Measure B appears headed for approval
by TP staff
Jun 04, 2014 | 5959 views | 15 15 comments | 55 55 recommendations | email to a friend | print

Voters appear to have approved Measure B, the $82 million bond proposed to modernize Tracy schools, after early ballot counting Tuesday.

Counting at the San Joaquin Registrar of Voters ended about midnight, and the bond measure was leading, with 64.29 percent of those who voted casting a ballot for it. The registrar has not yet finalized the vote count, so all returns reported so far are unofficial.

A news release Wednesday quoted Tracy Unified School District Superintendent Dr. James Franco saying the district was pleased with the results.

“Measure B is truly a victory for our students, our teachers and our staff. Tracy is a community that values education and Measure B bond funds will enhance and improve that experience here at Tracy Unified School District. Thank you to everyone who supported the bond and voted yes at the polls.”

In other local races, Sheriff Steve Moore is leading in his attempt to serve a third term with 58 percent of the vote so far. Challenger Sgt. Pat Withrow so far garnered 41.73 percent of the vote.

Moore will likely not have to face a runoff in the November 4 General Election because there were only two candidates for the Sheriff’s office and, if the results are official, he won this election with more than 50 percent of the vote.

The race to follow James P. Willett as district attorney for San Joaquin County is being led right now by Tori Verber Salazar with 77.45 percent of the vote. Attorney Gary Hickey so far has 22.24 percent of the vote.

Salazar will also not have to face a runoff election in November.

According to voting return numbers from the California Secretary of State, Rep. Jeff Denham is leading so far in his race for reelection with 57.3 percent of the vote in the 10th Congressional District. His closest challenger, Michael Eggman, has about half that vote total at 26.7 percent.

In the 9th Congressional District, which includes Mountain House, incumbent Jerry McNerney was ahead with 50.4 percent of the vote. Republican challenger Antonio Amador was the next highest vote-getter with 25.2 percent.

Susan Talamantes Eggman is ahead in her reelection campaign for the 13th Assembly District with 50.2 percent. Challenger Sol Jobrack has so far received 31.4 percent of the vote.

Those offices will have a runoff of the top two vote-getters in the November 4 General Election.

Voter turnout for San Joaquin County was 17.2 percent of 293,837 registered voters.

San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters Austin Erdman said counting the provisional and mail in ballots will not be finished until at least next week.

Get county election returns from the San Joaquin County website and election returns for state candidates and issues at the Secretary of State's website.



• Contact the Tracy Press at tpnews@tracypress.com or 835-3030.

Comments
(15)
Comments-icon Post a Comment
MrSycamore
|
June 09, 2014
The schools look pretty modernized to me! Wait, I take that back I think we need to put an electronic kiosk in front of every school! Anybody know if a committee is involved to monitor how these funds will be spent?
ertion
|
June 09, 2014
"Thank you to everyone who supported the bond and voted yes at the polls."

Aw shucks, doctor Franco, no need to thank *me*. I have no objection to paying taxes to support education of children. If only that were truly occurring in our public school system.

Go take a look at how teachers put together their lesson plans. All you'll see is numbers corresponding to codes proving that the lesson plan fulled state standard x, y, and zed. Content be d*mned. If anything coherent comes out of that, it'll be by accident. It's not the case that the teachers are incompetent and don't know things, it's that they are not really allowed to teach what they know in the first place.

So a system designed to protect kids from those teachers who are poor, ends up by gumming up the works for those teachers who have real skills.

I support publicly funded education. But public funding need NOT be the thing same as public schools. Let's shift our funding to private schools focused on education and excellence and not on political correctness to the fad of the day or furthering various political agendas.
victor_jm
|
June 09, 2014
Come on, Ertion, your comment seems to suggest if all schools were private, our woes would be gone, and you know this wouldn't be the case.

It isn't just about education.
ertion
|
June 09, 2014
victor, nothing human is without problems. That said, how can it NOT be to the benefit of parents with lower to middle income if they could send their child to a school of their choice that produced good results? Why should you have NO choice simply because you're poor?

The funded private school approach would liberate teachers as well: more opportunities at schools with more kids motivated to learn and less discipline problems.
victor_jm
|
June 09, 2014
Actually, I misspoke. Life is about understanding, about education; however, it isn't just about public or private (or formal) education. What are children doing when they aren't in school? What values do their parents have? What ought to be the focus of state-funded education? (Yes, I know, prepare children for a life of production and consumption.)

If you truly want greater academic success from children, you better be prepared to increase the funding for education, because, the way I see it, more intervention would be needed--and I am talking about a lot of intervention. In spite of what particular people have to say about our economy, it is actually doing well, because it produces everything anybody needs--some people just don't have the means to over-acquire what they need. Even if we had an official unemployment rate of 40%, our needs could still be met. Yes, education is more than certifying a dog as having the cognitive capacity to provide you with therapy, but, they, I guess it works for a lot of people.

There are so many indecent, irresponsible people--everywhere--but, hey, as long as we can feed the cows to the dogs, do you really care?
SimpleDreams
|
June 09, 2014
This additional cost is less than one month's cable/phone/internet bill. Increases to property owners is passed on to renters, so renters pay taxes.
victor_jm
|
June 09, 2014
I don't subscribe to television (cable, etc.). Also, don't presume this is a cost any property owner would like to pay or is in a position to pay. Furthermore, the assessment is unfair. However, I'm not going to go into the reasons why, because you would likely never understand them.

Do you have a different argument? And please don't tell me it's about the children, because it will always be about the children, but the question ought to be this: Who ought to be most responsible for them? As it now stands derelict, benighted individuals bring children into the world and there is no disincentive for them not too. Also, this country is intent on becoming a nation of a billion people one day--which I think is a mistake--so the immigrants will keep coming and I will be asked to pay for the education of their children.

Don't misunderstand me, we ought to be unified, but when a man is permitted to receive therapy from a dog, there is something amiss in the world.
victor_jm
|
June 09, 2014
I meant "to."
amandac123
|
June 04, 2014
Read the fine print on where the money comes from. I'm a first time home buyer in Tracy and now my taxes are going up $50 for EVERY $100k assessed value of my house. Renters don't pay for that. I have two young kids in school. And care about the schools, but didn't they get enough money. I don't know anyone that voted for this. How did it pass?
Sero7
|
June 04, 2014
How this passed is beyond me. I have to believe the voting is all rigged because of the people in town I talked to, nobody voted to approve this measure. If it's legit, well, the very people that voted to approve this are going to be the people that will complain in the next three years when the school district comes asking for more. Wake up people. If you keep on giving, they will keep on asking! In short, here is how it works. The school districts have the money, but if they can sucker you into giving them the money for things, they use your money for projects, and waste their money on the things they really want to spend it on. Unbelievable!!!!!!!!!!
yepper
|
June 04, 2014
What ? ... Did everyone forget about the SEQUESTER ? The "DO NOTHING CONGRESS" ? UNBELIEVABLE ! What a bunch of "SHEEP" BAaaaaaaa!
Hahahahahaha
|
June 04, 2014
You're either undermedicated or overmedicated.
mtrew
|
June 04, 2014
Gee now maybe TUSD will water our fields at Kimball? NOPE

We just got word that TUSD will not water our fields for the next school year (baseball, softball, soccer practice fields)and Kimball needs to find alternative options. WHAT?

I hope everyone concerned will go to the school board meeting next Tuesday the 10th at 7pm.
Point_of-Order
|
June 04, 2014
mtrew: Messure B has nothing to do with watering the fields at KHS.

Educated voters took the time to understand what it will and won't do.
mtrew
|
June 05, 2014
I was being flippant. Just thought it looked like the right place to bring up the fact that TUSD has decided not to take care of a school they built!


We encourage readers to share online comments in this forum, but please keep them respectful and constructive. This is not a space for personal attacks, libelous statements, profanity or racist slurs. Comments that stray from the topic of the story or are found to contain abusive language are subject to removal at the Press’ discretion, and the writer responsible will be subject to being blocked from making further comments and have their past comments deleted. Readers may report inappropriate comments by e-mailing the editor at tpnews@tracypress.com.