The biggest surprise in this election was perhaps the strong showing of John Moseley in the CUSD board election, which he attributed to his moderate approach to the development issues that divide the community.

There are more details on the Harbor District election at the Daily Journal.

The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) developing a Master Plan for the 2,042-acre La Honda Creek Open Space Preserve. MROSD is holding a series of workshops as part of its planning process.

The first two workshops will be held Wednesday, November 3, 2004 covering "Issues Identification, Vision and Goals" and Monday, December 6, 2004 on "Alternatives Development".  Both workshops will be from 7pm to 9:30pm at La Honda Elementary School cafeteria. Future workshops will take place in the spring and summer of 2005 to refine alternatives and finalize the Master Plan. Each meeting will build on the previous workshop.

MROSD’s goal is to address the community’s goals, including visitor parking and access, trail use and regional trail connections, agricultural preservation, and natural and cultural resource management. The community workshops will form the basis of the Master Plan and are also designed to educate the community about the opporunities and constraints on the preserve.

For more info, see MROSD’s La Honda Preserve page, or contact Matt Freeman, Senior Open Space Planner at 650.691.1200.

The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) appointed Carol Joyce of Moss Beach as the District’s ombudsperson for a one-year term. Ms. Joyce has a resume that seems tailor-made for the position, having served as an attorney, with experience as a family mediator, consumer aribitrator, and on the Fernandina Beach (Florida) Planning Advisory Board.

Click on the "Read more" link to see MROSD’s press release.

It’s still unclear who was behind an anonymous ad attacking CUSD board candidate Jonathan Lundell in last Wednesday’s Half Moon Bay Review.

The ad was designed to sit next to Lundell’s ad, copying the layout, typeface and color of his ads. While the content was a straightforward attack on Lundell’s positions and motives for running which neither of Lundell’s opponents dispute, whoever took out the ad has taken care to disguise their identity.

The ad was the work of something calling itself "Citizens for Coastside Schools" and where normally a political committee would list an ID number, the ad says only "ID pending". But no such committee has registered with the state, or with the county filing office, so it’s not clear what "ID pending" means.  You can search the California Secretary of State’s website yourself by clicking on this link.

Campaign committees are required to register by law if the committee raises or spends more than $1,000, but one quarter-page ad would have cost less than that and there is no ad in today’s Review. So, we may never know who took out this mysterious ad.

The ad appeared in space reserved by Charles Gardner, a premium quarter-page slot on the third page of the main section (page 3A) of the paper.  Last week, Gardner decided to share Moseley’s less-desirable quarter page on page 7A, instead of using his premium slot, or sharing it with Moseley.

I asked Moseley about the Citizens for Coastside Schools ad and he told me, "I don’t know who did it and I was not a part of the planning of it."  He went on to say that he didn’t necessarily disagree with the content of the ad, and that it raised issues worth discussing: "Jonathan Lundell is part of the League for Coastside Protection. He hasn’t promoted that he was part of it, or that he was involved in the Measure D campaign." Measure D was an unsuccessful attempt to prevent the building of a middle school west of Highway 1.

Moseley says that Gardner wanted to abandon his 3A slot to share Moseley’s 7A space: "Charlie got on the ball first and got the reservation on the best space on page 3A. But I understand Charlie asked to be part of my ad [on page 7A]". Moseley says that his campaign manager Lou Cohen told him that he (Moseley) and Gardner would be sharing Moseley’s space on 7A last Wednesday. 

Moseley’s campaign manager, Lou Cohen, says they had the space reserved and had almost decided not run last week, when the Gardner campaign called them. Cohen says, "I think they [the Gardner campaign] approached us about sharing the 7A space."  Cohen also felt that the content of the anonymous ad was fair, saying, "I think the real story is why is Lundell running for school board?"

I asked Gardner four questions in email: 

1. Did you give the space reservation to the "Citizens for Coastside Schools"?
2. Do you know who’s behind the ads?
3. If so, are you willing to say who it is?
4. Do you have any comment on the content of the ad or its effect on the campaign?

I received the following reply from him:

To respond to your questions, we placed a joint ad with Moseley on 7A. The ad your refer to seemed to reiterate Mr. Lundell’s stated and written positions, and other than that I have no further comments.

We’re left with a question. Both Moseley and Gardner don’t dispute the content of the ad. So, why did the authors decide to keep their identity a secret?

UPDATE: Since I planned to post the full text of this ad on Coastsider, I notified Jonathan Lundell and asked him for a response.  Lundell’s response to the points raised in the ad has been posted as a comment on this story.

Local policy wonks will have to make a difficult choice tonight between two reasonably important public meetings.

The final CUSD Candidates Forum will take place tonight at Farallone View Elementary at 7pm in the Multiuse Room. Come and see if any actual undecided voters show up.

The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District (MROSD) is holding a public meeting in Pescedaro to discuss how the District’s ward boundaries should be redrawn, beginning at 7:00 p.m. at the Russell Administration Center, 620 North Street.

The CUSD board represents all citizens in the District. Whether or not you have children in the schools, the board represents your interests and has a big impact on your life. They’re spending your money, influence development patterns and property values, and are manage community facilities.

Based on the live forum I attended, their writings, and their participation on Coastsider’s candidates’ forum, I believe any of the three is capable of representing us on matters of education. For the most part, the board’s job is to let the superintendent, administrators, and teachers manage the teaching.

The board’s most important job is to ensure that our money is spent properly and that the district’s strategy is sound. And this is where the candidates differ most. Jonathan Lundell has demonstrated a thoughtful and creative approach, as well as an openness that is sorely needed on the board.

CUSD’s strategy is bound up with a couple of very emotional pieces of real estate (Wavecrest and the Cunha Middle School), and the one issue that divides coastsiders like no other—what we build and where we build it. This goes beyond Wavecrest to every building the district owns and others we haven’t even envisioned.

When I created Coastsider’s CUSD Candidates’ Forum, I made it clear to the candidates that I felt Wavecrest is a poor location for a middle school. Cunha is an important part of downtown.  The middle school helps make Main Street one of the few honest-to-God Bay Area downtowns. Cunha was the center of the community activities in the Pumpkin Festival, from the costume contest to the parade. I don’t want to lose that.

A middle school at Wavecrest may improve traffic flow and parking. But when you plan your community to serve automobile traffic and not people, the result is sprawl. Sprawl destroys communities. A middle school at Wavecrest will suck life out of our downtown and force more parents to drive their kids to school.

Jonathan Lundell is the only candidate that opposes the boneheaded decision to rip the middle school out of the heart of our community and plop it down on edge of town.

My decision is not based solely on Wavecrest, and yours shouldn’t be either.

It would be a mistake to think Lundell’s campaign is simply about Wavecrest or the new middle school. He has spent years studying and analyzing the issues that confront the district. His analysis is thoughtful, incisive, and original.

Jonathan Lundell’s vision of smaller schools located closer to our homes is indisputably correct. It would improve education, commuting, and family life for all coastsiders, not just those with children.

Finally, putting Jonathan Lundell on the CUSD board would force the board to conduct more of its business in public.  The best brake on abuse of secrecy is a member that does not share the board’s consensus.

You should vote for Lundell regardless of how you feel about the middle school. If you support the Wavecrest location, Lundell’s lone vote isn’t going to make a difference on that one issue. But his analytical skill,  support for local schools, independence, and fresh perspective will improve the board’s accountability to the community.

There are two open seats on the board, and it was a lot harder for me to make my second pick. 

If you believe, as I do, that Jonathan Lundell needs to be on the board, you should only vote for one candidate. For Lundell to win, either Moseley or Gardner must lose and they don’t need your support.

But, if you want to vote for one of the other two candidates, I recommend John Moseley as your second choice. He’s just as dedicated to Wavecrest as Gardner, but he’s a lot less contentious and the current school board clearly prefers Gardner.  If we’re going to heal the community, Moseley’s focus on working together to achieve the best results for our kids is the right one.

CUSD board candidate Charles Gardner has received some big contributions from members of the current school board. According to his Campaign Disclosure Statement, outgoing board president Ken Jones has given him $1,500; and board member Jolanda Schreurs has given him $250 in cash, $525 in goods and a $2,161 loan.

Gardner’s treasurer, Susan Stuart, says the loan was a combination of a $2,000 cash loan and some accumulated out-of-pocket expenses that had not been reimbursed. She said of Gardner’s fundraising, "It’s a combined effort of Jolanda, me, Charlie, and the school board."

So far, there have been two other contributions of more than $500 to the campaign. Gardner also received $1,000 from the Committee to Elect Jim Larimer. Larimer is a director of the County Coastside Water District. Jonathan Lundell received $1,000 from Sid McCausland, a member of the Half Moon Bay City Council.

These amounts are big money in this campaign.  As of October 16, the total amount of contributions received by each candidate were Moseley $6,134; Lundell $6,853; and Gardner $8,625. Generally, the candidates’ sources are a small number of $100 and $200 contributions and smaller, unitemized contributions.

There were two partisan items on the disclosure statements in this otherwise nonpartisan campaign. Jonathan Lundell received a $100 contribution from Green party and Charles Gardner paid $200 to appear on a Republican party slate card.

Though Moseley is supported by the CUSD board, he has received only $100 in contributions from any members. When I asked Gardner why he had been selected for special treatment from the current board, he replied, "I guess they just like me better."

I sent a letter to the HMB Review responding to their endorsement of Gardner and Moseley for the CUSD board.  They responded that it is their editorial policy "not to print partisan letters to the editor this campaign season".  Since they ran an editorial stating their partisan opinion, a contrary opinion deserves a voice, too.  Accordingly, I’m posting my letter here on Coastsider.

[em]EDITOR’S NOTE: I’ve moved Stephen’s letter to the "read more" link on this story and I’m inviting others who want to reply to the Review’s editorial endorsements for Cabrillo Unified School District, Pescadero Unified School District, and Harbor District, and to post comments on this story.[/em]

[em]I will post my endorsements for CUSD soon, and will accept all comments from the community and the candidates. [/em]

The city of Half Moon Bay has denied the Review’s request for its "Due Diligence" report on the 22-acre park site, and is still reviewing documents to decide what it can tell them about its appraisal of the site.

The Half Moon Bay Review filed a formal California Public Records Request on October 4. The Review asked for "any appraisal or other information used to determine the value" of the 22-acre proposed park site and "the entire Property Due Diligence report date Sept. 3, 2004."

Last Thursday, City Attorney Adam Lindgren wrote the Review a letter [PDF] telling them that the city is reviewing its records to see what it has that meets the Review’s request for appraisal information and will let them know what it finds and whether it can give it to them by Thursday, October 28.  However, it also said that it will not give the Review its "Property Due Diligence Report dated Sept. 3, 2004", claiming "attorney/client privilege".

The Midpeninsula Regional Open Space District is soliciting questions from constituents, to be asked of candidates for the new ombudsperson position. The interviews will be Wednesday, October 20, 2004, 5:00 pm at the MROSD Administrative Office, at 330 Distel Circle in Los Altos.

According to the District, "This position is being created to help resolve misunderstandings and conflicts that cannot initially be settled by MROSD staff." I have been told that about half the candidates so far are not residents of the area to be added to the District.

Constituents are invited to submit questions for the applicants. by FAX at 691-0485, or by e-mail to [email protected] Call MROSD 691-1200, or visit www.openspace.org for additional information.