A first pass at the six candidates for Menlo Park’s three November 3 council seats — and where each stands on building apartments on the downtown parking plazas.
Three council seats are on the November 3 ballot — Districts 1, 2, and 4 — and every contender is being measured against the same flashpoint: the City’s plan to replace three downtown parking plazas with at least 345 affordable housing units. Here is who is running, and where each appears to stand.
Think of the three downtown lots the way neighbors think of a shared driveway: everyone uses it, everyone owns a piece of it, and while converting it to housing might open the neighborhood to more residents, its present use is important and hard — if not impossible — to replace.
Specifically, Menlo Park proposes to lease city-owned land for a nominal $1 a year (a 55-year ground lease) to incentivize developers to build at least 345 apartments for very-low- and extremely-low-income households (at or below 50% of area median income) on downtown Plazas 1, 2, and 3, between Santa Cruz and Oak Grove avenues. Those lots hold about 556 public parking spaces today; a study will decide how many are replaced, likely in a new garage. A citizens’ initiative on the same November ballot would require a citywide vote before any downtown lot becomes housing.
So the race isn’t abstract. A council majority will either move the plan forward or slow it down — which is why every candidate below deserves to be pressed on where they stand.
Notably, none of the six candidates has taken a position for or against the ballot measure that would require voter approval before any downtown parking lot could be declared surplus and handed to a developer. No candidate affiliated with the Save Downtown Menlo organization has filed to run, and none of the six has squarely opposed the current council majority’s effort to lease the plazas to developers as apartment sites. James Rohr, alone among them, has not addressed the downtown-plaza question publicly at all. That reticence is itself something merchants and shoppers may weigh when casting ballots.
Candidates positioned by their stated posture toward building housing on the downtown plazas; color denotes district. This is the Monitor’s reading of each candidate’s public statements, not a score. James Rohr is shown separately — his position is not yet on record.
Not yet on record: James Rohr (District 1), a Belle Haven candidate whose campaign site (bellehaven.online) centers on local history and neighborhood representation, but takes no stated position on the plaza plan or the ballot measure.
Compared across the same six measures. Portraits are line-art renderings.
| Candidate | Snapshot bio | In their words | Government experience | Website | Position on plaza → housing |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
 Wonman Lee District 1 | 44; software engineer at ed-tech firm Learneo (Course Hero); a Rutgers B.A. in political science who spent “nearly 8 years” in the U.S. Senate before moving west. Family arrived ~2021; runs as a pro-housing “supply” candidate. | “If there’s more housing, then rents potentially can go lower.”— to The Almanac, July 2026 | Parks & Recreation Commissioner (appointed April 2023). | wonmanlee.com | Supports Favors exploring the plaza housing, structured to protect small businesses — e.g., building replacement parking before homes. |
JR James Rohr District 1 | A Belle Haven resident; his wife, Meredith Rohr, is a contracts attorney. His 2026 Library Commission application lists a De Anza associate degree and Belle Haven community groups. More resident advocate than officeholder. | “…preserving our history while securing our future through transparent… leadership.”— bellehaven.online | No elected or appointed office; applied for a Library Commission seat in 2026 (not appointed); gathered a 55-signature petition and gave public comment (Sept. 30, 2025) seeking a Belle Haven pool audit. | bellehaven.online | Not on record Has not addressed the plaza plan or ballot measure; has urged an independent audit of the Belle Haven pool. |
 Drew Combs District 2 Incumbent · since 2018 | 49; Director of Product Risk at Meta (since 2015); Harvard Law (JD) and Columbia (Urban Studies). On the Council since 2018 and twice mayor (2021 and 2025); seeking a third term. | “…issues that we haven’t analyzed regarding the concentration of affordable housing.”— to The Almanac, May 2026 | City Council (2018– ); mayor 2021 and 2025; 4+ yrs Planning Commission; Bicycle Commission; San Francisquito Creek JPA board. | drewcombs.com | Conditional Voted to seek developer proposals but is wary of concentrating all affordable housing on the plazas; wants other sites analyzed and parking preserved. |
 Vamsi Velagapudi District 2 | 47; retired early after a global strategy career — London banking to McKinsey (U.S. and Singapore) and corporate strategy at Google, Cisco, and HP. Degrees from Cambridge and the University of London. A ~8-year resident. | “Not just to build housing… also to make sure that downtown is vibrant.”— to The Almanac, May 2026 | Finance & Audit Commission (2025– ); Library Commission member & Chair (2021–2023); MPCSD Measure U bond oversight; East Palo Alto Sanitary District advisory rep (2026– ). | votevamsi.com | Supports Building housing to meet state mandates, paired with steps to keep downtown vibrant and protect small-business access during construction. |
 Charlotte Reed District 4 | 31; communications professional at marketing-tech firm Klaviyo. A choral singer and cantor at St. Raymond Church. First to enter the race (March 2026); reported raising about $14,270 by mid-July. | “We need to make sure that we are building smart, intentional housing.”— to The Almanac, March 2026 | No prior city commission or elected office; community roles via the Junior League and local nonprofits. | charlotteformenlopark.com | Supports Backs the City’s plan; frames it as meeting state mandates and wants a downtown commission to rebuild consensus. |
 Laura Melahn District 4 | 41; venture-capital investor (Princeton molecular biology; former Google / GV). Co-founder of the Downtown Menlo Fund. A first-time candidate emphasizing quality-of-life, fiscal discipline, and protecting parks and trees. | “…eating up a lot of the City’s attention and polarizing the community…”— to The Almanac, May 2026 | Vice Chair, Finance & Audit Commission (2025– ); co-founder, Downtown Menlo Fund (501(c)(3)). | lauramelahn.com | Evasive Declined an explicit yes/no; calls the plan “polarizing” and wants to wait for the November vote and weigh finances. |
The “Downtown Parking Plazas Ordinance”
A citizens’ initiative backed by the group Save Downtown Menlo would amend the municipal code to bar the City from changing the use of its eight downtown parking plazas without a citywide vote — a direct check on the plan to place at least 345 affordable apartments on Plazas 1, 2, and 3.
Require voter approval before any downtown parking plaza can be repurposed for development, rather than leaving the decision to a council majority.
Save Downtown Menlo, a resident group organized in opposition to building housing on the downtown lots. No candidate tied to the group has filed for council.
The City Council voted in late 2025 to place the qualified initiative on the Nov. 3, 2026 general-election ballot. The county drew the randomized alphabet on Aug. 13, 2026; the initiative appears on the ballot as Measure P.
The council ordered a $164,951 impact report from consultant M-Group on the initiative’s fiscal, housing, and business effects. Then-Mayor Combs, the sole vote against it, called the report “kicking the can down the road.”
Enacts the ordinance. Voters — not just a council majority — would have to sign off before any downtown parking plaza could be handed to a developer. In effect, a brake on the housing plan.
Rejects the ordinance. The City Council keeps the authority to move ahead with the affordable-housing plan on Plazas 1, 2, and 3 without a separate citywide vote.
The official ballot title and Yes/No summary are written by the City and county. The county assigned the measure letter on Aug. 13, 2026: the initiative is Measure P.
Same colors, opposite messages.
Eagle-eyed residents may notice that Vamsi Velagapudi’s campaign signs — royal blue with gold lettering — closely echo the palette and styling of the “Save Downtown Menlo” citizens’-initiative materials, which urge a “Vote Yes” to require a public vote before the downtown plazas can become housing. The color palette and design certainly have similarities, unintentional or not.
But we know this: Velagapudi is not affiliated with the grassroots initiative’s organizers, and his stated position runs the other way — he has spoken in favor of building downtown housing to meet state mandates, and homesformenlopark.com (the “Vote No” campaign opposing the parking-plaza ordinance) now lists him among its endorsers. [Updated July 31, 2026: endorsement listing added.] We also recognize that blue-and-gold is a common combination for non-partisan candidates.
Finally, we note that this royal-blue scheme differs sharply from the pale, blue-green “Cambridge Blue” of Velagapudi’s own alma mater — dispelling the notion that his signage is a tip of the cap to Cambridge or his other London schooling.
Bottom line: whatever the visual echo, Velagapudi and Save Downtown Menlo would surely both want to avoid any likelihood of confusion between their positions — and their desired outcomes — on November 3.