The vote passed, and other council members sent the letter (PDF) without Cahalan’s and Goodman’s signatures. The letter stated the City Council was “disappointed in how San Mateo County has handled the proposed project,” and criticized the Board of Supervisors for not notifying them before the decision.
While Calahan has not publicly stated her position on the affordable housing project, Goodman has said he supports the project and has been a clear advocate for the unhoused community.
The recall effort is led by residents who feel their concerns around safety and the project’s economic feasibility went unheard by the two council members last fall. Ousting Cahalan and Goodman are necessary “to preserve the safety and well-being of our community,” according to the recall organization’s website.
The San Mateo County Democratic Party is supporting the two council members and called the recall effort an inappropriate use of city resources.
“We believe recalls should not be used as a tool to oppose council members who take positions that some people do not agree with,” April Vargas, a member of the party’s Central Committee, told KQED. “If people don’t agree with what the council members do, they can wait until they are up for reelection in 2026.”
Ballots for the special election have been mailed to voters, who have until July 23 to decide whether to recall the council members.
The city is also in the middle of a lawsuit surrounding the proposed purchase of the La Quinta hotel, alleging that the Board of Supervisors didn’t give Millbrae residents a chance to weigh in under a 1950s provision in the California Constitution known as Article 34, which gives local voters the right to decide on any affordable housing project in their city.
San Mateo Superior Court Judge Nancy Fineman dismissed the case in late June, stating it was “unripe” for a decision because the county hadn’t specified whether the funding would come from Project Homekey or other affordable housing subsidy programs. Her decision made no mention of Article 34.
“The city believes the county is taking an action at La Quinta that doesn’t follow what the rules are,” said Sam Singer, a spokesperson for Millbrae. “[The city] is considering their options to respond.”
Earlier this year, lawmakers flirted with placing a constitutional amendment to repeal Article 34 on the November ballot, but pulled the measure last month because of how costly the campaign would be. The provision, long criticized as discriminatory, has been a notorious scapegoat for delaying affordable housing, and multiple attempts to repeal it have failed.
