​

The folks behind “No on Q” campaign are making wild claims. Their recurring theme is that Measure Q (MQ)hurts small business or that any change of use triggers a ballot. Both of those claims are false.

And they never say why or how. In the absence of facts, they just keep making the same sweeping baseless claims and hope that by repeating these lies, you’ll buy it.

So, where’s the beef? Where is the substance behind their claims?

MQ does not hurt small business. MQ protects existing small businesses from being squeezed out by commercial landlords that want to replace them with new, higher rent-paying, higher intensity businesses that will increase traffic and increase demand for parking. If you are an existing business, why on earth would you oppose MQ It's provisions help you?

And it is false that any change of use triggers a ballot.
Changing use of a commercial space from one type of retailer to another type of retailer is not governed by any MQ provision. And realize that 90% of businesses in Laguna are retail businesses – not bars and restaurants, so anyone who wants to open a new retail business in a space where another retailer is located should have no issue from MQ. If it’s retail today, it can be retail tomorrow.

There is also zero problem with replacing most restaurants with a new restaurant that is the same level of service – fine dining for fine dining, fast casual for fast casual, for example. Changing from French to Italian is no problem. Oudoor dining is not covered under MQ.

Unless the commercial building owner is unwilling to provide the amount of parking required by code, there is no problem converting existing retail to all but the fastest of fast-food type restaurants. And, if parking is an issue, MQ allows the building owner to fill the needed with in-lieu spaces. Providing adequate parking is the responsibility of the commercial building owner – not the small business leasing space from the commercial landlord.

So, where’s the beef?

If applicants follow the guidelines in Measure Q their projects should have little problem with approvals.

Why are the opponents of MQ spreading so much misinformation? Because they realize that if  they stuck to the facts, they know you’d vote Yes on Q. The contributors to the No on Q campaign are mostly developers, and I can’t think of a developer who wants more regulation. Few developers welcome anything that limits their ability to intensify the use of land – to stuff more stuff onto a piece of land. And few elected politicians and bureaucrats want less power.

Make Laguna better, not bigger. Vote Yes on Measure Q.

​

​