Pleasanton Weekly

Opinion - April 2, 2010

Letter: Vote 'no' on D, 'no' on Oak Grove

Dear Editor,

The proponents of the Oak Grove development want you to believe that none of the mature oak trees will be removed as part of their development. Consider the following: their initial ballot argument stated that no trees will be removed. Then, in their subsequent ballot argument rebuttal, they indicated that 58 trees will be removed. However, they failed to mention that the 58 trees are only for the construction of roads -- it is still unknown how many trees will be eliminated to build the houses. Furthermore, the plan doesn't take into account fire safety requirements that the area around the home must be free of trees and shrubs -- that could require the elimination of still more trees. Even the city staff estimates a higher number of oak trees will be removed but their estimate is based on an outdated plan that doesn't include the developer's revised location of new homes. In the end, nobody really knows how many trees will be removed for this project. Isn't that an important detail to confirm before this election? Save the trees, save the ridgelines, save the hills, vote "no" on D. For more information go to www.savepleasantonhills.com.

Allen Roberts

Comments

Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 2, 2010 at 8:32 am

Stacey is a registered user.

In the interest of disclosure, readers/voters should be made aware that Mr. Roberts has a personal interest in the Oak Grove project since he owns property above which Oak Grove is to be built and on which there's an easement for the Oak Grove EVA route.

I recommend to voters to read the actual Ordinance 1961 and Ordinance 1962 documents.


Posted by Pete, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2010 at 9:22 am

Maybe the question should be... Mr. Pleasanton Weekly, please grant Stacey her wishes for disclosing an appropriate link between Mr. Roberts, along with personal interest to said property and Ordinances 1961 &1962. Next weeks Weekly would be appropriate. I'm sure the information would allow a slam dunk decision for all voters who are leaning one way or another.


Posted by iwastheretoo, a resident of Amador Estates
on Apr 2, 2010 at 4:28 pm

How about disclosing the campaign contributions by Tong, Lyns and the other folks associate with this project - guess who got the lions share of the money - Jennifer, Cheryl and Jerry...let's see...how did they vote - how did they act. It is the same old story...follow the money...


Posted by iwastheretoo, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2010 at 5:43 pm

I'm following the money Councilwoman McGovern and Councilman Sullivan received during the last election. I find it telling that McGovern received at least $2,000 in the last election from people who live on Grey Eagle Dr, Hearst Dr or streets off of Hearst--the neighborhood next to the Oak Grove property. Allen Roberts, who owns property abutting the Oak Grove property led the way with a $500 contribution to her campaign. And guess how she's voted and acted towards this project never mind that she lives in a home high on a hill.

Councilman Sullivan received over $700 from people in the same area.

Its just as important to follow the money for those not supporting a project. One certainly could wonder about their vote and how they are actting with regard to this project. . .


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Apr 2, 2010 at 9:03 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

This is the point. If one is going to apply the principle of "follow the money", it must be applied equally. The same goes for letters.

No one looking at this local issue would mistake a letter from the Lins as that of the typical Pleasanton voter. Indeed many in Pleasanton have received a letter from the Lins. By not disclosing his personal stake in this project, Mr. Roberts is giving the appearance of being a typical Pleasanton voter. The person reading this letter who has never heard of Mr. Roberts may identify with him. Yet practically they cannot as Mr. Roberts has a higher degree of stake in the project than the typical Pleasanton voter just as the Lins have a higher stake in the project.

One should determine their decision on Oak Grove based upon whether they believe the benefits to all of Pleasanton outweigh the negatives, not based upon whether the benefits to Mr. Roberts outweigh the negatives.


Posted by anonymous, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 2, 2010 at 10:45 pm

Mr. Roberts also negotiated with the Lin's and the city over the emergency vehicle access through his property, signing off on the project as acceptable.

Check the minutes from the October 2007 council meeting when the project was approved by a 4-1 vote. His lot overlooks the Oak Grove property. That's right it is ABOVE the Oak Grove property.


Posted by Nancy, a resident of Downtown
on Apr 2, 2010 at 11:11 pm

Let's remember that Mr. Roberts was a huge contributor to the Save Pleasanton's Hills efforts here, bankrolling their website and ads. I guess he means to Save Pleasanton's Hills for himself. And by the way, due to his lack of disclosure of these contributions he was cautioned by the FPPC. Hard to follow the money if he never reports it, huh?


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields