Opponents of Measure A spent $3,879 to fight Woodside's Measure A, an initiative to allow consideration of developing outdoor community gathering spaces, campaign finance reports show.
Save Rural Woodside, a group opposed to the Nov. 2 ballot measure that would change zoning on two parcels of land in the center of town, spent the funds on yard signs and campaign mailers, according to a filing that covers the period between Jan. 1 to Oct. 12.
Resident Jerry Anderson spent $1,758 on yard signs, while the campaign lists "various individuals" as responsible for $2,068 of in-kind donations for yard signs and mailers.
Proponents of Measure A have received about $1,632 in in-kind donations for yard signs, banners and stickers, according to the campaign's Oct. 16 filing. Before that, Bacchus Management Group and the owner of Robert's Market gave donations to the Yes of Measure A campaign.
Comments
Registered user
Woodside: Mountain Home Road
on Nov 8, 2021 at 12:30 pm
Registered user
on Nov 8, 2021 at 12:30 pm
Ironic (and not surprising) to see that after complaining vociferously about the "corporate money" supporting the "Yes" side, the "No" side actually ended up spending far more.
Woodside might change here and there, but the hypocrisy will never go away!
Registered user
Woodside: Skywood/Skylonda
on Nov 8, 2021 at 12:39 pm
Registered user
on Nov 8, 2021 at 12:39 pm
This saddens me. The main argument was that we shouldn't take away what the No campaign portrayed as Woodside protected open space from the heart of downtown. What true is that this parcel is private property owned my an individual who supported the change. I wonder what the owner will do with this piece of land if Measure A fails.
Maybe Jerry and the rest of the vocal No campaign should have reached out to the parcel owner. I sure hope the very slender three vote margin for yes holds, and the No crowd doesn't find out the hard way that this wasnt what they said it was. This land near the shopping area isn't, and never was, the property of Woodside or "protected open space".
Registered user
another community
on Nov 21, 2021 at 3:50 pm
Registered user
on Nov 21, 2021 at 3:50 pm
I was a Town Council Member from 1991-1995. Is the property in question what was known as the Matheson Property, adjacent to Town Hall and behind the Village Pub? If so, there was an uproar when it was discovered that the Town had tried to condemn the property with no public notice and had incurred huge legal expenses in doing so. A limited parking assessment district was formed of only the merchants directly surrounding the property to try to fund the effort. Does the current Council know that history... and that and other similar secret actions led to a Grand Jury Investigation?
Just curious!