Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Oct 31, 2014 at 10:09 am
Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Martin claims that she has read Measure M and she knows from other postings that what she is saying is a falsehood.

Section 3 of Measure M contains and freezes forever TEN different definitions and three of them are different than the similar definitions in the Specific Plan.

Here is a sample of Sec 3:
"ECR SPECIFIC PLAN AREA DEFINED. When referring to the “ECR Specific Plan Area,” this initiative measure is referring to the bounded area within the Vision Plan Area Map located at Page 2, Figure I, of the El Camino Real/Downtown Vision Plan, accepted by the Menlo Park city Council on July 15, 2008, which is attached as Exhibit 1 to this measure and hereby adopted by the voters as an integral part of this initiative measure. "

Measure M also has four new limits.

Measure M requires that "the voter- adopted development standards and definitions set forth in Section 3, above, may be repealed or amended only by a majority vote of the electorate of the City of Menlo Park voting “YES” on a ballot measure proposing such repeal or amendment at a regular or special election.

Measure M also states "Consistent with the Planning and Zoning Law and applicable case law, the City shall not adopt any other new provisions or amendments to the Policy Planning Documents that would be inconsistent with or frustrate the implementation of the voter-adopted development standards and definitions set forth in Section 3, above, absent voter approval of a conforming amendment to those voter-adopted provisions. "

Measure M also states "PRIORITY.
After this measure becomes effective, its provision shall prevail over and supersede all provisions of the municipal code, ordinances, resolutions, and administrative policies of the City of Menlo Park which are inferior to the Planning Policy Documents and in conflict with any provisions of this measure. "

[Portion removed; see Editor's Note below.]

Note that Martin does not quote actual language from Measure M - the supporters never do because the actual language always proves them wrong.

Editor's Note: Please stop accusing all Measure M proponents of "lying" about the facts. Webster's first definition of the verb "to lie" is "to make a statement that one knows is false, esp with intent to deceive." Reasonable people can disagree in interpreting the measure's provisions. In fact, opponents argue that there's enough ambiguity that some questions might have to be settled in court.

Posted by Peter Carpenter
a resident of Atherton: Lindenwood
on Oct 31, 2014 at 1:34 pm
Peter Carpenter is a registered user.

Let me restate my point - Martin is posting information about Measure M which she has been told is inconsistent with the facts. There is no "interpretation" of the Measure involved when the actual text of the Measure differs from what someone claims the text to say.

I reserve judgment on her comprehension or her motivation in repeatedly posting incorrect information.