Video from a surveillance camera of the sign theft. Courtesy of the Los Altos Police Department.
BY ALLISON LEVITSKY
Daily Post Staff Writer
The Los Altos police yesterday released a surveillance video of someone stealing a 3-by-4-foot Yes on Measure C banner from a house at the corner of W. Edith and Los Altos avenues.
The video, which was taken from a commercial building across the street around 9:30 p.m. on Oct. 12, was enhanced to make it easier to see the person stealing the banner and the car he or she drove off in.
The car appears to be a light-colored convertible. The thief was wearing a hooded sweatshirt, but police Sgt. Brian Jeffrey said the department hasn’t identified the thief or the make or model of the car.
Video of the sign thief’s suspected vehicle.
Mary Cunneen Lion paid $100 at Kinko’s for the banner on Sept. 18. She replaced the sign after it was stolen, and that banner is still there, she said.
Lion said she installed the sign with ropes and stakes on her friend’s property shortly after buying it and that the thief would have had to have trespassed to dismantle it.
If passed on Tuesday, Measure C would put a damper on downtown development by requiring voter approval of the sale or lease of the city-owned parking plazas.
Anyone with more information about the theft has been asked to call Jeffrey at (650) 947-2662 or the anonymous tip line at (650) 947-2774.
Not the first or only instance of the No on C campaign engaging in vandalism, theft, etc to dilute or distract Los Altos residents from voting for Measure C.
And not unexpected either given the Mayor and Council members actively engaged–from the outset!–in misrepresentations about Measure C making it appear what it is not, and a history of deceit, misrepresentations and bad faith by them and City staff (see this week’s Los Altos Town Crier letter to the editor and lawsuits in Federal and State courts for details)
Sigh. This is vandalism straight up. It is wrong. However, I find it just as wrong to anonymously accuse the No on C campaign. It may be reasonable to speculate this person opposes Measure C, but that doesn’t mean the activity is part of the campaign.
Can we not stick to the actual content of the Measure and debate its merit or lack thereof without this mud slinging?
vandalism and theft are two different things
Megan, you seem so vocal on distancing this vandalism from the No on C campaign. How about you say something about Mayor Mordo’s indiscriminate, baseless assertions Measure C campaigners misled, misinformed residents in even getting it on the ballot? Or his and other council members frantic and antic efforts to confuse residents–in writing and verbally–on the purpose and intent of Measure C just so it can be defeated at the ballot?
For the record: when you were on Council you were party to sales of public land without due transparency, and stonewalled public record act requests that would have incriminated you and Council. You have no credibility to speak on Los Altos matters and it’s time you realize that.
>This is vandalism straight up. It is wrong.
Why don’t you and your cohorts on the anti-Measure C campaign do a bit homework, find out who in your camp drives the car in the video, and report that person to the PD? That would go a little way to giving you some credibility to opine on Los Altos matters.
I am not a member of the No on Measure C campaign. On balance, I do believe Measure C will no more harm than good. That is my opinion. In stating my opinion, I have not smeared the proponents of the measure nor personally attacked any individual. I condemned the behavior described, and I equally condemn those that choose to smear groups or individual people.
This need to smear and attack corrodes public discourse. It doesn’t bring us closer to finding the best possible answers to the challenges that face us.
> I condemned the behavior described, and I equally condemn those
>that choose to smear groups or individual people.
So said Trump about the white nationalists march and rampage in Virgina.
And so says Megan Satterlee about a vandal who also trespassed onto private property, and those that spoke out forcefully about that incident and the patrons of vandalism.
A reasonable person would not equate the two.
Regardless of how smoothly you try to spin things about “corroding public discourse…challenges that face us…” you are indeed showing your true nature. Frankly the challenge we face may overlap in some ways…but is significantly different in other ways esp when you equate the reaction with the provocation, outrage with willful violations of the law.
I support the Measure C campaign and actively helped post signs, including the specific banner that was vandalized and reported in this article.
This vandalism did not occur out of the blue. It follows prior attempts by Mayor Mordo to disparage–with reckless, baseless statements–Measure C and its supporters. Other council members seem agitated on Measure C.
The vandal clearly targeted a Measure C sign. Common sense says the person is a member of the anti-Measure C campaign and it is incumbent on them to turn up that person to the PD for the said vandalism. It can’t be hard for them to find who drives a white convertible, right?
Paul, there have been many “No on C” signs taken as well, including signs taken from the same location multiple times. Neither side can claim moral superiority on this issue. Your accusation that the thief is a member of the “No on C” campaign based on “common sense” doesn’t make it a fact, and is frankly insulting. Given our understanding of how much time, effort, and expense we’ve expended on our campaign we are more aware than most that stealing yard signs is not a winning strategy. We’ve also discussed the white convertible and no one has claimed knowledge of whose it is.
Finally, if Mayor Mordo’s statements regarding Measure C are baseless, then so are the statements of the Daily Post, Town Crier, Mercury News, and the many other local organizations who have all come out strongly against Measure C. Do you deny that over thirty Measure C petition signers made the effort to rescind their signatures when they learned of its true impact? If all Measure C did was protect our parks there’d be far less opposition, as shown by the City Council’s passing of an ordinance which does exactly that. It’s the other impact of Measure C, requiring costly elections for routine city business which will, in effect, shut down the Downtown Vision Plan, which is what is so dishonest about the “Protect our Parks” mantra. I’m confident that, in spite of Measure C supporters spending nearly 50% more money than the opponents of Measure C (based on the most recent FPPC filings), the citizens will recognize that Measure C is a bad idea for Los Altos and vote appropriately.
Bill, your views against Measure C are well recorded by your numerous comments in the Los Altos Town Crier and elsewhere. It is therefore no surprise you make false allegations re the No On C signs “taken as well…”. No surprise too re: the light colored convertible of the vandal in your campaign team “no one has claimed knowledge of whose it is”. Of course, of course, of course…sure, that very language “no one has claimed knowledge…” itself gives you away, your protests notwithstanding.
As for Mayor Mordo and his history of bullying women on City Council and engaging in misrepresentations and deceit (see the complaints filed with the City and Council as well as the lawsuits in Federal and State courts where he is individually named as a defendant, along with others and the City): his time for a reckoning is drawing near, at the voting stations and in court.
Bill’s “Facts” are self-serving.
Over five thousand Los Altos residents signed the petition supporting Measure C.
Far more than what was needed to be on the ballot.
That signals support across the board, not “opposition”.
A few, far less than thirty, were persuaded by the opposing party to withdraw their signatures. So what? In that same time Measure C supporters, if permitted, could have gotten 10X more to signal their support.
Simply put, given the history of bad faith and abuse of office by City Council and staff (see the ongoing complaints filed with City and in State and Federal courts), why would residents continue to place any trust or confidence in Council to act in the public’s interests on what belongs to the public?
Vote Yes on Measure C.
Vote in candidates for Council that will arrest the rot in City Council and Hall.
Bill Shephard names the PA Daily Post, the Los Altos Town Crier, Merc, and other “local organizations” to bolster his argument against Measure C.
The Daily Post and Town Crier have reported on misconduct and abuse of office by Los Altos staff and Council. That includes the termination of previous City Manager, Deputy City Manager, and City Attorney (“MemoGate”), sale of public lands without due transparency and stonewalling of resident requests for records concerning that sale, bullying by Mayor Mordo of other council members, poor governance of City staff, etc.
Perhaps they, like most Los Altos residents, are not aware of:
a) current complaints filed by residents with City and Council alleging bad faith and deceit and worse by staff, the Mayor and City Attorney and that the Council has been non-responsive (despite evidence of allegations provided them)
b) lawsuits in Federal and State courts alleging other grave violations by the City also naming staff, the Mayor etc as individual defendants.
Awareness of those facts (supported by irrefutable evidence from the City’s own records) would show why it makes complete sense to support Measure C.
It makes no sense for residents to place trust and confidence in a Council (especially on what belongs to the public! i.e., public lands) when that Council has a long record of bad faith and acting to cover up illegal conduct and protect bad actors.
Bill: your accusations about “No on C” signs being taken are baseless [Portion removed, accusations were stated without any proof offered] Stop equating fact (backed by evidence on record) with fiction (coming out of a dogmatic, ideology-driven campaign group) as it is insulting to the rest of Los Altos residents, far far more “insulting” than the manufactured umbrage you lay claim to.
>We’ve also discussed the white convertible and no one has claimed
>knowledge of whose it is.
Sure, sure, indeed your campaign “also discussed the white convertible”…and sure, sure, we are to believe you when you say “no one has claimed knowledge of whose it is.” As if we are to expect you to step up and confess who owns the car.
Residents of Los Altos noticed some noses are reaching epic lengths, way past Pinocchio’s…could they belong to your campaign cohorts, Bill?