|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Menlo Park Police Department code enforcement unit told a local business to remove a sign advertising the Save Downtown Menlo ballot measure petition that was placed on public property after at least one resident complained.
On July 12, Menlo Park resident David Pollack reported an A-frame sign outside of Stephen Miller Gallery in downtown Menlo Park. The sign suggested passersbys could sign the Save Downtown Menlo ballot initiative inside the gallery.
Signs are not allowed on public property, including sidewalks, without an encroachment permit, according to Menlo Park police spokesperson Nicole Acker. She said code enforcement told the business to remove the sign and the business complied.
“I’m aware of one case where an A-frame was on public property, and a code enforcement officer sent a courteous email asking for it to be removed, at which point it was immediately moved. Now that the businesses know the rules, I would not expect it to happen again,” Save Downtown Menlo proponent Alex Beltramo said in an email to this news organization.
Save Downtown Menlo is a group of residents and business owners which was formed in opposition to the Menlo Park City Council’s plan to build affordable housing on some downtown parking lots to meet state mandates. It claims that the removal of parking would negatively impact downtown businesses and the city should look at other locations. The city says it extensively reviewed various sites as part of its housing element
Save Downtown Menlo launched a citizen initiative to get a city-wide vote on a proposed ballot measure to require voters approve any repurposing of the downtown parking lots.
“As someone who manages campaigns for a living, the first thing I am taught is that one is not allowed to post political campaign signs on public property,” Pollack said. “Stores are welcome to put signs in their buildings.”
Pollack, who works in campaign finance and consulting, is an opponent of the ballot initiative and a former candidate for San Mateo County assessor-recorder.
Save Downtown Menlo has been collecting signatures for its initiative through several methods, including encouraging businesses to gather signatures from customers. Stephen Miller Gallery is one of those businesses. According to Beltramo, the group has collected roughly 2,000 signatures, nearly reaching the 2,104 needed to send the initiative to a vote. Save Downtown Menlo is still collecting signatures.
Pollack said his opposition to the sign on public property was unrelated to his position on the ballot initiative.
“As a campaign finance expert, I don’t think it’s appropriate for any political signs, whether it’s something I am for or against, for a candidate or measure to use a public space or building,” Pollack said.
He said he reported two signs in downtown Menlo Park, one in person at the police station and the other via a call to the city’s non-emergency number.
Acker said police were only aware of the sign at Stephen Miller Gallery. She noted that while signs are common on sidewalks, the department took action because this sign was not directly in front of the business and was not advertising the business itself. She added that businesses can apply for permits for signs. No permit applications for signs related to Save Downtown Menlo signs appear on Menlo Park’s public permitting portal.
While Pollack wanted the signs removed from public property, he also thinks it’s important that patrons know how businesses stand on the initiative.
“When I see a sign on a store advertising for the initiative, I am less inclined to patronize as it looks to me, as a pedestrian and bike rider, that they are prioritizing their patrons who use cars,” Pollack said.
When Pollack first reported the signs, he said the police department tried to “weasel out” of dealing with them.
He initially spoke with the public works department and city clerk’s office, which confirmed the signs were not allowed and directed him to the police department. After he called the non-emergency number, a dispatcher connected him with an officer on patrol.
“The officer said ‘Well, it is not in anyone’s way…’ (The officer) said that if he had heard from a business entity he could do something. I told him that was not true. He also tried to say it was a planning department issue but I knew it wasn’t after speaking with the department and the city clerk,” Pollack said.
After his complaint, he said the business removed the sign. With his complaint about another business, he said the business adjusted the sign to lean against the building.
“I think it’s technically not allowed but it’s kind of fine because the sign is leaning against the building. I personally don’t mind it but I can’t say if it’s legal or not,” Pollack said.
Guest Opinion: Has the Sequoia Union High School District Board of Trustees lost its way?February 1, 2026 1:50 pm
Sounds like ‘resident Tom Pollack’ has a lot of free ‘opinionated’ time on his hands – and appears to be the only one complaining about a sidewalk sign bothering no one. It’s kind of sad.
I’m betting Mr. Pollack wouldn’t have complained if the sign had been for a group in support of the very low income housing the council is trying to stuff down our throats.
Getting the authorities to remove speech you don’t like. A very interesting and un-American approach.
The businesses are free to express their speech, just not on a public sidewalk/walkway.
Hmm, neither of the first two commenters seem to have taken the time to actually read the article. If they had, perhaps they would’ve gotten Mr. Pollack’s name right and also noted the pains he took to say he would object to the placement of the sign regardless of the issue.
He was totally correct to report it.
Since practically all businesses have signs opposed, not sure why this “resident” in “inclined” to “patronize” any of downtown businesses.
Also, hope the “for crowd” understands that the parking lot used by the farmers market on Sundays is also included in the Housing element. They are there advocating for the elimination of the farmers market… at the farmers market. Make it make sense.
“Pollack said his opposition to the sign on public property was unrelated to his position on the ballot initiative.” Not true. Mr. Pollack has publicly made his support known for building housing on the downtown parking lots. As a self-described pedestrian and bike rider, why has David Pollack not complained about numerous realtors’ A-frame signs that are on public street and sidewalk corners every Tuesday ( tour day) and Saturdays and Sundays. Surely, they present a greater risk to his walking and riding safely. I’ll tell you why. It’s because David Pollack thinks by making this trivial, not-newsworthy complaint, in some way, will make his position on the downtown parking ballot initiative influential.
Come on, Almanac! Menlo Park has much bigger and better stories to fill the front page.
Agreed. There is also an a-frame sign daily on the corner of Evelyn and Santa Cruz Ave. (promoting a nearby thrift store) but I don’t see David P. complaining about that one.
Let’s see if we understand what just happened.
1. Save Downtown Menlo was collecting signatures for its ballot petition that would enable 11000+ voters – rather than only 3 City Council members – decide “If and how” public parking lots could be repurposed in the future.
2. To collect signatures for the ballot initiative, a Downtown business owner who clearly supports the initiative allowed petition signatures to be collected at his location for a single day with this date posted online.
3. A temporary “sandwich-style” sign was placed on city public land outside the business, and it did NOT obstruct pedestrians. (Note: other Downtown businesses have often used similar signs to promote their offerings.)
4. David Pollack, an outspoken critic of the ballot initiative, just happens to spot the sign and gets the City to remove it. And then claims no political motive for his action.
Does anyone want to buy the Brooklyn Bridge?
Today (July 29), three businesses have similar signs at similar outdoor locations on one Downtown block. None are obstructing pedestrians and (fortunately) our city has not forced the businesses to remove them.