Town Square

Post a New Topic

3 on Pleasanton Council to rotate Vice-Mayor's duties in 2012

Original post made on Dec 7, 2011

Pleasanton Mayor Jennifer Hosterman sidestepped the concern over appointing a possible mayoral candidate to the post of Vice-Mayor for 2012 Tuesday night by agreeing to rotate the post on a quarterly basis.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, December 7, 2011, 7:52 AM

Comments (22)

Posted by Shirley, a resident of Del Prado
on Dec 7, 2011 at 8:45 am

I totally agree with Sullivan that Hosterman is gutless! It is way past time for her to go!!


Posted by Agreed, a resident of Laguna Oaks
on Dec 7, 2011 at 9:25 am

Agreed about Hosterman being gutless on this one. At the same time, whining that it's not fair isn't what I call leadership. These folks need to grow up and focus on the community they serve vs. their political aspirations.


Posted by Anonymous, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 7, 2011 at 9:31 am

Just remember not to vote for the either Hosterman, Thorne or Cook-Kallio for any political position again. People that spend most of their time fixating on what future political office they will run for and don't have any leadership ability or guts, and just are concerned about their own political careers are in it entirely for themselves anyway and should not be in public office.


Posted by Terry , a resident of Mohr Park
on Dec 7, 2011 at 10:16 am

Hosterman is in office only to reach higher political aspirations, not for the interests of all the people of Pleasanton. Glad that Cindy voiced her disappointment with the 3-2 decision of a "rotating the vice-mayor's assignment"??? Never heard of this one before!!


Posted by Old Joe, a resident of Downtown
on Dec 7, 2011 at 10:49 am

McGovern is such a whiner.
Sullivan has a very bad case of diarrhea of the mouth -- what takes a normal person 10 seconds to say, always takes him at lease 10 minutes.
I'll be so glad when they are both gone.


Posted by annonymous, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 7, 2011 at 10:50 am

Rotating every year is no different than rotating it per quarter. The Vice Mayor's job is to fill in when the mayor can't attend an event. All four of the councilmembers could run for the vacated seat in the fall. When the Vice Mayor also can't attend, councilmembers are asked on a rotating basis. What's the big deal???

Since all of the councilmembers could run, this could just as easily be looked at as being apolitical!


Posted by POed in PTown, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 7, 2011 at 12:26 pm

Once again The Three Stooges on the Council (Hosterman, Thorne, Cook-Callio) demonstrate their collusion. All three of them are political hacks. I sincerely hope that another viable candidate decides to run for Mayor, because the last thing Pleasanton needs is more years with one of The Three Stooges as Mayor.


Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger, a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Dec 7, 2011 at 2:25 pm

Annonymous, Why have a vice mayoral position at all then? Hosterman didn't want to be seen as giving an advantage to those she may support in running for mayor and refused to give it to two who may or may not run. If she can't be decisive about this, I don't see much of a political future for her.

I hope there are other viable candidates for mayor as well; but that would not include any of the people currently on the council.


Posted by Another watcher!, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 7, 2011 at 3:16 pm

Sounds like Kindergarten at the City Council level!
McGovern and Sullivan are such a "whining bloc", that it has become
TOO OLD to even pay attention to anymore! But, folks, we have only to wait until next Nov. to see both of them gone,and the mayor also -- now, if we can only clean out the White House!!!!


Posted by local, a resident of Birdland
on Dec 7, 2011 at 3:42 pm

Even though Sullivan and McGovern received the most amount of votes when they ran, Hosterman refuses to allow them to have equal opportunity as vice-mayor. You have to be her friend in order to get that position.

I hope there is somebody else running for Mayor. Don't want to see Thorne or Kallio there as they are part of the block of three that consistently are on the loosing end of initiatives by the voters of Pleasanton. Plus if either one of them wins as mayor, there will have to be another special election, at the cost of the taxpayers since they both are in a safe-seat, not up for reelection. I wish we had a law that if you are on the Council and want to run for Mayor, you have to resign from your position of Council, effective the date of the election. This will prevent special elections and prevent those on the council from running from safe-seats for their own selfish reasons. The additional special election will cost us a lot of money, money that we do not have. For those that are interested, we have a law on the books in Pleasanton that if there is a vacancy, there has to be a special election. The council cannot appoint a replacement (which is good).

My wish list:
1) Running from a safe-seat? You must resign from your current seat.
2) If you do not resign from a safe-seat, do not vote for that person.
3) Do not vote for any candidate that is supported by a public employee union. Their interests and the taxpayers are not the same.
4) Do not vote for anybody that is in a public employee union. They will always protect their interests.
5) Do not vote for anybody who receives donations from developers. Those developers will want something in exchange for the money.
6) Do not vote for anybody who receives donations from Political Action Committees (PACs). I want candidates who are supported by residents, not by professional campaign contributors.

While we cannot control campaign contributions (apparently), we can vote accordingly. We need to send a message.


Posted by Pleasanton Resident, a resident of Country Fair
on Dec 7, 2011 at 4:40 pm

I watched the entire meeting. If I had to elect any one in the room for mayor it would be Nelson who demonstrates leadership and a lot of common sense.


Posted by common sense, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 7, 2011 at 5:18 pm

I bet everyone in Pleasanton is thankful for term limits. Now if term limits were applied to the Congress of the United States perhaps the US Government would once again become functional. Money does talk and it buys votes also


Posted by Resident, a resident of Lydiksen Elementary School
on Dec 7, 2011 at 7:19 pm

4) Do not vote for anybody that is in a public employee union. They will always protect their interests.

The above is absolutely ridiculous! Does the person that wrote that comment think that public employee union members are the only ones with interests to protect? Why don't we just elect a robot? Seriously, this person has to be a union hater (I won't say more).

What's wrong with all the good things that unions have created for ALL workers? I'll name a few, well, apart from the eight-hour work day, and the forty-hour work week, weekends, sick days, vacation days, paid leave, maternity leave, workplace safety regulations and health standards, social security, the minimum wage, pensions, worker insurance plans and benefits, child labor laws, the retirement age, unemployment insurance, disability pay, overtime pay, laws regarding discrimination and harassment in the workplace, and the downfall of the Polish Communist Party... Union workers fight for what is right and everyone benefits! I'd rather belong to a union in this country than be a worker in India and China. If unions are not here for us, you might as well be a slave!


Posted by GX, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 7, 2011 at 7:42 pm

I too will not vote for a candidate who has public employee union backing. This particular special interest has had the most detrimental impact on the future finances of the city:

- Personnel costs have grown dramatically and are now crowding out other parts of the general budget (the stuff most citizens care the most about)
- Unfunded liabilities grew from zero to $180 Million

This means that all future Pleasanton citizens will have lower standards of living (paying more for fewer services) because previously captured representatives gave away the store to public employee unions.

The 8 hour day/etc. came about in the late 1800's. Since then, unions have degraded one industry after another. Is it any surprise that the US is so non-competitive? Look at the remaining industries that are in fact competitive on the global level. What do they have in common? They are not overly infected by unions.

Even the auto industry unions have negotiated two-tier compensation approaches that are shafting younger employees in order to protect the above-market compensation of older employees. They know that if they pushed for that higher level of compensation, they would bankrupt GM, etc. once again.

Today, all public employee unions are doing are transfering wealth from your pocket to theirs under the charade of protecting the middleclass. How many members of the middle class have multimillion dollar retirements like Pleasanton city public employee retirees?

Take Pleasanton back. Vote for candidates who are not captured by the public unions.


Posted by Old Joe, a resident of Downtown
on Dec 7, 2011 at 9:09 pm

Hey Newt:

Your'e gonna get at least 2 votes in P-Town. Onefrom GX and one from some dude in Birdland.

They probably like your "substitute school-kids for janitors" idea too, as long as the janitor belongs to a union.


Posted by GX, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 8, 2011 at 8:32 am

There you go ... attempt to undermine the otherside and don't debate the points.

Maybe you are afraid of the Pleasanton facts and the reality that the city has become a financial mechanism for very rich employee compensation and retirements, much to the detriment of future residents and employees.

Heck, what's wrong with a $203K+ for our retired city manager? It's only a $4-5 Million package not including her medical benefits.


Posted by local, a resident of Birdland
on Dec 8, 2011 at 10:13 am

Old Joe does not have any good arguments so he resorts to partisan politics to label people. On this board I have been called a left-wing nut, a right-wing nut, and a tea bagger. In reality, none of these labels apply to me. When people resort to this 'name calling', it means that they have no real argument against the comments and their debating skills ended in second grade.

I believe you need to separate public employee unions from private employee unions. Private companies have to make a profit in order to stay in business or they go bankrupt. Public entities can keep lowering service and charging more because they have a monopoly that has an income stream guaranteed by the taxpayers. The officials making the decisions are not on the side of the owners (the taxpayers). They are on the side of what ever give them the most money for their future campaigns. Plus they know they will not be around in the long term so they will not have to deal with the furthering financial crisis of their decisions. I also know of no private company union where they get the 'vested rights' of a public employee and the ability to get retroactive increases like the public employees have.


Posted by Old Joe, a resident of Downtown
on Dec 8, 2011 at 11:07 pm

Old Joe learned long ago that you cannot have a rational discussion with zealots. So at those times he resorts to a little humor to flesh out where they are coming from. Looks like he hit two bulls eyes here. Right, GX and local????


Posted by GX, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 9, 2011 at 6:45 am

I always focus on understanding the facts. I find this improves decision making.

Sometimes those facts are inconvenient for some.


Posted by local, a resident of Birdland
on Dec 9, 2011 at 9:45 am

There Old Joe goes again....

GX is right. Some people work on data and facts. Others, like Old Joe, resort to name calling.


Posted by Old Joe, a resident of Downtown
on Dec 9, 2011 at 10:17 am

GX - what facts? Reread your posts. All of your statements are conclusions unsupported by any basic facts. As such they are opinions -- your opinions. While you may, of course, conclude that your opinions are facts, others, like me, may regard them as more of the same old right wing baloney that they are.


Posted by GX, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Dec 9, 2011 at 10:55 am

Old Joe - I respectfully suggest that you reach out to the City to confirm my claims. I am highly confident that I speak the truth as I am using the city's own data.

If that is too difficult for you, post your email and I'll send the City's documents directly to you.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

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

Moneyball, the Sequel: Billy Beane for President!
By Tom Cushing | 6 comments | 952 views

Spedowfski Announces run for Livermore City Council
By Roz Rogoff | 1 comment | 854 views

Planning the "Pleasanton way"
By Tim Hunt | 8 comments | 799 views

Take Full Advantage of Free Standardized Testing Opportunities
By Elizabeth LaScala | 0 comments | 294 views