First batch of results - Dist 4, 8:03 pm

Muratore 51.86%

Perine 35.76%

Stanford - 11.98%

Member, District 2, City Council MODESTO CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 2 Vote for no more than 1 (WITH 9 OF 20 PRECINCTS COUNTED 45%) DAVE GEER . . . . . . . . . . 280 54.79 0 0 280 AL NAVA . . . . . . . . . . . 226 44.23 0 0 226

Geer leads Nava 280-226 as of 8:03 p.m. 

JOE CATALINE . . . . . . . . . 766 35.41 0 0 766 KRISTIN OLSEN . . . . . . . . . 1,389 64.22 0 0 1,389 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 8 .37 0 0 8 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 1 0 0 1 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 129 0 0 129

Olsen leads 1,389  to Joe's 789.

Possibly 70% before nights end?

Director, Division 2 MODESTO IRRIGATION DIST, DIV 2 Vote for no more than 1 (WITH 18 OF 39 PRECINCTS COUNTED 46.15%) GLEN WILD . . . . . . . . . . 1,505 60.44 0 0 1,505 MIKE SERPA . . . . . . . . . . 971 39.00 0 0 971 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 14 .56 0 0 14 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 3 0 0 3 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 137 0 0 137 Director, Division 3 MODESTO IRRIGATION DIST, DIV 3 Vote for no more than 1 (WITH 18 OF 46 PRECINCTS COUNTED 39.13%) RICHARD L. HARRIMAN . . . . . . . 1,245 39.90 0 0 1,245 TOM VAN GRONINGEN. . . . . . . . 1,864 59.74 0 0 1,864 WRITE-IN. . . . . . . . . . . 11 .35 0 0 11 Over Votes . . . . . . . . . 2 0 0 2 Under Votes . . . . . . . . . 263 0 0 263 Director, Division 4 MODESTO IRRIGATION DIST, DIV 4 Vote for no more than 1 (WITH 17 OF 41 PRECINCTS COUNTED 41.46%) PAUL WARDA . . . . . . . . . . 1,087 52.95 0 0 1,087 CALVIN "TED" DONHAM . . . . . . . 586 28.54 0 0 586

Warda leads Ted Donham 1,087 to Ted's 586

Tom Van Groningen leads Richard Harriman 1,864 to 1,245 

Glen Wild leads Mike Serpa 1,505 votes to Serpa's 971. 

Not looking good. 

Not a bad showing for someone that really didn't campaign much.

Here we go:

STEVE COLLINS . . . . . . . . . 3,911 10.22 0 0 3,911 NANCY CLINE. . . . . . . . . . 4,438 11.60 0 0 4,438 SUE ZWAHLEN. . . . . . . . . . 6,391 16.71 0 0 6,391 SOLANGE G. ALTMAN. . . . . . . . 4,103 10.73 0 0 4,103 BELINDA ROLICHECK. . . . . . . . 2,504 6.55 0 0 2,504 RUBEN A. VILLALOBOS . . . . . . . 4,822 12.61 0 0 4,822 JOSHUA VANDER VEEN . . . . . . . 2,918 7.63 0 0 2,918 JIM STANDART . . . . . . . . . 4,038 10.56 0 0 4,038 CINDY MARKS. . . . . . . . . . 5,048 13.20 0 0 5,048

Wow.....that's a surprise. 

Collins 3,911

Cline 4,438

Zwahlen 6,391

Altman 4,103

Rolicheck 2,504

Villalobos 4,822

Vander Veen 2,918

Standard 4,038

Cindy Marks 5,048

It ain't happening... let's see if this holds up. 

Your numbers could be fudged.

Stanford loses bad in District 4, Muratore likely to take this one outright.

Dist 5 - Kristin Olsen to be reelected.

District 2 - Geer leads only by a little bit. 

MID - Serpa loses to Wild, Harriman loses a close one to Van Groningen, and Paul Warda easily beating Ted Donham.

School Board - Sue Zwahlen comfortably in front, so is Cindy Marks. 

http://www.stanvote.com/past-results/results.htm

Are you satisfied, Wayne? See for yourself, please. Thanks.

Muratore - 905 - 51%

Perine - 624 - 36%

Stanford - 209 - 12%

Most;y by 60 to 40 percent.

My guess was Serpa would kill Glen Wild.  Guess I was wrong.  Maybe those negative mailers worked????? 

Although, I like Mike Serpa.  We had a good chat when he was walking precints.  But, I know a few of my neighbors who took his signs down the more they researched him.  Specifically why they decided to vote for Glen Wild, I don't know.  But they took down the Serpa signs nevertheless.

Maybe others in the district did the same?

1. Sue Zwahlen 6,391

2. Cindy Marks 5048

3. Ruben Villalobos 4822

4. Nancy Cline 4,438

NEXT CLOSEST

5. Solange Altman 4,103

Wrong time, wrong place. 

I will not be surprised one bit if they all fail. 

All five annexation measures are losing at this point. 

A - yes 41.6%, no 58.3

B - yes 37%, no 63%

C - 40% yes, 60% no

D - 37.5% yes, 62.4% no

E - Yes 32.9%, no 67%

We'll side step those, I've aleady got people working on it.

With so many vacant homes and vacant commercial buildings, it should be no surprise that the voters are against annexing any more land for development at this point in time.

Bad timing....

Yeah, they are only advisory.  In my humble opinion, voting on them is a waste of time, whether they are approved or not (in this case, not). 

Far too many commercial vacancies out there. Voters aren't in the mood for it. 

I guess thats why you are a talking magp.......you repeat verything ohters say.

No new results since 8:03 pm - awaiting next result. That should give us a better idea of the Dist 2 race and whether Muratore takes this one outright. 

A city government ran by developer shill's

is going to be close.  I hope someone straightens out that whacked out situation.

The advisory aspect of the Measures are common knowledge.  It's not repeating. 

By the way, go check out www.stanvote.com.

Or, decide to wait until the Bee posts the official results......from their outsourced Contractors of course.

Lastly, what does "ohters" mean?

Anybody want to weigh in?

Like Snoop Dogg says....."Shillism my nism.....fosheezie."

http://www.stanvote.com/past-results/results.htm

emergency meeting tommorow, I would bet my last dollar they will not respect the voters and okay everyone of these annexations......thats for the pro-developer's on this site, is it a bet or not?..........just what I thought NO!

If Brad Johnson had actually stayed out of the race, things might have been different: 

Warda - 1,087

Donham - 586

Brad Johnson - 365

Add Donham and Johnson's votes hypothetically - 950 votes versus Warda. Emphasis on might have been different. 

PAUL WARDA . . . . . . . . . . 1,087 52.95 0 0 1,087 CALVIN "TED" DONHAM . . . . . . . 586 28.54 0 0 586 BRAD JOHNSON . . . . . . . . . 365 17.78 0 0 365

Aren't they bought and paid for?

then maybe...

Hats off to Bob and your efforts at assisting them during this campaign cycle. I mean that. You did your best - Bob worked his butt off to get where he is today. 

Seriously, what else could you folks have done differently?

Sure, I'll weigh in....

If the areas to be annexed are filled mostly, if not all, with Commercial or Industrial, then my guess is the Council will override the advisory votes. 

For residential, my guess is Council follows the advisory votes.

Im on it already, and the votes don't count anyway if they are advisory.

Look at the top vote getters in City Council races - they all raised the most amount of money. And look where it got them. 

You can either pay to play or sit on the sideline and wonder what might have been. 

I have my own opinion on what will happen....but I think the percentages just might matter.

I doubt they would do it tomorrow.  What point does it serve to annex those areas now?  No one is going to be building anything for at least another year or so (but probably more like 5).

You're right though, at some point in the future I could very well see it happening.  Disappointing considering the clear majority of the voters, and I doubt it will wait another 4 years.

Muratore lengthens lead:

Perine - 637, 35.4%

Stanford - 212, 11.8%

Muratore - 941, 52.37%

JEFF PERINE. . . . . . . . . . 637 35.45 0 13 624 ROBERT STANFORD . . . . . . . . 212 11.80 0 3 209 JOE MURATORE . . . . . . . . . 941 52.37 0 36 905

Tomorrow's City Council meeting is scheduled as such because tonight is election night.  City Council's typically do not meet on election night.

I don't believe the annexations are on the Agenda. 

Nice try though.

1. Zwahlen

2. Cindy Marks

3. Ruben Villalobos

4. Nancy Cline

Dick Lang lost the Mayoral election and someone whispered it in his ear and he got up and walked out in the middle of the council meeting.