Measure A opponents spend nearly $4K on yard signs, mailers

Ironic (and not surprising) to see that after complaining vociferously about the "corporate money" supporting the "Yes" side, the "No" side actually ended up spending far more.

Woodside might change here and there, but the hypocrisy will never go away!

This saddens me. The main argument was that we shouldn't take away what the No campaign portrayed as Woodside protected open space from the heart of downtown. What true is that this parcel is private property owned my an individual who supported the change. I wonder what the owner will do with this piece of land if Measure A fails.

Maybe Jerry and the rest of the vocal No campaign should have reached out to the parcel owner. I sure hope the very slender three vote margin for yes holds, and the No crowd doesn't find out the hard way that this wasnt what they said it was. This land near the shopping area isn't, and never was, the property of Woodside or "protected open space".

I was a Town Council Member from 1991-1995. Is the property in question what was known as the Matheson Property, adjacent to Town Hall and behind the Village Pub? If so, there was an uproar when it was discovered that the Town had tried to condemn the property with no public notice and had incurred huge legal expenses in doing so. A limited parking assessment district was formed of only the merchants directly surrounding the property to try to fund the effort. Does the current Council know that history... and that and other similar secret actions led to a Grand Jury Investigation?

Just curious!