Which organizations have lined up for and against the ballot measure — in their own published words.
As the Nov. 3, 2026 election approaches, civic and advocacy organizations beyond the two named campaign committees have begun publicly staking positions on the Downtown Parking Plazas Ordinance. Below is what each organization has said in its own published statement, sourced directly and linked, rather than inferred.
| Position | Organization | Source |
|---|---|---|
| Yes (supports the ordinance) | Save Downtown Menlo | savedowntownmenlo.org |
| No (opposes the ordinance) | Menlo Together | menlotogether.org |
| No | ACLU of Northern California | aclunorcal.org |
| No | TransForm | transformca.org |
| No | Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County | hlcsmc.org |
| No | League of Women Voters (named by Menlo Together as a coalition partner) | menlotogether.org[1] |
Save Downtown Menlo's own position statement frames the measure narrowly: it would require a public vote only before the City could sell, lease, or repurpose one of the eight downtown parking plazas — not before any other development, anywhere else in Menlo Park.[2]
The opposition coalition — Menlo Together, the ACLU of Northern California, TransForm, and the Housing Leadership Council of San Mateo County — each published its own statement independently, but converges on the same core argument: that the measure is procedurally framed around parking but would functionally block a specific set of affordable-housing units the City has already planned for those three sites, by adding a citywide vote as a precondition.[3],[4],[5]
The ACLU's statement draws an explicit historical parallel, tying the measure to Article 34 of the California Constitution — a 1950 ballot measure requiring local voter approval before public low-rent housing projects, later narrowed by the Legislature.[3] TransForm's statement focuses on land use and parking-versus-housing tradeoffs rather than voting-rights history.[4] Whether either framing persuades a given reader is a matter of opinion this site takes no position on; what's verifiable is that both organizations did, in fact, publish the positions summarized above.
Individual elected officials, local business owners, and residents have taken public positions on the measure in City Council meetings, campaign materials, and local press — those are covered elsewhere on this site. This page tracks organizational positions specifically: civic groups, advocacy nonprofits, and coalitions that have issued their own named, citable statement. If an organization not listed here has published a position this site missed, or reverses a position listed above, corrections are welcome — see the Editorial Standards page for how that works.