FREE DELIVERY (with min. order)
“THE BEST PIZZA WEST OF NEW YORK” —Ralph Barbieri KNBR 680
880 Santa Cruz Ave Menlo Park
226 Redwood Shores Pkwy Redwood Shores
(650) 329-8888
(650) 654-3333
(Next to Pacific Athletic Club)
(at University Drive)
REGISTRATION IS OPEN
ALPINE/WEST MENLO LITTLE LEAGUE
T-BALL, COACH PITCH, PITCHING MACHINE, MINORS (AA & AAA), & JUNIORS Please visit the League website for online baseball registration and information: http://www.eteamz.com/alpine/index.cf Registration closes February 22 for T-Ball, Coach Pitch and Pitching Machine Late registration closes February 8 for Minors (AA & AAA) Alpine Little League also offers recreational girls softball for 5-14 year olds who live in Menlo Park, Portola Valley, Woodside and Atherton. http://www.eteamz.com/amasoftball/index.cfm Send your inquiries to: alpinelittleleague@gmail.com Although registration is closed, it may not be too late if you hurry!
Opening Day is March 20th! Registration questions? Contact the Alpine Little League Registrar at: alpinelittleleague@gmail.com (Please contact division commissioners with all non-registration related questions.)
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE A PUBLIC HEARING WILL TAKE PLACE ON MARCH 2, 2010 AT 7:00 P.M. OR SOON THEREAFTER, AT THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE MENLO PARK CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER AMENDING THE SMOKING ORDINANCE AND ADDING A TOBACCO RETAILER PERMIT ORDINANCE NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Menlo Park, California, will consider adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 7.30 [Smoking Regulated or Prohibited] of Title 7 [Health and Sanitation] of the City of Menlo Park’s Municipal Code. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that said City Council will also consider adoption of an ordinance adding Chapter 5.26 [Tobacco Retailer Permit] to Title 5 [Business Licenses and Regulations] of the City of Menlo Park’s Municipal Code. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that said City Council will hold a Public Hearing on the above matters in the City of Menlo Park Council Chambers Building at 701 Laurel Street Menlo Park, at 7:00 p.m. or as near as possible thereafter, on Tuesday, the 2nd day of March, 2010, at which time and place interested persons may appear and be heard thereon. NOTICE IS HEREBY FURTHER GIVEN that such meeting is open to the public and all interested parties can voice their support or opposition to the City Council’s actions. /s/ MARGARET ROBERTS, City Clerk DATED: PUBLISHED:
February 12, 2010 February 24, 2010 in the Almanac
22 N The Almanac N February 24, 2010
C O M M U N I T Y
INSIDE THE ‘BOHANNON PROJECT’ BOHANNON
continued from page 21
efforts, setting up a Web site and organizing polling efforts. Public Affairs helped plot a longer-term communication strategy, and advised Mr. Bohannon on negotiating what he calls the “political realities” of developing in Menlo Park — namely, the potential for the project to be overturned via voter referendum. Patrick Corman, a veteran public relations professional and a 30-year resident of Menlo Park, works with journalists, writes the newsletter that is periodically e-mailed to some 2,000 Menlo Park residents, and “channels” the efforts of people who want to write letters and guest opinions to newspapers. The purpose of the communication work is twofold, according to Mr. Bohannon and adviser Tim Tosta, a land-use attorney cum life coach. First, the company wanted to develop a proposal that would garner wide community support. Broadcasting the company’s intentions would allow it to respond to concerns voiced by residents and council members, and to modify elements of the project in response to those concerns, they say. “We wanted to be confident we would have peoples’ support in the public hearings,” Mr. Bohannon said. “We wanted to be able to say to the council, ‘We’ve been out in the community, and there’s a lot of support for this project.’” The outreach effort is also geared toward addressing the possibility of a voter referendum, Mr. Bohannon said. If the company can inform a wide swath of residents about the proposal, they won’t feel blindsided when the council considers it. The public polls are designed to gauge whether the project would survive a referendum vote, to aid in “messaging,” and to get input on design, he said. Whose air war?
The facts concerning the Bohannon company’s communication efforts are not a point of contention. Nor, by and large, are the company’s intentions, though Mr. Bohannon and project opponents use different terminology to describe what he’s trying to accomplish. The divide between the Bohannon company and its critics is more a matter of attitude. While Mr. Bohannon and his advisers say the work the company has invested so far is geared toward building community consensus on the project, some prominent critics describe those efforts as an attempt to overwhelm the city with a big-money campaign. Referring to that campaign, former council member Paul Collac-
chi said: “This really defines what America is, doesn’t it? It’s what we’re all struggling with. Is it a dollar a vote, or is it a man a vote?” Describing the Bohannon company’s attempts to foster a “broad-based conversation,” Mr. Tosta said: “The political insiders have a disproportionate share of the air time, but at the end of the day, the voters vote.” While Mr. Bohannon maintains that he has a responsibility to inform the community about the project, and to help the council understand the level of support for it, Councilwoman Kelly Fergusson argued that he should leave that to the city. The fact that it’s Mr. Bohannon behind the communication effort, rather than a developer with fewer ties to the city, has served to make matters even more complicated.
‘This is the game I have to play. I have to sell my family and the neighborhood on the project, and then somehow I have to get it through the public process.’ DAVID BOHANNON
“It’s baffling to me why he would spend so much money on consultants, instead of sitting down, shoulder-to-shoulder, and working out a project that is a win-win,” Ms. Fergusson said. “It’s clear what their motivation is: They want to maximize their profit. From the city’s perspective, we want good land use, we want a good deal, and we want to minimize the impacts. We have more of a multi-faceted bottom line.” Councilman Andy Cohen called the Bohannon company’s communication efforts “indecent,” especially a recent poll the company conducted in the midst off negotiations with the city, though he said he couldn’t fault Mr. Bohannon for playing the game. “To the extent that they are building an effort to attack this council for not doing exactly what he says we should do, that’s not fair,” Mr. Cohen said. “That’s not good-faith negotiations. And, lord knows, his experts are beating the bushes to bring out every bit of support they can drum up for this project.” People on both sides argue that it is they who are trying to engage people in a substantive manner, countering efforts to con less-involved residents into blindly supporting or opposing the project. Mr. Collacchi accused the Bohannon company of preparing for an “air war” to bombard the
community and the council. “He will make no substantive modifications to the project, he will just reposition it” in response to community concerns, he said. “He wants an army of people to show up at council meetings and say, ‘We favor this,’ to write editorials, to give the appearance of public opinion where there is none. It snowballs. You convince the council, and you convince other people.” The activist’s response, he said, would be to go door-todoor informing people about the project — something that’s tough to do in your free time. That’s just what Mr. Bohannon has done, Mr. Tosta said: calling people who raise objections about the project and meeting with critics, such as members of Mr. Cohen’s circle of advisers, to discuss their concerns directly. Mr. Bohannon and Mr. Tosta say they’re trying to prevent a small group of activists from dominating the discussion, a trend Mr. Bohannon said he has seen play out in several recent Menlo Park land-use debates. Mr. Tosta spoke of a continual effort to ward off “hackers,” using the term to describe people who oppose a project not on its merits, but to gratify their own ego. “You have a software developer who spends 10 years developing a program, working with discipline and creativity, and then you have a hacker who says, ‘I bet I can take that down,’” he said. “These are people who use the process to advance an agenda that is principally a self-esteem issue: ‘I want to be seen, I want to be heard, I want to have power.’” And he described the struggle to get people interested in development issues in much the same terms that Mr. Collacchi did. “You’re better off with more people engaged,” he said. “The problem is, with all the inputs in our culture, it’s real hard to keep up that high level of engagement in local public process. ... There’s a trend toward having projects dominated by non-representative voices.” The debate shaping up around the project is nothing new to Mr. Bohannon, long familiar with Menlo Park’s rollicking political scene. But there remains the uncomfortable fact that many of the people criticizing the project, and the campaign behind it, have sent their kids to school with Mr. Bohannon’s, worked with him on political campaigns, or exchanged greetings with him in the grocery store. “Remember, this is a guy I like, this is a guy who is one of us,” Mr. Cohen said. “He’s Menlo Park. ... He’s generous, his family has a history of generosity. This is not a pleasant situation for anyone.” A