Posted by Kathy supporter, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Feb 13, 2013 at 8:52 am
Not only does Kathy have the most experience of the candidates, she has specific ideas on how to make great things happen for Pleasanton, based on all her experience. I wonder if any of the other candidates have specific ideas or if they're just going to co opt Kathy's.
Experience + specifics is why I'm voting for Kathy!
Posted by Claire, a member of the Amador Valley High School community, on Feb 13, 2013 at 12:12 pm
Kathy has my vote and I am delighted such an experienced person is running for this important seat.
I have known Kathy many years and always found her to be an independent thinker who does her homewortk before making decisions and solicits input from many members of the community. She really listens to public input and that is so important so our leaders stay grounded on what the needs and issues are and do the right thing for the overall good of the community.
Posted by Common sense too, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 13, 2013 at 9:45 pm
I certainly hope people who are consumed with issues outside Pleasanton, don't drag that into our issues of street signs, banks, restaurants, traffic. We will be voting for 'CITY' council, and don't intend to be 'used' as an experiment for partisans. I want who has done the most for Pleasanton, understands Pleasanton, and whose only focus is Pleasanton.
Also 'single issue' people are deadly....YOU know who you are....this could get ugly, you're not fooling ANYbody!....sort of an abuse of position too.
Posted by Bill Fazakerly, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 9:41 am
I don't want someone whose "only focus is Pleasanton". Sounds a bit parochial. How about someone like David Miller, who wants the best for Pleasanton, but also knows what is going on in other communities. If you don't put some focus on Stockton and Vallejo, you may be inclined to make the same mistakes they made. Up until recently we had a City Council that was taking us down the road to bankruptcy, and it was David Miller and a few others who took the time to attend Council meetings and fight against more fiscal irresponsibility. I did not see Kathy Narum speaking out at those meetings, and I have yet to see any platform with solid positions, only the usual abstracts. I'm sure all of those running for Council would say they are focused on Pleasanton, care about Pleasanton, have experience in Pleasanton, etc. None of that means anything. When the unions want the taxpayers to pay for their early retirement, lifetime health care, too-high salaries, etc., will Kathy represent us, or is she being backed by the unions?
Posted by Tea Party Proud, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 11:11 am
I agree with Bill wholeheatedly. If Kathy doesn't or won't defend us against the United Nations - there coming, did you hear the jet last night? - then what good can she do? I think unless each candidate takes a pledge in support of freedom they shouldn't be alloud on the ticket. That's why Miller makes so much sense to me.
Posted by Common sense too, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 11:18 am
Well Bill, IF you and your group had been engaged very long, you would know just how deeply involved at multiple levels Kathy has been for YEARS. Those who just suddenly got involved in the last two years, wouldn't know about that long list of leading and doing. Kathy's a doer, not a talker.
Of course Kathy has been and is on the Planning Commission.
Those of you who have not been engaged over the years, would have missed observing that it has not been the practice for Council members to speak before Planning Commission, not for Commissioners to crusade before Council. Sort of official decoroum and practice.
As you become more aware of Pleasanton's history, you will learn Kathy has been there making things happen.
She will definitely 'represent us' in fixing the union problem.
Posted by Tea Party Proud, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 11:46 am
The silence on this is becoming deafaning. Notice how no one is talking about real issues? Like freedom. Do this, do that, experience, blah, blah. But we have the United Nations sending survaillence planes over our hills and no one seems to think this is a question of our liberties being trampled from a far.
Posted by Iwastheretoo, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 12:11 pm
I was able to ask Kathy at her breakfast about unions as that's an issue for me. She told me she is not accepting endorsments or money from any unions. So Bill, making unions an issue is a non-starter. Why don't you contact her and ask her position on unions?
BTW, my oberservation of people in attendance at the breakfast was that it was a wide cross section of the community--people on opposite sides of issues.
Posted by Tea Party Proud, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 12:23 pm
I see, but she takes money and endorsements from others? Isn't that an unbridgement of free speech rights? So, who is paying her off? Banks? Oil? Developers? UN Forces? How can anyone trust someone like this? And who paid for her breakfast? Whose financing her run? Come on, be honest with us.....
Posted by Common sense too, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 2:37 pm
OMG! TPer, I am embarrassed for you. I think you should try larger forums. Pleasanton is a small town not even approaching 100,000. Our country has many experts to focus on United Nations. I want a council that solves my LOCAL property taxes, starting with local public unions. These are issues we want to solve LOCALLY, without interference from either Sacramento or DC. Both of whom are intruding far more than they should. Our agenda is full without adding the United Nations to our local agenda.
I'm not sure your TPer mouth would help our United Nation issues, which I want solved too. TPers would do well to learn where, when, how, and WHAT is appropriate to discuss. This is small town USA with VERY SERIOUS LOCAL issues WE WANT solved, with few hours, and fewer dollars. PICK your battles. Picket the White House, and get on NATIONAL TV, but please to do distract from our VERY SERIOUS LOCAL issues. I am engaged in national issues I don't ask council to spend time solving. Please take on the United Nations for us and give us a 3 minute report at city council.
Posted by Tea Party Proud, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 3:20 pm
Notice how nobody's ansering my questions? If Kathy isn't taking money or endorsements from unions, whose she taking them from? If the unions dont have her in their back pocket, who does? She has got a be taken money from somebody.
And by the way, when the UN has its big nose sticking in all our affairs, trying to get cars off the streets and the like, it is very much a local issue.
Posted by An Embarrassed Republican, a member of the Alisal Elementary School community, on Feb 14, 2013 at 6:12 pm
I am a proud Republican who is very embarrassed by the lastest round of e-mails from Tea Party afficionados insisting that anyone other than their Tea Party candidate, David Miller, is on the "take." This kind of dialogue is not constructive. If this is the only way Dave Miller and the Tea Party does business - my way or the highway - i am not interested. I would hope all candidates for City Council woud be opem minded and role model positive leadership and specifics about what they will do to make Pleasanton stronger (vs. just slamming others and not describing their own action plan).
Kathy Narum has been very clear about her priorities and totally open about meeting with others who have any questions. I am hopeful that the Tea Party afficiandos will begin to do the same in respect to others.
Posted by Iwastheretoo, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 7:13 pm
TPP, so why don't you tell us who is filling the campaign coffers of Dave Miller? The tea partiers have indicated its not the unions--ok so who is then or is Dave funding his own campaign which would indicate a lack of community support. . .
Posted by Jay, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 7:28 pm
To "An Embarrassed Republican":
If you are new to this forum you will not know that there are groups of people posting messages that are just "trouble makers" for lack of a better term. It is quite possible, and probable even, that the person who is posting as a "tea party person" is on somebody's campaign trying to make the tea party look bad by posting rubbish, and thus hurting the changes of somebody who might have affiliations with the tea party. You have no idea if this person is in the tea party, a supporter of any candidate who may or may not be a tea party person, or a supporter of any other candidate trying to improve their changes. This tactic has been used before on this forum ad-nauseum.
As another piece of information, there have been multiple tea parties in this area. At one time it was a group of concerned taxpayers who feel they have been "taxed enough already" (TEA). This was a group of republicans, independents and democrats. It was not a party-affiliation but a group concerned on the never-ending requests for new taxes when the government unwisely spends the money we already give them. There is also another tea party which some would call way to the right on the political spectrum. Might even be more variants out there.
This forum probably has people from all campaigns posting positive things for their candidate and negative things for the other candidates. People are anonymous. Best that you don't use any information learned here in your decision on who to vote for.
My guess is that every candidate running has an interest in their community but different ideas on what is best for their community. You need to look at the issues, as told by the candidates themselves, to decide which candidate best reflects how you want the city to run.
Posted by john, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 10:49 pm
What on earth is this problem people have with being "pro-growth", or "pro-development"? Pleasanton could use more houses and businesses. It will grow our tax base. It will help restore programs to the schools. And please don't say Pleasanton will become like Dublin. I don't get that either. I think Dublin is also a nice place.
Posted by Tea Party Proud, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 14, 2013 at 11:36 pm
@"Are there any candidates who show genuine concern for working people (including union members, who are working people also), or are they all pro-development/developers, chamber of commerce employers?"
You must be joking. I think I speak for all Pleasanton residents when I say that we moved here to get away from working class. Now we find ourselves in a trying situation where our public servents are asking more then we can afford. High unsustainables and unfunded liabilities just because our public servents want to live high off the hog. If we give back to our job creaters what they deserve maybe some of the public servents can come back.
Posted by Julie, a resident of the Vineyard Hills neighborhood, on Feb 15, 2013 at 8:51 am
Growth that pays for its impacts, with adequate fees and mitigations, can strengthen a City. The 3000 new high density housing units that have just been approved, and many thousands to come, are not mitigated with adequate school impact fees or other mitigations that will pay their own way. Pleasanton schools, community resources, and roads will be overburdened and new taxes will be asked for in the form of more bonds and parcel taxes to mitigate the damage.
I will support someone who I know has the courage to to stand up to this threat to our community. I will support David Miller.
Posted by Mr. Geeneyuss, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 15, 2013 at 3:58 pm
Folks, please do not be duped by the supposed "Tea Party" participant here. The Troll is merely using the most rabid stereotypes of what he/she/it assumes a Republican, conservative type of Tea Party affiliate's mindset and opinion would be on this subject matter and is here only to irk the Town Square and defame the Right leaning folks in this town.
Douchebaggery has yet again crept into our midst, ignore the cretin and it will go away.
Posted by Nancy , a member of the Pleasanton Middle School community, on Feb 15, 2013 at 8:02 pm
TPP, if you are referring to protecting "freedom" and the whole UN aspect of having more control over local issues then I strongly suggest that you look into what is happening with the implementation of all of the public housing, transportation and taxing aspects of UN Agenda 21 within the Tri-valley and throughout Northern California.
Posted by Bill Fazakerly, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Feb 17, 2013 at 12:23 pm
The UN Agenda 21 is very real, and it is impacting Pleasanton in a very big way. ABAG is dictating more and more high density housing, and our City Council just continues to go along with it. FINALLY, Palo Alto is waking up to the fact that membership in ABAG brings no benefits, while their demands are destroying the city. Another 2,000 plus units of high density housing is on the table in Palo Alto, and their City Council is planning to appeal. There is even talk of withdrawing from ABAG - the absolutely best thing that any Bay Area city can do. Anyone who thinks that the UN agenda is not a local problem needs to wake up. It is time for us to carefully cast our votes because the stakes are much higher than downtown lighting and beautifying Pioneer Park. David Miller can intelligently discuss these more important issues, and it isn't clear whether the other candidates are even aware of the issues. In Palo Alto they are finally figuring out that another 2000 units of high-density housing is really a local issue.
Posted by Ohbrother, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 17, 2013 at 1:28 pm
Great, withdraw from ABAG and have no seat at the table yet the housing numbers are still asigned to Pleasanton, but without Pleasanton having any say in their allocation, per state law. That makes a lot of sense. . .if that's intelligent discussion then no thanks! Withdrawing from ABAG doesn't make housing numbers go away--does Dave Miller NOT understand that?
Posted by local, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Feb 17, 2013 at 7:22 pm
Having a seat at the table does absolutely no good. Their staff members, who have no accountability to the cities, come up with formulas and then assign housing numbers to cities. The whole "regional housing need" is a joke. At what point can we say "enough is enough"? You cannot keep adding housing and keep a quality of life. The whole housing need is an unfunded mandate. How about leaving some land open for "affordable" housing, 100% financed for by the State of California (the ones forcing us to build subsidized housing). That land will remain vacant until the State finances it and pays all the mitigation fees for all of the impacts it puts on our community (schools, traffic. etc.).
However, I think better that withdrawing from ABAG it would be better to withdraw from Alameda County. The low-income housing pricing for Pleasanton is set at the county level. We have nothing in common with Oakland, Hayward, and the whole west-county. Plus they will always have more people so they will continue to tell us what to do as they have more votes at the agency level as well as the voters (for new taxes). Oakland will only be happy when Pleasanton is just like them.
And as for enough housing, isn't Dublin doing a good enough job for the whole east bay? They have a jobs-housing balance that is way out of wack with too much housing. But hey, if that is what they want to do, go for it. Just don't make all cities be required to follow their lead. What is actually the point of having the concept of a city if the city has no control over its land-use?