www.montereycountynow.com OCTOBER 23-29, 2025 MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY 13 There was one unremarkable day back in June when Sam Messenger of Salinas took his usual walk to the Cherry Bean coffee house on a Saturday, during the Oldtown farmers market. He noticed a sign about rent control; he knew there was an effort to gather signatures for a referendum seeking to restore rent control and other tenant protections in Salinas, and he supported it. So he approached a signature-gatherer, engaged in a brief and not particularly memorable discussion, signed the petition, and walked on. Fast-forward four months to another unremarkable day, Monday, Oct. 13. Messenger was at home when a stranger knocked on the door, who introduced herself as District Attorney Investigator Rebecca Ayala. Messenger was immediately curious. “It was a remarkable occurrence on an otherwise unremarkable day,” he says. Mostly, he says, Ayala wanted to know if the petition team had offered him anything in exchange for his signature. “She asked me questions about date, time, place,” Messenger says. “I told her a whole lot of, ‘I don’t really remember.’ I certainly was not offered cash or a cash equivalent.” The District Attorney’s Office declined to speak about this pending investigation, or even to acknowledge its existence. But City Councilmember Andrew Sandoval—who supported the suite of renter protections that his council colleagues later overturned—says he has heard from multiple signatories that they’ve been approached with similar questions by investigators. While the DA is investigating what is presumably a credible complaint, if they’re knocking on many doors—thousands of people signed—Sandoval sees a worrisome potential impact. “These recent actions risk creating a chilling effect on democracy by discouraging residents from participating in the petition process,” he says. “This could suppress voter turnout and deter people from exercising their constitutional rights.” Messenger was not intimidated, although it’s easy to imagine how others could be; months after you sign a petition, an officer shows up at the door to ask some questions. It’s also easy to imagine how the snacks that often accompanied organizers from the group Protect Salinas Renters could have been offered up to somebody signing. Free tacos and loaded baked potatoes at one event might have been meant to fuel volunteers for signature-gathering—but then got handed out to a petition-signer. It’s hard to imagine it was ever intended as a quid-proquo—someone would sign only if they got a potato?—or that it constitutes actual bribery (the California Penal Code on commercial bribery defines the amount as at least $250). On the other hand, if it did happen, it crossed a line. In a letter dated June 30, Jamie Estrada filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission against Protect Salinas Renters. Estrada described attending a public event around 3:30pm on Saturday, June 28 at 335 East Alisal St. (the location of a furniture store). According to the letter, Estrada spoke to Matt Huerta, a housing advocate and member of the group pursuing the referendum. “Mr. Huerta offered me free food after I began asking questions and discussing the referendum,” Estrada wrote. “However, when my friend—who did not engage or sign the petition— attempted to receive food, she was told she had to pay and that the free food was only available to individuals who ‘sign or participate’ in the referendum.” If true—I was unable to reach Estrada, and Huerta did not respond—it’s certainly a cringe-worthy misstep. Even more cringe-worthy: Luci Rodriguez (who I also could not reach) wrote an identical letter on the same date. It makes the whole thing feel like a coordinated campaign, perhaps politically motivated, more than a goodfaith effort to raise an alarm about the bribery potential of a baked potato. As Messenger says, “It seems as equally likely to me as the committee did something untoward as they are being retaliated against by some powers that be. I am beyond being surprised at this point.” Everything advocates say and do will be scrutinized as this long-running political battle comes to a head. This is just the beginning of this chapter, with the referendum set to appear on Salinas ballots in 2026. Sara Rubin is the Weekly’s editor. Reach her at sara@montereycountynow.com. Potato-Gate Investigation into petition signatures in Salinas casts suspicion all around. By Sara Rubin TO BUY, OR NOT TO BUY…Squid is no fan of tug-ofwar, associating it with a frustrating chase for shrimp (Squid gets hangry). So when Squid stumbled upon a real-life tug-of-war—this one involving a $5.3 million Big Sur property—Squid wondered: What gives? Santa Clara County residents Jennifer DiBrienza and Jesse Dorogusker are suing Michelle H. Mackay and associated trusts after four years of back-and-forth negotiations over a home known as “Teapot.” The one-bedroom, 900-square-foot home is on Clear Ridge, with a real estate listing promising it is “undoubtedly one of the best home sites in all of Big Sur.” That’s if you can get it. According to the lawsuit, filed in Monterey County Superior Court, the initial offer was made in April 2022. Over the next few years, Mackay repeatedly changed her mind—first agreeing to sell, then backing out, then rejecting DiBrienza and Dorogusker’s $5.3 million all-cash offer, believing a higher bid would come. It didn’t. Eventually, Mackay accepted the offer on Sept. 11, 2025. But even after preparing a contract she attempted to back out again—twice. First, Mackay wrote, “It is with humility and sincerity that we ask if you would consider releasing us from the contract…” Two days later, Mackay pivoted, citing a clerical error that made the contract invalid. Squid, exhausted by just reading about this battle, will just stay cozy in the lair. NUMBERS GAME…Squid is no math genius, but Squid can count to 420,000. That’s the amount of money Seaside City Council had budgeted for community social services grants this year to give to community-based organizations and faith-based organizations with projects that benefit Seaside residents. Sounds easy enough, except 22 organizations applied seeking a combined total of $1,067,303—obviously more than the amount allotted. So councilmembers reviewed the applications and each made recommendations on who should get funding and how much. “Of course it’s not enough money to go around to every agency,” Mayor Ian Oglesby said, offering an olive branch. “It does not mean I don’t value those nonprofits in our community.” But when the council set out to divvy up the money on Thursday, Oct. 16, the numbers analysis went on—and on, and on. The number-crunching took more than two hours to get to $420,000 allocated to 12 organizations. Some of the discussion focused on which groups were most deserving, but most of it was the excruciating process of adding, subtracting, averaging and moving numbers around on a spreadsheet—a little bit like counting sheep. The council agreed to fund wide-ranging initiatives from plants in parks to youth ambassadors building trust with police officers. Nowhere on the list was improved math skills. THE LOCAL SPIN SQUID FRY THE MISSION OF MONTEREY COUNTY WEEKLY IS TO INSPIRE INDEPENDENT THINKING AND CONSCIOUS ACTION, ETC. “I certainly was not offered cash.” SEND SQUID A TIP: squid@montereycountynow.com
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjAzNjQ1NQ==