|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
It’s official. Save Downtown Menlo can start collecting signatures for its initiative to protect the downtown parking lots and block Menlo Park’s planned affordable housing project. City attorney Nira Doherty finalized the ballot measure title and summary on May 29.
The ballot measure would require voter approval before the city council could repurpose downtown parking lots for affordable housing. Residents and business owners launched the initiative to block the council’s plan for 100% affordable housing developments on three parking plazas.
The city council sent out a request for qualifications from potential developers on Jan. 14 and reviewed the responses on June 3. Despite the pending ballot measure, a majority of the city council decided to move forward with sending a request for proposals, the next step after a request for qualifications, to some developers.
For the initiative to go on the ballot, supporters will need 2,104 signatures — 10% of registered voters in the city — within 180 days.
Van Kouzoujian, one of the registered proponents, told this news organization that Save Downtown Menlo planned to begin collecting signatures outside of Draeger’s in Menlo Park this week.
Save Downtown Menlo has also formed a campaign committee. The effort to raise funds is separate from its legal fund that is supporting Save Downtown Menlo’s lawsuit against the city, alleging it does not have the right to repurpose the parking lots.
Over the next several months, Menlo Park residents will likely be asked to sign the petition through door-to-door campaigning and at various businesses.
To help voters make an informed decision, The Almanac asked both Save Downtown Menlo, and Menlo Together, which opposes the ballot initiative, to submit pro and con answers to five questions.
The proponents: Save Downtown Menlo is a coalition of residents and business owners that was formed to oppose the city’s plan to develop the downtown parking lots. It has also filed a lawsuit against the city. To learn more about the organization, visit savedowntownmenlo.org.
The opponents: Menlo Together advocates for affordable housing at all income levels. It envisions a pedestrian and bike-friendly downtown with safe and affordable homes for everyone. It has firmly opposed several attempts by residents to block various affordable housing developments. It works closely with the San Mateo County Housing Leadership Council. Learn more about Menlo Together at menlotogether.org.
The Almanac lightly edited the responses. Each side was limited to 200-word responses.
What position should voters take on the ballot measure to require voter approval for repurposing the downtown parking lots?
Proponents: Voters should support the measure. Downtown is the heart of our city, and the people of Menlo Park care deeply about its future. This ballot measure recognizes that the eight public parking plazas are essential to the downtown’s vitality. Repurposing them would be an irreversible decision with far-reaching, potentially devastating, consequences. A change of this magnitude, which would alter our city forever, deserves direct community approval.
Opponents: No matter what you think about the proposal to build new affordable homes on city-owned parking lots, this measure is a bad idea. It would replace a democratic and transparent decision-making process informed by input from the public and professional expertise of city staff. In its place would be an endless series of expensive and divisive yes/no political campaigns.
This ballot measure is an attempt to block desperately needed new affordable homes downtown. Menlo Park is one of the most expensive places to live, and teachers, plumbers, small business owners and young families can’t afford to live here. Businesses can’t recruit and retain talent.
The measure would impose a political veto mechanism for any future change, even projects that would revitalize downtown.
This measure doesn’t “save downtown.” It protects the status quo and stalls solutions for our community’s most pressing needs today and into the future.
Should voters or the city council decide the future of the parking lots?
Proponents: Voters should decide. We respect and appreciate the service of our City Council – but councilmembers come and go. Our community is here to stay. The parking lots are public lands that have been serving the Menlo Park for decades and are still heavily used today. A decision to change their use, or to declare them “surplus land,” is too significant, and too permanent, to be decided by a three-person majority of whichever City Council happens to be in office. The people should decide.
Opponents: Voters elect city council members to lead their communities. Menlo Park’s city council consists of our neighbors who dedicated their time to study complex issues with inherent tradeoffs and make decisions with the city’s best long-term interests at heart. City council deliberations are public and transparent, informed by expert city staff including legal counsel, and by law, include multiple opportunities for public input.
Ballot box decisions eliminate transparency and empower those with the loudest voices and deepest pockets, and they waste taxpayer money that could otherwise go to parks, libraries and roads.
Menlo Park’s housing plan is the result of a years-long, transparent process that involves staff, city council and public input. Furthermore, the city and all of the potential developers have plans for extensive community engagement that will incorporate feedback from multiple perspectives into the project.
Our city council members should make decisions about land use, just as they make decisions about budgets, parks and roads.
Should someone who supports, opposes or is undecided on affordable housing on downtown parking lots support your position on the ballot measure?
Proponents: Anyone who respects the democratic process should support this measure. It doesn’t block housing, it simply requires that if someone wants to use our public parking lots for housing or anything else, they must first convince the voters. It’s about accountability, not ideology. No matter your view on housing, we can agree that public land should not be repurposed without public consent. Importantly, the measure imposes no restrictions on downtown housing in general — it only ensures that changing the use of these parking lots requires a vote of the people.
Opponents: The ballot measure is a bad idea regardless of one’s opinion on the plans for new affordable homes downtown. Menlo Park’s City Council was elected to make hard decisions about how best to meet community needs. Members understand the community best, having dedicated countless hours to it, and they have access to experts, data, legal counsel and public input.
Even if you’re unsure about housing on these particular lots, we should let our public process work. There will be multiple hearings, impact studies and opportunities for input on any proposal. This measure shuts down those conversations before they even begin.
Ballot measures are blunt instruments. Once passed, they’re hard to change, even if better ideas come along or conditions shift. This isn’t about one project, it’s about whether we want a city that can evolve, adapt, and plan for the future.
If we care about good government, fiscal responsibility and community input, we should oppose this unnecessary measure.
What are the motivations behind your position on the ballot measure?
Proponents: We love downtown Menlo Park and want to protect its future. Our downtown can only thrive if it is easily accessible — and convenient parking is essential to that. Without it, we risk losing the businesses, jobs and community activity that give downtown its vibrancy. We do not oppose downtown housing, but we do oppose sacrificing the parking infrastructure that makes downtown viable. There are other housing alternatives that don’t pose an existential threat to our businesses, and we believe those should be pursued instead.
Opponents: We want a vibrant downtown that is accessible to people of all backgrounds. Building housing along with necessary replacement parking, as the city plans to do, will bring new customers and employees to the heart of Menlo Park’s downtown, creating new opportunities.
The ballot measure would hobble economic development in our downtown. The measure gives a small, well-organized group the power to delay or kill any future plans to enhance our downtown, whether for housing or something else.
The strategy could also backfire massively. State law requires all cities to do their fair share to provide homes for those who need them. If the ballot measure passes, it will increase the risk that Menlo Park yet again loses local control over land use, resulting in unplanned megatowers in residential neighborhoods.
How will the measure succeeding or failing to get on the ballot affect Menlo Park?
Proponents: If the measure qualifies for the ballot, voters will have the opportunity to enact an ordinance requiring that any change to the use of downtown parking plazas must first be approved by a public vote. The ordinance would apply retroactively to May 15, 2025, protecting the plazas in the meantime. But if the measure fails to qualify, the city may move forward with plans to declare the lots “exempt surplus land” and make them available to developers — despite widespread public opposition. Menlo Park residents could be left watching helplessly as the land that anchors their downtown is given away.
Opponents: If the measure qualifies, Menlo Park will spend taxpayer dollars defending it, studying it and holding an election, even if it’s ultimately rejected by voters. That’s money we could spend on schools, parks, or infrastructure — and affordable homes.
As of now, the measure has had no impact on the city’s progress towards developing hundreds of desperately needed new affordable homes on three of the city’s downtown parking lots, near transit, shops and services. If it does cause delay it’s important to remember that our state housing obligations won’t go away. Failing to plan for housing puts us at legal and financial risk. It also opens the door to state intervention and loss of local control, such as more mega-projects like the 39-story 80 Willow Road development proposal.
On the other hand, if the measure fails to qualify, Menlo Park can move forward with open, transparent planning and finally make progress on smart, equitable downtown development.
Read The Almanac’s previous coverage of the ballot initiative and the housing proposals.
Editor’s Note: This story was updated to correct a typo and to clarify Menlo Together opposes the ballot initiative.
Redwood City police warn public after woman’s necklace stolen in ‘blessing’ scamOctober 28, 2024 11:05 am