Dear Menlo Park City Council Members, September 19, 2026
Please take ONE (1) minute to (at least) read the highlighted portions of the attached letter to Mayor Richard Cline, from the Shute Law Firm (dated February 18, 2010); and discuss this email and letter with the staff and city legal counsel at the next Council Meeting.
Then: Please Provide a Written Explanation for ignoring the “51% Vote Requirement”
Your plan to build apartments and a ramp was Proposed in 2010 and Rejected by the city council for the reasons outlined in the attached letter from the Shute Law Firm.
It should be Clear to you: You have NO authority to LEASE the plazas OR USE them EXCEPT for the purposes for which it was acquired, UNLESS a petition is signed by the owners of at least 51% OF THE PROPERTY LYING IN THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.
You already have a petition signed by 150 +/- Businesses/Property Owners who are OPPOSED to your plan.
FIRST:
As a former Bench Trial Judge (No jury, I decided the facts AND the law) for over ten years, I will share my opinion of the outcome at the pending trial on this issue:
Decision of the Court: Equitable Estoppel requires the city to obtain the approval from 51% of the property lying in the assessment district.
Simply stated: This is like an EASEMENT. There was (and is) no time limit on it. It was paid for by the property owners. They relied on it for 75 years. There is precedent (2010 Mayor Cline and Council) for the city acknowledging its validity.
SECOND:
As a former Commercial Real Estate Attorney, for over 40 years:
Even IF approved by 51% vote: The three proposals presented by the developers are NOT FEASIBLE. They fail to provide sufficient (convenient) parking, and will disrupt the vitality of the Downtown Business District, causing vacancies, and require unacceptable tax payer funding ($$$$$Millions) for a private developer.
The State Legislators can not change human nature: Every tenant wants at least one parking space; and will not want to park in a ramp, a half mile away from their apartment and below ground or above level 2; even if state legislators (and biased developers) say differently.
Looking out of these apartments on the dumpsters behind the adjoining stores is a "hard sell" to prospective tenants.
I have owned and personally managed over 350 apartments. I never bought an apartment building that I would not personally want to live in. I doubt that you would move into the proposed apartments; especially if, in addition to all the other negatives, you must do your laundry in a common area washer and dryer room with coin operated machines; as one developer is planning to do, to add to their income (NO IN UNIT Washer and Dryer allowed)
Frankly: Wedged in between the older stores, these apartments present a fire hazard! I do not see the Fire Marshall agreeing to this.
Your past mistakes regarding the META development and the Builder’s Remedy "80 Willow Towers" indicates that your admitted inexperience with complex real estate negotiations is a clear warning that the downtown parking plazas is a third failure that you must acknowledge and AVOID.
More importantly:
Whatever your reasons for continuing with this flawed project, you owe a duty to the voters to explain in writing why:
1) WHY are you ignoring the attached warning letter that Mayor Cline and the city council honored just 16 years ago? ( on this SAME ISSUE ! )
2) WHY are ignoring the city’s current and continuing financial deficit?
3) Why are you wasting taxpayer time and money on a trial and a ballot measure that you will surely lose. (The mathematical probability of winning the trial, the ballot AND the followup approval is 12.5% )
4) Why you are ignoring the fact that in DOWNTOWN MENLO PARK, you will ONLY see “YES” on the ballot P signs in store windows?
5) Why are you giving Millions $$$$$ to a PRIVATE developer?
6) Why have you repeatedly refused to answer these questions?
You have admitted, in writing,
Therefore: Explain Why you NEED apartments on the plazas.
Please do what is right: Reject the proposed plans from the developers, and seek better location for apartments, (if needed).
Respectfully,
Michael C. DeMoss, Resident
Former Chairman of the Audit Sub Committee, Menlo Park Finance and Audit Commission Member
The exhibits and attachments to the Shute Letter are in the city archive.

