Town Square

Post a New Topic

Measure T -- New Bohannon ad continues to lie about school revenues.

Original post made by Morris Brown, Menlo Park: Park Forest, on Oct 26, 2010

On page 2 of the Oct 27 Almanac, the Bohannon full page, paid ad, for the Menlo Gateway project, again carries this falsehood.

"Money for Schools"
"Approximately $1.8 million per year in revenue for the Redwood City Elementary, Sequoia Union High School, and San Mateo College districts.... "

I would think by now, that the Almanac would be unwilling to print this falsehood.

The true picture is explained in detail at

Web Link

As you can read the 1.8 million is about $1 million too high.

Again the Menlo Park K - 8 schools get no new revenue. The only school in Menlo Park, Menlo Atherton High School would receive a portion, estimated to be about 20% of $600,000 / year, based on the number of students at MA as a percentage of the whole district's student population.

The benefits of this huge project just don't come close to justifying the huge impacts.

Vote No on T

morris brown
stone pine lane

Comments (4)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by schools lose money with T
a resident of Menlo Park: Downtown
on Oct 26, 2010 at 10:34 pm

M-A is in Atherton, not Menlo Park

 +   Like this comment
Posted by interesting
a resident of Menlo Park: other
on Oct 27, 2010 at 12:23 pm

I went to a coffee two weeks ago with some candidates. I brought in your literature and challenged the candidates. It was really interesting to hear the responses.

Morris claims in his opposition mailers and in recent public forums that there will be 1799 homes forced on us as a result of jobs creation at the site. So I asked the candidates.

Morris is not telling you the entire story.

Did you know that this number is regional and not just MP?

Did you know that Morris knows this and is lying to you to scare you?

I say this because I took it as fact for month. In fact, the city is only a small percentage of this housing load. So the housing load is less than 100 homes.

When I asked one of the candidates who opposes Measure T this question, he told me it was regional homes which still have a negative impact on our community.

Well, this school money is regional too. So if you are going to use a regional number that in my mind is fictitious, you should use the regional school dollars too.

But you don't, Morris.

You use the regional housing number to fool us and you try to act like the regional school dollars is a lie.

Shameful. Your candidate will be getting no votes from me.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by straight scoop
a resident of Menlo Park: Allied Arts/Stanford Park
on Oct 27, 2010 at 4:22 pm

It looks to me as if Morris never claimed that all the new housing would be in Menlo Park. Actually, no one knows where the new housing will go but the city's consultants estimated that Menlo Park will have some of it. If not, there will be even more traffic from commuters. The project doesn't provide any housing or land despite generating the need for more. Schools in Menlo Park would lose money from additional students and no revenue from the project.

The destination of the school revenue is quite certain, however. It is based on where property taxes from the project flow. And for schools, it's not to districts in Menlo Park.

Bohannon wants everyone to believe an inflated revenue number for regional schools. The benefit is real but between 1/3 to 1/2 what is claimed, because it is revenue net of new costs and deductions of state funding for Revenue Limit districts.

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Morris Brown
a resident of Menlo Park: Park Forest
on Oct 27, 2010 at 4:52 pm


We never claimed 1800 new homes only in Menlo Park, rather 1800 homes would be need regionally. I certainly am not lying. Our group is not lying. We went to the meetings, we documented what we have posted.

What is interesting is that Henry Riggs, planning commissioner requested that the developer "identify" where 400 homes could be built.

Bohannnon refused to even do this. As a result, Henry told me he has refused to "endorse" the project, although he voted with the 4:3 majority at the Planning Commission meeting to approve the project.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: * Not sure?

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Freebirds Palo Alto shutters, Pieology to move in
By Elena Kadvany | 12 comments | 3,132 views

A Glimpse into local HS Suicide
By Chandrama Anderson | 6 comments | 2,176 views

Deny the 429 Univ Ave Project Appeal
By Steve Levy | 7 comments | 1,313 views

Now Playing - Your Dinner!
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 920 views

Water War & Peace
By Paul Bendix | 1 comment | 314 views