Last night, 32,661 votes were recorded in the mayoral contest. Four years ago, over 56,000 Berkeleyans voted for mayor. Given the high turnouts observed in Berkeley yesterday, it’s clear there are plenty of votes remaining to be counted.

… This morning, the registrar could not confirm how many Berkeley ballots remain to be counted. An update of both the count and the likely number is expected later today.

Other than Measures T and S, the other race likely to be affected by the further counts is the Rent Stabilization Board. Only 1,075 votes separates current third place finisher Asa Dodsworth from current sixth place finisher Nicole Drake. The top four candidates are selected for the Rent Board.

Man asleep in downtown Berkeley. (SF Homeless Project: Flickr)

The city of Berkeley has a storied history of tolerance. But that attitude is being tested by Measure S, in which the tension between tolerance and notions of quality of life is coming to a head.

The ordinance would prohibit sitting on sidewalks in commercial districts between 7am and 10pm. There are certain exceptions — most notably for medical emergencies and people in wheelchairs — and a warning must be given first. After that, violators would have to pay a $75 fine or perform community service.

On KQED’s Forum show on Friday, both the Measure S supporter and opponent were clear that they are sympathetic to the homeless and their need for services. But they strongly disagreed over whether Measure S would help those in need to get food, shelter or other services.

“If this law were going to get people who needed treatment into treatment, if this law were going to get people who needed housing into housing, I would be first in line to say ‘yes,’” said Elisa Della-Piana, of the East Bay Community Law Center. But, “there’s nothing in this law that is connected to services.”

According to the ballot measure, Berkeley will spend $2.8 million in fiscal year 2012 on services for the “homeless, mentally ill and other disadvantaged residents, including meals, shelters (and) … housing.”

Coady spends her professional life working with addicts, but is sympathetic to business owners and their complaints about people sitting and panhandling on sidewalks. “The business owners I talked to on Shattuck and Telegraph said that ‘yes, this was a major problem,’” she said.

She added that she’s a Berkeley native and used to shop small neighborhood stores, but that’s in the past. “I don’t go to Shattuck or Telegraph to shop any more,” she told the Forum audience. “I go to Solano or El Cerrito, and it’s because I don’t like the aggressive panhandling. It really bothers me. When I was on Shattuck yesterday, I had to step over a homeless person to get into a gelato store I wanted to go into.”

But Della-Piana said there are laws already on the books barring aggressive panhandling and blocking sidewalks. “This law would make it a crime to sit on the sidewalk; it makes sitting a criminal act,” said Della-Piana. “There’s nothing on the law that says it’s just homeless people…. San Francisco’s original sit-lie law was passed back in 1968. It was targeted at hippies and several years later in the 70s, it was starting to be used against LGBT folks. … Once a law is on the books, we can’t control how it’s enforced and this law would put in the hands of the police entirely who can and who can’t be in public spaces.”

Listen to the complete discussion on Forum: