The campaigns for and against Measure P, the initiative to stop the city’s plans to put public housing on downtown parking lots, have raised a combined $500,000.
A “yes” would require voter approval for any attempt by the city to put public housing on the downtown parking plazas. It would also require a vote if the city attempted to sell, trade or lease the plazas, or built anything on them that would reduce parking.
A “no” vote opposes voter approval for any city plan that would reduce parking capacity in the plazas.
‘No’ side leads in contributions
The “no” side is ahead in fundraising. The “no” campaign, led by Menlo Park Neighbors and Small Business Owners for Affordable Homes, has raised over $300,000.
Donors include two nonprofits, Grove Action Fund ($20,000), an advocacy organization led by Karen Grove, co-founder of the “No on Measure P” campaign, and MidPen Housing Corporation ($5,000), a housing developer in the Bay Area.
The largest individual donors, contributing over $1,000, include Andrew Baratz Ehrich ($10,100), Elizabeth Burr ($6,000), Jennifer Schindler ($5,023.87), Joseph Daniel Fantuzzi ($5,000), Carol Orton ($3,000), Jennifer DeBrienza ($2,500), Kin-Ching Wu ($2,094.55), John O’Farrell ($2,500), Barbara Coll ($1,570.99), John McKenna ($1,262.09), Brian Kissel ($1,100), Vamsi Velagapudi ($1,047.43) and Ana Williamson ($1,047.43).
Anke Farber, Heather Hopkins, Stephen Levy, Jacqueline MacDonald, Keyko Pintz, David A. Roise and Michelle Swenson donated $1,000.
‘Yes’ side’s donations
On the “yes” side is Save Downtown Menlo, which has raised over $200,000.
The largest individual donors, contributing $1,000 and over, include James Boettcher ($6,417.65), Nadine Pflueger ($6,139.57), Jon Woodruff ($5,000), Kevin Kennedy ($2,000), Rick Onorato ($1,285.03), Lynne McClure ($1,125), Sally Morton $1,070.05 and Jeannete Ritchie ($1,000).
Ballots will go out Oct. 5 for the Nov. 3 general election. The measure requires a simple majority to win.
If it wasn’t for the “Legal Defense” clause in the ballot initiative, I’d be yes on P. I don’t know why we want to waste taxpayer dollars so these ballot initiative authors can fight a lawsuit on MY dime. What if Rob Bonta wants to settle with us after we get sued? Too bad, the ballot initiative authors can keep fighting the lawsuit with the most expensive lawyers they can find until they get the outcome they want (or lose spectacularly) and there’s nothing we can do about it because we didn’t elect them.
This whole ballot measure is a scam. No wonder no city council candidate has come out to support it.
If you want to really waste tax dollars then vote “NO” on P. Read Combs newsletter from the week. The geniuses we have on city council made bad assumptions and the proposals from the developers will cost the taxpayers “ranging from approximately $20 million to $45 million.” That’s only IF the development comes in on budget. So vote No and get out your checkbook. Grab his newsletter and read all about it.
You don’t understand the “legal defense” clause. It’s common in ballot measures. It means that if Measure P passes, and the city refuses to defend it in court, then the proponents can defend it.
The clause became common after Prop 187 passed. The state government didn’t like that the Prop 187 had passed. So they convinced a nonprofit to sue to overturn 187. The stunt worked. A superior court (lowest level court) overturned the prop. Instead of appealing, the state said 187 has been overturned–and nobody could challenge that. One low-level judge overturned the decision made by millions of voters. Prop 187’s proponents could do nothing about it. Since then, this legal defense clause has become a common feature in citizens initiatives like Measure P.
So let me ask you, if Measure P passes and one of billionaire Karen Grove’s front groups sues, do you think the city will defend Measure P?
The simple fact is that we wouldn’t need Measure P at all if the city council was doing their jobs and designing a real housing plan. The easy and stupid solution is to just drop high rise developments into the downtown parking lots. Not only will that shutter virtually every business in the area but when it’s all done there will be no replacement parking provided, so nothing will come back. What a disaster! Apparently that’s perfectly OK with these dullards. If the homeowners and taxpayers of Menlo Park aren’t brain dead they will take back control this fall from the YIMBY bought and paid for fools.
Draeger’s already closed a store this year and Beltramo’s Wine and Liquors has been closed for a decade now. All that time the parking lots haven’t changed at all. If you think that these downtown businesses will all close because there is a new parking garage and more apartments near downtown, I have a bridge to sell you. Downtown Palo Alto has made money back on their parking garage 10 times over with the new downtown shopping.
Maybe these Measure P proponents should look at themselves before they tell the rest of us about how downtown should look.