Note: Ballotpedia will be read-only from 9pm CST on February 25-March 9 while Judgepedia is merged into Ballotpedia.
For status updates, visit
Ballotpedia's coverage of elections held on March 3, 2015, was limited. Select races were covered live, and all results will be added once the merger is complete.

South Pasadena Unified School District parcel tax, Measure S (June 2009)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
A South Pasadena Unified School District parcel tax, Measure S ballot question was on the June 16, 2009 ballot for voters in the South Pasadena Unified School District in Los Angeles County, where it was narrowly approved.

Measure S asked voters to approve a four-year parcel tax of $288 for single parcels and $95 for each unit in four-plex parcels.

The Measure S tax was expected to generate about $1.8 million a year.

The election was conducted on a mail-in only basis.[1]

A 2/3rds supermajority vote was required for approval.

Election results

Measure S
Approveda Yes 4,158 67.6%
These final election results are from the Los Angeles County election office.

Ballot question

The question on the ballot:

Measure S: "To offset severe cuts in State funding for schools and protect the quality of education; to help prevent teacher layoffs, class size increases, and cuts including libraries, arts, music, and classroom academics, shall the South Pasadena Unified School District levy an annual special tax for four years at $95/unit in multi-unit parcels and $288 for other parcels, with a senior exemption; independent, citizens oversight committee; no funds for administrator salaries; and with every dollar staying in South Pasadena schools?"[2]

Paperwork error

The South Pasadena school district failed to submit paperwork to the Los Angeles County Assessor's Office about the newly-approved tax. As a result, when property tax bills were mailed in October 2009, the bills sent to property owners in the district did not include a line item for the new Measure S tax.

School board President Elisabeth Eilers said "This happened at a time when we were going through a lot of changes at the district."[3]

The district was forced to pay a vendor $15,000 to mail out supplementary bills to the district's property owners.


Ad for "Yes on S"

According to a local blog, those supporting Measure S were "way more organized" than those in opposition.[4]

See also

External links

Suggest a link