the left.

Not only would the measure allow Liccardo, a Democrat, to be mayor for a full decade at a pivotal moment in San Jose, as the city prepares for a massive Google campus near Diridon Station and several new BART stations, but it also likely would drive up voter participation among residents who tend to align with Democrats. Low-income voters and minorities are more likely to turn out in presidential years.

“Are we saying that Mayor Liccardo was illegitimately elected or something?” Khamis said, adding that he thinks the idea attempts to fix a problem that doesn’t exist. “It kind of feels like an effort to make sure whoever runs doesn’t have any conservative leanings.”

Bob Nunez, the head of the Santa Clara County Republican Party, said he’s not concerned about more Democrats turning out but about the mayoral race getting lost in the shuffle.

“As Republicans,” Nunez said, “it is really having the opportunity to go out and talk about very specific issues to our constituents in our cities … and not getting swept up in all the other kinds of things and losing sight of what’s important, and that is local politics.”

But San Jose State University political science professor Garrick Percival said he thinks when more people vote, it sparks a healthier democracy.

“It would lend to more trust in government if people feel like they have a voice in the system,” Percival said.

In an op-ed last year, Percival wrote that less than half of the city’s registered voters cast ballots when Liccardo was elected in 2014. Two years later, about 80 percent of the city’s registered voters weighed in on policy measures.

People are more likely to vote in presidential years, Percival said, because of stronger enthusiasm and voter-mobilization efforts. And if a broader, more diverse cross section of the city votes, Percival added, the council would reflect a more accurate representation of residents’ views.

“Just having more people participate, it’s just better for democracy and better for the city,” said Richard Konda, executive director of the Asian Law Alliance.

But Jerry Mungai, a member of the board of directors of the San Jose-based Citizens for Fiscal Responsibility, said robust efforts already exist to get people to participate in all elections.

“We already have enough ways to get out the vote, like reducing voter eligibility from age 21 to age 18; vote by mail; DMV mandatory voter registration; ballots in numerous languages, provisional ballot availability on election day, expanded voting time at voting places on election day; just to mention a few,” Mungai wrote in an email.

Liccardo, who was not involved in drafting the proposal, said he only recently had a chance to review the memo from his colleagues.

“While I appreciate the desire to have a large turnout at the polls, it should be balanced against the importance of having a robust dialogue about local issues without the distraction of the chronic dysfunction consuming our national politics,” Liccardo said. “I also suspect my wife will raise even greater concerns about giving up our weekends for another two years.”

Related Articles Editorial: Why San Jose voters should reject cardrooms tax increase

Editorial: Despite quirks, San Jose voters should approve Measure G It’s unclear whether the measure will ever make the ballot. San Jose’s Rules Committee will hear the idea on Wednesday, and it could choose to move discussion of the proposal to the City Council in two weeks. The deadline to add items to the November 2018 ballot has passed, so the measure would have to appear on a future ballot.

San Jose would not be the first city to move its mayoral election to line up with presidential election years. Several years ago, Los Angeles moved local elections to even-numbered years in an attempt to combat low voter turnout.