.
Feedback

County Ballot Measures Update

In the last update before Friday's final audit, the car rental tax could pass, parking facility taxes are failing, and JUHSD parcel tax is narrowly passing.

 

San Mateo County voters appear to have narrowly approved a new tax on car rental businesses in the county and a handful of measures benefiting school districts, according to the most recent results from the June 5 election.

Today's update was the last before the Elections Division conducts a manual audit that is open to the public on Friday. Measure T, which could bring the county an estimated $7.8 million annually by imposing a 2.5 percent tax on car rental agencies in unincorporated areas, appears to have barely passed with 50.1 percent support, Chief Deputy Elections Officer David Tom said.

Measures U and X, which would have raised the transient occupancy tax by 2 percent and imposed a new tax on parking facilities, appear to have failed, both garnering only 47 percent support.

All three measures required a majority vote to pass. Two parcel tax measures benefiting local school districts also appeared to have been approved. Both required two-thirds approval, or 66.7 percent of the vote, to pass.

Measure W, which will levy a $67 parcel tax on properties in the Redwood City School District, earned 69.2 percent support, according to today's results.

Measure Y, a $48 parcel tax on properties in the Jefferson Union High School District, was just above the threshold it needed late today, with semi-official results showing the measure with 67.3 percent support.

An $81 million bond measure to benefit the Cabrillo Unified School District -- Measure S -- also appeared to have passed, with 56.5 percent voting to support it.

The measure needed 55 percent approval to pass. After Friday's manual audit, the election results will be submitted to the state for certification in one to two weeks.

CONTACT: San Mateo County Elections Division (650) 312-5222

--Bay City News Service

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Pacifica Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Loading comments ...
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Janet Arline Barker May 17, 2013 at 11:18 am
Awesome! Next Tuesday, Thursday or Friday are open. Name a time and place. I used to write 3Read More different columns for San Bruno, Millbrae, and Burlingame Patch. I am ready to write for Pacifica Patch & blog too. Here's my personal blog...I do sporadically. Www.art-Janet.blogspot.com My art studio is at Sanchez Art Center #11
Christa Bigue (Editor) May 17, 2013 at 11:05 am
When can we meet for coffee Janet? Since you're the first one to post in our biz update section youRead More get to have coffee and chat with your local Patch editor! Email me at christa.bigue@patch.com and we'll find a date and place.
Anon. April 14, 2013 at 01:43 am
I can start with the comments on the Theravance drug, fluticasone fluroate - the active moiety inRead More this compound is the same, fluticasone (proprionate) that has been marketed by GSK for the same indication for approximately 25 years. Indeed, that patent is so old, and the drug has such a proven track record for safety and efficacy, that the patent has expired and there are generic versions available. There is also in implicit assumption by the author that the only reason that the FDA will approve medications in a short time span is because they are for 'life-or-limb' or unmet serious medical need. This is just not the case - regulators in many countries, including the FDA in the USA, may give accelerated approval to a product, where the safety and tolerability of a product is equivalent to a similar active agent which has already been approved. I suspect this is the case for fluticasone fluroate - but I am not privy to the details of the regulatory filing. I note that none of the companies mentioned here, nor the FDA, has provided input to this article. The journalism in this article smacks of someone trying to make a name for themselves quickly by scaring uneducated and/or anxious people. The science is just plain flawed.
Pacificat April 12, 2013 at 12:49 pm
Please tell us in what ways it is ill-informed
Anon. April 11, 2013 at 08:22 pm
Ill-informed, sensationalist rubbish.
Deb Wong March 26, 2013 at 06:09 pm
Thanks, Stacie!
Stacie Chan (Editor) March 26, 2013 at 02:51 pm
Absolutely stunning photos, Deb! Thanks for sharing. I really feel like I was there by just perusingRead More your photo gallery.
Donna Fentanes March 26, 2013 at 09:49 am
Thanks, Deb, for the videos. Now we all can take one last ride. :)
Jim Clifford March 25, 2013 at 01:08 pm
Each column gets better. I look for "The Shoe."
Deb Wong March 25, 2013 at 11:19 am
I think many of us can relate! 10 kids, huh? I was the oldest of 9, so sort of understand. MyRead More family grew up in Pacifica, & we rode over the slide every weekend when we went to the HMB airport to tend to my father's airplanes. I drove on it once, during driver's ed in high school, scary! I have an old home movie clip from 1966, going over the slide. Very overexposed, but you can still see parts of the slide in it. More recently, took 2 videos of our drive over the slide, North & south views. Going North: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kb8NKnu9Gvw Going South: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-rlN_g2LeE8