This will hardly be a mandate to forge ahead with chainsaws and bulldozers should Measure A squeak by. How do the 60% of Woodside's apathetic registered voters feel about all of this since they couldn't be bothered taking two minutes out of their day during the past month to fill in a tiny square box on a ballot and drop the provided self-addressed postage-paid envelope into the mail?

There are many hurdles ahead should this measure ultimately succeed in the final vote tally. The emergency order currently allowing outdoor dining will inevitably disappear long before any proposal makes it through the long process garnering necessary entitlements for development. One has to wonder whether a few dozen people who voted 'yes' may regret their hasty decision in retrospect. How many of those 'yes' votes were cast on the deceptive marketing of this measure as a simple vote to keep outdoor dining at Cañada Corners?

Once again the phrases hold true, we are a nation divided and a community divided--and every vote obviously counts. An apparent happy day for 1,150 people. A sad day for everything Woodside stands for. Good luck red-legged frogs and dusky-footed woodrats, owls and squirrels, a bit more of our shared paradise will apparently disappear forever in favor of mediocre coffee and voguish avocado toast.

[Portion removed.] The parcel by Roberts Hardware isn't open space. It's zoned Residential. Nothing stopping the owner from putting housing up there.

The No campaign has used scare tactics throughout this whole campaign to get people to think this is about unprotecting preserved open space. And it's not. It's about allowing the owner of the parcel to use part of the land to help mitigate the loss of parking that the outdoor dining created.

And the other parcel, Matt? You know, the one earmarked for an amphitheater--having nothing to do with outdoor dining. It will come out soon enough that the existing parking behind Cañada Corners was allowed half a century ago on half of the subject property with the owner's agreement that the remaining half would remain as open space in perpetuity.

You know, Matt, you should really make up your mind about why you are in favor of this unnecessary zoning change. Now you are saying it’s to compensate the property owner. I hope this flip flop is because you’ve finally accepted that the Measure is not needed to “preserve outdoor dining” since by now it’s obvious that can be done by simple things like parking lot restriping. You should really put down that pitcher of koolaid.