Substantive factual corrections made to this Site are dated and explained.
This page logs substantive changes to published content, in reverse chronological order, so that the editing record sits in one place. Entries are of two kinds:
Correction — a published factual statement was wrong and has been fixed.
Update — a statement was accurate but incomplete, or new material has been added
to an ongoing story.
Both kinds are also marked on the affected page itself, with a dated bracketed note in the reader-facing copy. Routine editing, typographical fixes and spelling corrections are not logged.
August 28, 2026 — Correction — The Library and the League: Asking an opponent to present both sides. The piece said that Voter Services and Advocacy “may be different teams, but the president is not a team” and that she is “the officer above both.” That was wrong. Asked directly, the League’s president stated that LWVSSMC is “a 100% volunteer-run organization, so there is no compensation and no conventional supervisor/employee reporting structure for anyone in the League”; that the presenters for the Menlo Park program “are not evaluated by me, and there is no compensation to set or approve as part of a budgeting process”; and that the Director of Voter Services is one of several directors on a board that operates “collaboratively and by consensus,” “working alongside the rest of us rather than reporting up through a hierarchy.” The sentence has been withdrawn and the passage rewritten. In the same revision, an update: the piece had said that who chairs Voter Services, and to whom that chair reports, was not stated. It has been stated since, and both answers are quoted in full in a new section of the piece, Whether the wall runs through the president’s office. The correction is dated on the affected page.
August 19, 2026 — Correction — The voter guide won’t tell you all you might want to know., and source notes on Home and Reports/Opinion. These pages dated the Council’s approval of supplemental work on the Downtown Parking Management Study, and the accompanying Transportation Fund appropriation, to May 19, 2026. That date was wrong. The action was taken April 28, 2026, on the consent calendar as item G6 (Staff Report #26-063-CC): an amendment to the City’s agreement with AECOM Technical Services for supplemental work on the study, plus an appropriation from unassigned fund balance in the Transportation Fund. The April 28 minutes appeared on the May 19 agenda for acceptance, which is the source of the error. The underlying point — three years, two grants, two rounds of utilization data and a supplemental appropriation without published recommendations — is unchanged. The vendor, previously not named because it was not legible in the excerpt then available, is now named. The correction is dated on the affected page.
August 17, 2026 — Update — Home, Aug. 14 edition. The Aug. 14 rebuttal item read that Alliant asks the City to front the impact fees. That named one of two distinct financing requests in Alliant's filing: a loan of the impact fees, repayable with interest, and a second loan covering the upfront fair market lease value, structured as a residual receipts note. The sentence now names both. Nothing published was inaccurate; it was incomplete. The same day, the second request was also named alongside the first on RFP Fast Facts, the payback calculator, The public purse and Trust., which had described a single request or none.
July 31, 2026 — Correction — Home. An item stated that none of the six City Council candidates had taken a position on the ballot measure. That was wrong. The revised item reports that one candidate's name appears among the endorsers listed on the “Vote No” campaign's site, and that no Save Downtown Menlo–affiliated candidate has filed. The correction is dated on the page.
July 31, 2026 — Update — A lot about a little. An endorsement listing was added to a candidate entry after it was published on a campaign site. No prior statement was withdrawn. The addition is dated on the page.
Every entry carries the date, the page affected, what was wrong or incomplete, and what changed. See the Editorial Standards page for how this Site sources claims and handles corrections generally.
If credible evidence demonstrates that a factual statement on this site is materially inaccurate, the Site operator typically reviews the cited sources and, where appropriate, corrects or clarifies the publication. The correction is dated on the affected page, and a summary is added here.
If you believe something on this site is factually inaccurate, contact editor@monitormenlo.news with the page, the specific claim, and your supporting source. Corrections are made at the Site operator's discretion after review — see Replies and corrections on the About page for how that review works.