Stand on homeless housing has 2 Millbrae city council members on verge of being recalled
In the city of Millbrae, voting was closed Tuesday night on a special election to decide whether two members of the city council will be recalled for refusing to sign a letter.
It's part of an angry reaction to a county plan to convert a local hotel into homeless housing.
As of 9:30 p.m. Tuesday, a majority of voters were in favor of removing council members Maurice Goodman and Angelina Cahalan from office.
79% of District 4 voters said "yes" to recall Goodman and 71% from District 2 voted to remove Cahalan.
For a solid year now, the city of Millbrae has been up in arms over a proposal by San Mateo County to purchase the 99-room La Quinta Inn to convert it to permanent, supportive housing for people experiencing homelessness. The city and its residents have objected loudly, saying it would eliminate $600,000 of annual tax revenue and make the city a dumping ground for people with mental and substance abuse issues.
So, in September, the council voted to send a pointed letter to county officials, urging them to include the city in any further discussions. But Goodman, who supports the homeless hotel plan, refused.
"While there is a need for communication to our Board of Supervisors counterparts, I feel that this letter, at this time, is nothing short of a carefully crafted letter to be utilized as propaganda to further manipulate and politicize our collective responsibility," he said at the meeting.
But he said he didn't expect the reaction that he got.
"No, not at all. I did not expect this to happen," he said on Tuesday. "You have one vote, one voice. And that was my vote, and I voted my conscience at that time."
The letter was still sent, but it didn't include Goodman's signature or that of Cahalan, who abstained. So, enraged citizens began a recall campaign of the two.
"They opposed that idea. One of them objected from sending that letter, one of them abstained from the vote. And both of them didn't put their name on the letter," said recall organizer Albert Yam.
"When our two representatives, our two councilmembers, abstained and refused to sign the letter, we felt like they weren't really representing us as a community," said recall volunteer Ken Smith. "So, at that point, you're either with us, you know, or we have to act. When you refuse to listen to us as a community, then what other action do we have?"
Councilmember Ann Schneider has been a passionate opponent of the hotel plan and blames the county for trying to force it on the city. But she was alarmed by the effort to recall her two colleagues, simply for disagreeing.
"In districts, it's so much easier to take your anger out on the closest available target," said Schneider. "I do not think this recall is right. Because, to me, a recall is when you do something wrong, you steal, you break the law. They haven't broken the law. This is a disagreement amongst a set of council. And, in fact, disagreement can be healthy. In this case, it's not been healthy. And, in fact, it's been very, very sad."
The recall organizers said it's not just about a disagreement, it's about ignoring the wishes of those who elected them. And now a new election will decide if new representatives will be chosen, ones who will be willing to prove their loyalty by signing on the dotted line.