Town Square

Post a New Topic

Why Boyle-Duboc-Winkler Lost The Election

Original post made by ElectionWatcher, Menlo Park: Sharon Heights, on Nov 7, 2006

History (and the present) tell us why Boyle-Duboc-Winkler have lost this election.

They were swept into power back in 2002, not because of the supposed "residentialist" issue, but because the city council made a huge blunder with the Santa Cruz Avenue traffic-calming fiasco. Look back at the vote count:
Web Link

West Menlo was the key to their victory - the area most affected by that traffic calming project.

Fast forward to 2006 - this whole "residentialist" issue is of much less concern to average voters in the wake of the "dot-com" bust. Even Boyle-Duboc-Winkler haven't brought it up as a campaign issue.

Instead, what is their signature issue?:
Putting $17 million worth of playing fields on a landfill at the edge of town, across 101. (While a utility tax that they support is also on the ballot.)

I'm reminded of the phrase:
No matter how much lipstick you may put on a pig, it's still a pig.



Comments (1)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by CITYELECTIONWATCHER
a resident of Menlo Park: Central Menlo Park
on Nov 11, 2006 at 10:48 pm

The very narrow view, that the 2002 election was won by Winkler, DuBoc and Jellins, because of the Santa Cruz fiasco, is certainly not nearly the whole story.

There was complete chaos among the "residentialist" group, which resulted in splitting the camps and thus the votes. There was almost no prior organization and in fact Toni Stein was recruited at the very last minute.

The Sand Hill Road expansion, which Mr. Schmidt engineered split the group. Schmidt then advanced the candidacy of Mr. Halleck, who was going to be his replacement. Mr. Halleck had more than running for council on his agenda, including being a poster child for the openly GAY movement. This might be an admirable stance in running for office in San Francisco, but certainly not here in much more conservative Menlo Park.

Then Eric Kinney ran on the anti bike tunnel theme. He was supported by his Father, Chuck. Chuck was the most popular member of the council, but he only worked for the candidacy of his son, leaving out to hang the other candidates. This hurt their chances greatly.

So the whole movement was split by the bike tunnel question, which literally threw the Linfield neighborhood into the arms of Winkler, DuBoc and Jellins.

This was a very temporary relationship, however, as evidenced by the 2004 election, when Fergusson and Judge Cohen were elected.

The scene in now back to a more normal status now, since the newly elected councilmen, Robinson and Cline are certainly going to listen to the citizen of the city, have an open government and not just pay patronage to realtors, and developers.


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

Email:


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

Local picks on 2015 Michelin Bib Gourmand list
By Elena Kadvany | 8 comments | 3,583 views

Charter School Proposal Steeped In Unintended Consequences
By Erin Glanville | 51 comments | 2,086 views

A Surprise!
By Cheryl Bac | 0 comments | 1,415 views

Measure M-- I am not drinking Greenheartís expensive potion
By Martin Lamarque | 15 comments | 681 views