Pacific Elementary is one of two school districts hoping to secure bond money this election with 55 percent vote.
Our elections may be more important than ever. Local governments' responsibilities are growing, while cash flow dwindles. Each voter plays a vital role in the future of county services and how they will be paid for. Here are our picks for measures around the county:
Measure M: Pacific Elementary Bond: Yes
Like Pajaro Valley schools, the Pacific Elementary district (made up of a single school in Davenport) wants to replace aging roofs, make tech improvement and make much-needed fixes to the tune of $830,000 in bonds for those in the district—with an independent committee to watch the funds.
Measure N: Santa Cruz County Hotel Tax: Yes
Measure N raises TOT taxes charged to vacation rentals and hotels to 11 percent, just a 1.5 percent increase—an important slice of revenue for a cash-strapped county with a growing list of responsibilities.
Measure O: City of Capitola Tax Increase: Yes
This quarter-cent sales tax increase provides a boost to a city hit hard financially by the 2008 recession (massive flooding, which happened in 2011, didn’t help).
Measure P: Santa Cruz Desalination: No
Let’s face it, this measure was born out of some voters’ anger at the Santa Cruz City Council over their handling of desalination. Whether or not that anger is legitimate, this measure most definitely is not. All it would do is give city voters the right to vote on any desal proposal. However, they’ve already been promised the right to vote on any desal proposal, making this the worst kind of proposed legislation: the redundant kind.
Measure Q: Santa Cruz City Hotel Tax: Yes
This measure would raise the TOT taxes by 1 percent to the same rates proposed for the county in Measure N. Tourists, who already impact on the city infrastructure when they visit, won’t know what hit them. Actually, they probably won’t notice.
Measure R: Watsonville Mobile Home Parks: Yes
With legal threats to rent control constantly looming, Watsonville mobile home park residents approached their city and said they would be willing to pay this monthly $5 fee to help cover the cost of defending their comfy, reasonably priced metal homes. Fair enough.