Regardless of my views on the overall issue, I am disappointed to see this. I do not view it as a productive form of discussion.

Mr. Lanza is hardly immune from making depricating descriptions and criticisms of others.

We are so fortunate to have Mr. Lanza to look out for the best interests of the ignorant masses.

Each week it would seem Peter Carpenter can stoop no lower in his nasty little campaign of misinformation. And then he does. What possible value does this post add to any reasonable discussion of the initiative? How does this post contribute to "the thoughtful gathering place" Peter so pines for in this forum? Rhetorical questions both, as is the question of Peter's objectivity where the initiative is concerned. Poorly played, Peter.

PSTB

Posted by Peter Carpenter, a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Jul 12, 2014 at 4:34 pm
Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

I urge the Lanza/Fry supporters to be more active in this "thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion." The vote on this initiative is crucial to Menlo Park's future and informed voters are crucial to having a democratic election. The Lanza/Fry supporters need to start documenting their position by posting excerpts from the Specific Plan, the initiative and the Wise report that support their positions. And they need to start answering the many unanswered questions that have been posed to them on this forum. Unless they have decided that ignorance is their best and only ally.

Peter is usually a little more subtle in his attacks on his ignorant neighbors to the south. I wonder if there is some financial risk for Peter, or if he just foresees more obstacles in his quest for local power. There's something very, very personal in his visceral hatred for all things SaveMenlo.

Peter: maybe you should consider applying your considerable energy to your work on the fire board, the job that we voters, apparently ignorantly, elected you to do.

I think the above criticisms are fair.

My concern, poorly worded, is that the Lanza, Fry and Save Menlo have not been open and transparent either in the crafting of their initiative, the vetting of their intuitive and now in how they are choosing to spend the money that was donated in support of the initiative.

Were the donors told that their money was going to be used to support candidates for the council? What is the role, if any, of the big donor from Atherton in picking the three candidates that Save Menlo has selected to run? Why do Lanza, Fry and Save Menlo refuse to answer the many questions that have been posed to them?

From Commission won't probe Save Menlo classification (June 4, 2014):

Web Link

"Atherton resident and community activist Peter Carpenter filed a complaint with California's Fair Political Practices Commission on May 16 alleging that the group claims to be a general purpose committee when it's really a ballot-measure committee."

No real surprise that Save Menlo is a general purpose committee.

"No real surprise that Save Menlo is a general purpose committee."

Were the donations solicited to support the initiative or to support as yet unnamed candidates?

Have the donors been given the opportunity to vet the candidates whom they will now be supporting?

Who will actually chose the candidates that Save Menlo will be supporting?

Or is this donation without representation?

Lanza has now anointed his three candidates:

Kelly Ferguson, Kristin Duriseti and Drew Combs.

Kelly has been a strong supporter of Save Menlo," said Mike Lanza, one of the group's leaders. "She put a lot of energy into our efforts to collect signatures and organize volunteers. She believes in our initiative and the related issues very passionately. She's a very skilled politician, has lots of experience ... and we're very lucky to have a friend like Kelly."

Ferguson, Duriseti and Combs are the perfect trio for Save our Special Interests.

As the only candidate ever endorsed by the Menlo Park POA, Kelly should be a big supporter of binding arbitration.

One of the reasons that Lanza choose Ferguson was because Ferguson almost single handedly produced the vacant lots on the Cadillac and Derry sites - who better to Save Our Vacant Lots.

In today's Daily Post Lanza states "The clear best choice for us would be to have three candidates and only three candidates".

These folks only want three people running to fill three seats - that is an interesting way to have a democratic election. Sounds like Russia.

Fortunately Cline, Ohtaki and Keith are also running so there will be a clear choice for the voters between three sitting council members who have worked hard to keep Menlo Park moving forward and the Save Our Special Interests candidates who would keep Fergusson's vacant lot policy.