Early Results Show Riverside’s Measure Z Update Likely To Fail 

As ballots continue to be counted, early election results show Riverside residents are rejecting the city’s proposal to both increase and extend Measure Z. 

Results posted Thursday evening showed nearly 59% of voters opposed the measure. The Riverside County Registrar of Voters (ROV) is expected to post another update by 6 p.m. Friday.

“I don’t know of anybody on either side who thinks the result is going to change,” Mike Gardner, a former councilmember and Measure Z proponent, said in an interview with The Riverside Record. “I think the voters have spoken that they do not support Measure Z as presented.”

The ROV said an estimated 270,000 vote-by-mail ballots and 3,200 conditional voter registration ballots from across the county have yet to be counted. Ballots postmarked by Election Day that arrive at the ROV by June 9 also still need to be counted.

The Riverside City Council voted to add Measure Z — a sales tax approved by voters in 2016 — back onto the ballot to ask whether residents would like to increase its current 1% sales by 0.25% and extend its expiration until voters choose to repeal it.

If approved, the city estimated the increase would bring in an additional $20 million annually, which staff said the money, which would go into the general fund, would be used to cover an “urgent” overhaul of the Riverside Fire Department over the next 15 years. 

Opponents of the ballot measure said they supported the fire department and wanted to see it receive upgrades, however they did not like that the proposed change would remove the 2036 sunset clause. 

“I’m proud of voters if they voted after researching the measure,” April Glatzel, chair for the Neighbors of the Wood Streets community group, said in an interview with The Record Tuesday night. “A defeat of Measure Z would send a message that Riverside voters are paying attention, asking questions and carefully evaluating what is being proposed before agreeing to higher taxes.” 

Glatzel, in previous interviews, said she would have been more likely to support the measure if it was a special tax that specified the revenue could only be used for the fire department, instead of going into the general fund where it would be used at the council’s discretion. 

Gardner said he believed residents voted against the measure due to rising costs and the lack of guardrails. Although he believed the city would have used the increased revenue on the fire department, he understood voters’ hesitation to entrust them with even more taxpayer money. 

But the pathway to funding the fire department’s upgrades was not closed yet, he said. He believed the council, barring any legal issues, might even have the ability to bring a revised Measure Z back to the voters as early as November.

“The range of options available to the council, if they want to try again either in November or in 2028, to me runs from the 0.25% stand alone [to deciding] whether it will be special or general tax,” Gardner said. “My gut feel is that…a proposal that would be just a 0.25% increase, we could get 50%.” 

Phil Pitchford, the city’s public information officer, said in an email to The Record the city appreciated residents who participated in the election process, but was disappointed by the outcome. 
“City staff and the city council will continue evaluating Riverside’s long-term fiscal needs and service priorities through the public budget process,” he said. “At this time, the city council has not discussed or provided direction regarding any future ballot measure.”