BY NORAH SHEPPARD-HUTCHINS
Daily Post Staff Writer
Incumbent Drew Combs said his dissenting voice on Menlo Park City Council is necessary to reflect what residents want, while his opponent, Vamsi Velagapudi, argues that Combs’ approach is not constructive to council’s decision-making process.
“It’s not like the residents agree on everything, so why should the council? If it’s really a reflection of the residents, why should the council agree?” Combs said in an interview with the Post.
Combs, 49, who works for Meta, is running for a third term to represent District 2, which includes the Willows, Suburban Park and Flood Triangle neighborhoods. Since his start on council in 2018, Combs has at times been the sole dissenting vote on council decisions.
“Whatever disagreements there are, we have to be able to get to an actual plan going forward. I haven’t seen it yet, and I’m extremely concerned that this council’s unable to do it,” Velagapudi said.
Velagapudi, 47, grew up in London and moved to Menlo Park eight years ago, and has lived in District 2 for about a year. He retired early after working at companies like Google, Cisco and HP.
Not ‘constructive’
“I think I’m running against somebody who I don’t think appropriately participates in a constructive way to get there, which is part of the reason why I want to run,” Velagapudi said.
Combs said a recent example of his voice offering a different perspective was at the city’s annual priority-setting meeting on March 13. There was debate about whether public safety should be a priority, with Combs being the one council member in favor.
Other council members argued that “core services” shouldn’t be a priority. Combs said residents showed up to the meeting expressing concerns about safety that he felt obligated to address.
“I was like even if it is the case that the concern these residents have isn’t aligned with reality, or metrics or any sort of policing numbers that you would point to, their concern is real and their fear is real,” Combs said. “And we have an obligation to address that, so that should be a top priority for us.”
Combs said he also offered a different perspective during discussions about whether subsidized housing should be built on downtown parking lots.
“I said I support housing downtown, but maybe let’s start with one parking lot, that way we’re persevering most of the parking that go around, and then we can go through this process in a way that brings the businesses and brings the residents along,” Combs said.
He said although his perspective was not on the winning side that time, it’s still important for the council to have that kind of voice.
Combs opposes Sunset towers
Combs was also the first council member to come out against the 80 Willow project, which is a proposed development that includes an up to 39-story building on the former Sunset Magazine campus.
Velagapudi said saying you’re against something is easy, but coming up with a compromise is a hard part.
“One of the things that we found in our last housing element process is that the council couldn’t quite come together,” Velagapudi said. “And while the state had a big part to play in why we missed our housing element, I think the council not quite coming together also had caused problems.”
Council approved its 2023-2031 housing element on the day of the deadline, 4-1, with Combs opposed. However, the state sent it back for revisions.
“What I think Combs should have done is, if he didn’t agree with the housing plans proposed by city staff or by other city council members, he could have at least advanced his own housing plan. I don’t think I ever saw that,” Velagapudi said.
Combs also said his experience working with Meta has been used by Velagapudi against him.
“That’s something my opponent eight years ago (Kirsten Keith) used and I think I’ve been one of the most significant members of council in my timeline. So I don’t think my Meta affiliation has in any way diminished my ability to be an effective council member,” Combs said.
A major component of Velagapudi’s campaign is that he wants Meta to contribute more to the city as a top employer.
“Their jobs are helping create the need for housing, so we should be inviting them to do that,” Velagapudi said.
Velagapudi said Willow Village, a housing development put on pause in May that was proposed on behalf of Meta to offer 17,000 homes, are the kind of projects the company should be doing more of to help the city.
“My opponent works for Meta and has done so for 10 years. There’s nothing wrong with that, but it does mean there’s lots of conversations which he has to recuse himself from,” Velagapudi said. “So I put it to the voters, if voters want a council member who can go and push Meta, there’s only one person that can do that right now.”
Velagapudi’s chief complaint is that Combs is often the dissenting vote on council. I guess Velagapudi believes Groupthink is the way to go, that council members shouldn’t form their own opinions, they should go along with whatever they’re told to do by the city manager. Groupthink needs to be challenged. Velagapudi hasn’t given me a reason why he should replace Combs.
“Council approved its 2023-2031 housing element on the day of the deadline, 4-1, with Combs opposed.”
Builder’s Remedy is no joke, but Combs can’t be helped. The redevelopment of the old Sunset campus will devastate Menlo Park. Combs says he was first council member to come out against the project, whatever that means, but he is certainly responsible for not having the housing element in order.
My impression is that most Meta employees commute back and forth to San Francisco on big buses that are equipped with wifi so they can work while en route. Thus, they’re not overloading Menlo Park’s housing stock. I think Combs is more of a moderate on the housing issue rather than a NIMBY but props to him for speaking the truth. What we really need is for Bay Area cities and towns like Palo Alto, Menlo Park, Atherton and Portola Valley and others, some of whose residents have put the Bay Area on the world map, to tell useless Sacramento politicians and Prop. 40 types to go to hell.
So what’s the status of the 80 Willow project? I think it’s a terrible idea. Is Vamsi for or against it? I don’t want compromise on that. It’s an awful plan.
Nobody wants the towers at 80 Willow Rd. When council missed the deadline for the housing element, the builder’s remedy took this out of the hands of the planning commission and city council. Now council’s only option is wether or not to enter into an expensive (and likely pointless) law suit.
I would much rather have a council member who represents his district and the concerns of the residents in that district. Then somebody who just goes along with what everybody else on council wants. I have not heard anything from Vamsi that leads me to think he is a candidate that will listen to his constituents and stand up for them. I have actually seen some of his campaign flyers that lead me to couple him with the national politic we’re seeing by not going after the issues as much as going after the incumbent. I’m not sure if his attacks are even accurate.
What I can say from personal experience is that when my neighbors and I had an issue and we contacted Drew Combs, he was quick to respond and get involved working between two different parties to help resolve it and he has stayed involved as the issue has continued. That’s been my experience on other topics as well, he listens to his constituents and he gets involved in helping resolve issues. That’s what I want in a city council member.
Absolutely. All of us in Flood Triangle are extremely grateful to Drew for keeping all of that housing development traffic in Suburban Park. Payback for Measure V is hard.
If nothing else, getting rid of a council member who is beholden to Meta for his livelihood is a positive. We have one of the wealthiest companies on the planet and we run a budget deficit? There’s something fishy about that.