Municipal Elections in Maastricht: What comes next

The results of the 2026 municipal elections in Maastricht reveal a significant change to the city's political landscape. Voters reshuffled the balance of power, paving the way for coalition talks that will determine policy for the next four years. These elections will directly impact daily life in Maastricht, affecting everything from student housing to cultural spaces and urban mobility.  Following the ‘Visions for Maastricht’ Editions, it is interesting to examine the outcomes of the municipal elections and the parties' thoughts on their campaigns, results, and future plans. Therefore, the Maastricht Diplomat interviewed several relevant parties - D66, CDA, GroenLinks, PvdA, and Maastricht van NU - to hear about their experiences during the campaign and when the results were announced, as well as their future plans.

A shifting political landscape

Under the new leadership of Marlou Jenneskens, D66 (Social Liberals) emerged as one of the clear winners, increasing its number of seats from four to six. The CDA (Christian Democrats) matched this result, with runner-up Gabriëlle Heine also gaining two seats. GroenLinks maintained its position on the council, holding steady with four seats. Compared with the national picture, Maastricht only partly followed the broader trend: while local parties were the big winners across the Netherlands, in Maastricht the strongest gains went to established parties such as D66 and CDA rather than to a new local frontrunner. Voter turnout in Maastricht also increased, rising from 45.2% to 46.5%, which is an increase of 1.3 percentage points. However, this remains below the national average, where turnout increased by around three percentage points to 53.7%.

Source: NOS Election Outcomes for Maastricht

However, not all parties fared as well. The Seniors' Party Maastricht dropped from five to three seats, and the Labour Party (PvdA) lost ground, falling back to three. Meanwhile, smaller parties showed mixed results. Maastricht van Nu (Maastricht of Now), a new party originating from the Partij Veilig Maastricht (Party for a Safe Maastricht ), gained two extra seats in the municipality, while Forum voor Democratie (Forum for Democracy) doubled its presence to two. Other parties, including the Partij voor de Dieren (Party for the Animals), lost their seats, and the Liberale Partij Maastricht (Liberal Party Maastricht) disappeared from the council entirely.

According to local sources such as RTV Maastricht, the election reflects both fragmentation and renewal. While larger parties remain influential, they no longer dominate the political landscape. The increase in votes made by D66 (Social Liberals) and CDA (Christian Democrats) suggests that voters are in favour of change, while the losses made by previously strong local parties such as Senioren Partij Maastricht (Senior Party Maastricht) indicate that the voters' priorities are shifting.

With no single dominant party, attention now turns to coalition negotiations. These discussions will determine who will govern and how key issues, especially those affecting students, will be addressed in the coming years. D66 and CDA, the top two with the biggest growth, will probably take the lead in forming a majority. Over the years, parties in Maastricht have fragmented, meaning that a majority of 20 seats will currently require a coalition of at least five parties to negotiate the policy for the next four years.

D66 (Social Liberals): “This is everything we hoped for but didn’t dare dream.”

For D66, election night was the reward for an energetic and widely supported campaign. In hindsight, Thomas Gardien (#4 on the list) describes the campaign as "very good", a sentiment he believes is reflected in the result. However, the party believes that the story of their success was not just about the numbers. D66 stresses that almost all party members took part, campaigning “In their own neighbourhoods and to their own strengths”, an approach they believe made a real difference on the ground.

The campaign's tone was deliberately optimistic, and reflected in their slogan “het kan wel”, as they claim. According to Gardien, their message centred on the idea that problems in Maastricht could be solved if people worked together. He claims that this positive message, together with local proposals on themes such as housing, education, safety, inclusivity, and entrepreneurship, helped to create an identity with which voters could identify.

At the same time, Gardien does not attribute its victory solely to a national trend. While acknowledging that the party gained seats in many places, he points out that they are the biggest party in a limited number of major cities. When the results came in, there was excitement within the party. D66 said they were “super happy”, especially because becoming the biggest party is “truly special” and their “best result historically in Maastricht”. At the same time, the party reflected on election night more broadly. They acknowledged that while one party wins, another loses, and said it was important to recognise that “not everyone can be happy on election night”.

The party also said that it is staying in contact with the CDA as the next political steps unfold. Based on the information provided, this is the only direct indication of how D66 views the CDA in relation to the result.

Even for D66 itself, the scale of the outcome appears to have exceeded their expectations. They describe it as 'everything we hoped for, but didn't dare dream'. While they had hoped to make gains, becoming the largest party was not something they had “actively anticipated”. They also placed the result in a wider political context, saying they were pleased to see the city choose what they termed a 'positive agenda' with a more centrist and progressive orientation.

Now that D66 has come out on top, the party is also taking the lead in the first phase of coalition formation. Rather than moving immediately into traditional coalition arithmetic, D66 has nominated Guido Derks, who has no party affiliation, as a neutral “verkenner”, in charge of identifying the parties' positions to build a coalition. According to the party, the idea is to begin with “a neutral round” involving all 16 council parties, so that each can reflect on the result and the way forward. D66 says it wants this first step to be “neutral, open and transparent”, presenting it as a different approach to those usually seen in Maastricht after elections.

CDA (Christian Democrats): “We’re going into the next period with an open view.”

For the CDA, the election result seems to be recognition of the way the party has positioned itself over the past four years. Patrick Veugen (#4 on the list) attributed the gain of two seats to the party’s “hard work and dualist character”, as well as its “honest choices” and its candidate list, which he said was “strongly rooted in Maastricht society”. In that sense, the result was not presented as a surprise, but as the outcome of a longer process. As Veugen put it, the party was “very happy to be rewarded with two additional seats”.

At the same time, he shared one of the more challenging aspects of the campaign. According to Veugen, it was sometimes challenging to communicate with voters who had a vague idea of what the municipality does, its responsibilities, and the challenges it has faced in recent years. Nevertheless, he did not view this solely as an obstacle. For him, these conversations also provided valuable insights, suggesting that the campaign was not just about persuading voters but also about explaining local politics in practical terms.

Looking ahead, the CDA appears to be positioning itself as constructive rather than dominant. Although it is one of the major winners of the election, the party is not leading the coalition process, being the second-largest party with D66. Veugen acknowledged this directly, saying: “Of course, we’re not in the lead”, but he added that the result brings “certain responsibility”. For this reason, he said, the CDA is adopting a cooperative stance as Maastricht moves into the next political phase.

GroenLinks (Greenleft): “One of the most tense evenings.”

For GroenLinks, the election results were less about gains or losses and more about maintaining their position in an ever-changing political landscape. While other parties moved up or down, GroenLinks remained steady with four seats. The party described this as a positive outcome, stating that they were "pleased to maintain the current number of seats" and noting that the "division of seats... has been shaken up significantly". In that context, they considered staying stable to be “definitely commendable”.

Election night itself, however, was anything but calm. As the results came in from each polling station, the initial indications were not favourable for GroenLinks. The leading candidate, Luc Callemeijn, recalled how those early numbers created “a very tense and nail-biting scene”. It was only later in the evening, when results from neighbourhoods where the party traditionally performs well started to come in, that the situation began to change. Even then, the uncertainty lingered, making it “one of the most tense evenings” they had experienced.

Looking ahead, GroenLinks is clearly aiming for a different role than that in the previous term. Having spent the last four years in opposition, the party now wants to join the governing coalition. Their ambition is clear: to “join the new coalition” and “provide a wethouder” in the next city council. With coalition talks approaching, GroenLinks says they are “looking forward” to what comes next.

At the same time, they are reflecting on the campaign itself and the people behind it. Callemeijn has expressed pride in the team that supported the list, particularly highlighting the contribution of their campaign designers, where a student actively helped with designing the campaigning for GroenLinks. 

Partij van de Arbeid (Labour Party): “This is not what we were expecting.”

Election night was clearly challenging for the Partij van de Arbeid. After losing one seat, initial reactions were ones of disappointment, although the party itself views the campaign positively. They described it as a campaign with “good talks and a nice vibe” and stressed that they are still trying to understand exactly what happened.

This process of reflection had barely begun when the results came in. The party said it was too soon to draw firm conclusions, especially since the detailed results from each polling station had only just arrived. What is clear, however, is that the outcome did not match their expectations. In their own words, it was “most certainly not what we were expecting or hoping for”. Floris Soeren, 19 years old, and #5 on the list, also described the result as a "mismatch with my expectations", adding that he expected more.

At the same time, their reaction was not only about disappointment, but also about reflection. The PvdA said it wants to “take a close look at the campaign”, while holding on to the belief that it still has ‘a really good story to tell”. The tone was therefore not one of resignation, but of evaluation.

Looking ahead, the party says it wants to remain constructive in the next political phase. The PvdA has indicated that it is willing to take on a governing role, while recognising that, as the largest party, D66 will now lead the coalition talks. The party added that it is open to working with many different parties for a great future of Maastricht.

One theme they explicitly mentioned for the future is student outreach. Reflecting on their strategy, the PvdA said they would focus “even more on students”, citing a slight increase in student turnout. However, they also acknowledged that they could do better in reaching this group.

Maastricht van Nu (Maastricht of Now): “A very great result for a starting party.”

For Maastricht van Nu, the campaign was all about having a strong presence across the city to ensure that voters could not easily miss them. The party says it reached out through a variety of channels, including flyers, TV and radio, as well as social media, the written press, banners, and other campaign materials. This broad visibility formed the backbone of their campaign, reflecting the approach of a party trying to establish itself more firmly in Maastricht politics.

When the results came in, the initial reaction was one of satisfaction mixed with cautious optimism. Maastricht van Nu described the outcome as “a very great result for a starting party that had to begin from zero”. At the same time, however, election night also left room for wondering whether even more might have been possible, with the party still hoping that a third seat might come through as a remainder seat.

This combination of satisfaction and ambition is evident in the party's forward-looking approach. Rather than outlining major changes immediately, Maastricht van Nu is sketching a process of gradual growth. “Time will tell”, they say, as the party continues to “become more mature” and aims to remain “clearly visible and audible’ in local politics.

In terms of substance, the party says its direction will remain largely the same. Maastricht van Nu does not view the result as a reason to change course, but rather as an opportunity to continue its existing work with more support. Addie Redmeijer (#11) says that the party will continue to work on the same issues they have focused on for over two years, but now “in a more professional way and with a larger team”.

What comes next?

Now that the votes are in and the seats have been allocated, the real political chess match can begin: coalition talks. Which parties will team up? Which parties can actually work together? Most importantly, what will this mean for students and young people in Maastricht?

This is where campaign promises turn into real decisions. Consider student housing, cultural spaces such as LBB, bike depots, events, and the type of city Maastricht aspires to be over the next four years.

So while election night may be over, the story definitely isn’t. In many ways, this is where things get interesting. The campaign posters may come down, but the important discussions are only just beginning.

For students, this matters more than it might initially appear. The decisions made in the coming weeks could influence everything from your living arrangements to your social and study spaces, as well as your nightlife. So yes, the ballots have been counted, but Maastricht politics is far from over.