City of Menlo Park Amendment to Downtown Specific Plan, Measure M (November 2014)

Voting on Property
Ballot Measures
By state
By year
Not on ballot
Local Local property Zoning and land use Property tax

A City of Menlo Park Amendment to Downtown Specific Plan, Measure M ballot question was on the November 4, 2014 election ballot for voters in the city of Menlo Park in San Mateo County, California. It was defeated.

Measure M was initiated through a successful signature petition drive by a group called Save Menlo Park.

If approved, Measure M would have increased open space requirements, restricted new office space development projects to 100,000 square feet or less and maintained a cap of 474,000 square feet of non-residential development in the Downtown Specific Plan. The measure would have also retained the maximum limit of 680 residential units in the downtown area. Moreover, Measure M would have prevented any changes to the standards set forth or the development restrictions established in the initiative without voter approval.

Supporters said that Measure M would guarantee the "small town ambiance and village character" of Menlo Park and claimed "A yes vote on Measure M leads to a balanced mix of shops, services, restaurants, residences, offices, and open space."

Opponents argued that the measure prevented "Menlo Park’s Downtown revitalization, handcuffs the City with unworkable, inflexible rules for 30 years and damages the city, schools', and fire district finances." They also claimed that the measure would prevent essential new tax revenue from development, waste taxpayer money on unnecessary elections and open the city up to expensive lawsuits.

Election results

City of Menlo Park, Measure M
Result		Votes	Percentage
d No		6,179	61.3%
Yes		3,893	38.7%

Election results via: San Mateo County Registrar of Voters

Text of measure

Ballot question

The question on the ballot:

“

Shall an Ordinance entitled "An Initiative Measure Proposing Amendments to the City of Menlo Park General Plan and Menlo Park 2012 El Camnio Real/Downtown Specific Plan Limiting Office Development, Modifying Open Space Requirements, and Requiring Voter Approval of New Non-Residential Projects that Exceed Specified Development Limits" be adopted (quote)

”

Impartial analysis

The impartial analysis provided for Measure M is available here.

Full text

The full text of the initiative that would have been enacted by the approval of Measure M is available here.

The full text of the resolution authorizing the Measure M ballot question is available here.

Support

Yes on M campaign logo

Supporters

The group called Save Menlo Park was behind this initiative.

The following individuals signed the official arguments in support of Measure M:

• Stephen M. Schmidt, former Menlo Park Mayor
• Heyward G. Robinson, Ph.D, former Menlo Park Mayor
• Patti Fry, former Menlo Park Planning Commission Chair
• Vincent Bressler, Menlo Park Planning Commissioner
• Clark Kepler, president of the Hometown Peninsula Independent Business Alliance

Arguments in favor

The following was submitted as the official arguments in favor of Measure M:

“	Vote YES for Balanced Growth Menlo Park voters face a critical decision about our City’s future. Nothing less than our community’s small town ambiance and village character is at stake. A YES vote on Measure M leads to a balanced mix of shops, services, restaurants, residences, offices, and open space. A NO vote leads to mega-office buildings in the heart of downtown, heavier rush-hour traffic, and more commuters cutting through our neighborhoods. Thousands of Menlo Park citizens signed the petition to place Measure M on the ballot. It is supported by nine former Mayors, local business owners, and the Sierra Club. Two massive projects recently submitted to the City revealed unanticipated flaws in the 2012 Specific Plan. They call for: Building huge office complexes that will bring in thousands of out-of-town commuters. Counting private balconies and rooftops as required “Open Space”. These projects serve the interests of developers while leaving us to deal with rush-hour traffic jams and cut-through traffic. Unfortunately, City Council has been unwilling to fix these flaws. Measure M closes both loopholes. It limits the amount of office space per project while encouraging other uses. And it makes “Open Space” true open space. Vote YES on M if you want our downtown to have: Revenue-generating restaurants, shops, and hotels. More open space for parks, plazas, walkways. Safer streets for you and your children. Vibrant growth that is environmentally and financially sustainable. Developers opposing Measure M will spend huge sums to confuse, manipulate and distort the facts. Don’t be fooled. Remember, it’s OUR town, OUR future, and OUR decision. Measure M supports our community’s vision of a revitalized Downtown and El Camino Real by encouraging balanced growth consistent with the special quality of life that drew us all to Menlo Park. Vote YES on M	”
—Stephen M. Schmidt, Heyward G. Robinson, Ph.D, Patti Fry, Vincent Bressler and Clark Kepler

Opposition

Opponents

The following individuals signed the official arguments in opposition to Measure M:

• Ray Mueller, mayor of Menlo Park
• Fran Dehn, president/CEO of the Menlo Park Chamber of Commerce
• Benjamin Eiref, Menlo Park Planning Commission Chair
• Maria Hilton, governing board member of Menlo Park City School District
• Bianca Walser, chair of Menlo Park Transportation Commission

Arguments against

The following was submitted as the official argument in opposition to Measure M:

“	We strongly urge No on Measure M. Measure M creates negative impacts to Menlo Park’s Downtown revitalization, handcuffs the City with unworkable, inflexible rules for 30 years and damages the city, schools’, and fire district finances. Additional negative, unintended consequences also happen. Loss of Downtown Vibrancy Vacant, blighted lots on El Camino Real remain for years. Anticipated mix of daytime customers (professionals) and nighttime customers (new residents) supporting newly created great restaurants and retail downtown will not materialize. Unintended Consequences Increased Taxpayer Costs - future changes because of Measure M, even minor, must be made at costly city-wide elections. Increased Burden on Schools - significantly more family housing built. Increased Traffic! The mix of uses allowed under Measure M may degrade traffic on El Camino worse than current proposals. Harms Small Property Owners because limited development options and rules work against them. Unattractive, above-ground parking structures built instead of new underground parking. Planned bike/pedestrian railroad underpass may never be built, reducing safety for school children and bicyclists. Modernized Downtown Fire Station jeopardized. Significant Negative Fiscal Impacts Menlo Park, Schools and Fire Districts will lose millions of dollars annually in new tax revenue for public safety, street repair, parks or school improvements. Expensive lawsuits. Rentable, affordable housing jeopardized. In a city-wide collaborative process, Menlo Park spent 6+ years and over $1 million dollars building consensus for development standards for our Downtown that encouraged an optimum mix of uses to improve our Downtown, manage traffic and generate new tax revenue. Measure M changes that publicly created work with a secretly crafted, deeply flawed, negative impact initiative locked in for 30 years. An independent, impartial analysis studied impacts of this initiative and identified numerous negative consequences if adopted (www.menlopark.org/documentcenter/view/4683). The Menlo Park City Council unanimously opposes Measure M. We urge a No on Measure M.	”
—Ray Mueller, Fran Dehn, Benjamin Eiref, Maria Hilton and Bianca Walser

Path to the ballot

See also: Laws governing local ballot measures in California

Measure M was initiated through a successful signature petition drive by a group called Save Menlo Park. The group had to collect valid signatures equal in number to ten percent of the registered voters in the city to qualify its initiative for the ballot.

See also

• City governance on the ballot
• Local zoning, land use and development on the ballot
• San Mateo County, California ballot measures
• November 4, 2014 ballot measures in California

Additional reading

Post-election news

• The Almanac, "Menlo Park's Measure M opponents outspent proponents," February 3, 2015

Pre-election news

• Mercury News, "Consultant to be paid $15,000 to evaluate own analysis of Menlo Park downtown measure," August 21, 2014
• Mercury News, "Group asks Menlo Park to toss analysis of downtown ballot measure," August 2, 2014

External links

Suggest a link

• City of Menlo Park government website
• San Mateo County Elections Office website
• Save Menlo Park website