Political Tricks Around Town, posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Jul 15, 2008 at 10:38 pm
Proponents of the ridgeline protection initiative keep saying that a second Council-sponsored measure on the ballot this November will only confuse voters. Opponents of the initiative say that choices must be given to voters.
Matt Sullivan tonight called putting a second measure on the ballot a political trick. So let's talk about tricks, shall we? The biggest trick going on is the one being pulled by the Save Pleasanton Hills group.
I'm going to set aside all the feel-good BS that is being tossed around in the Council meeting tonight regarding public participation, citizens exercising their rights, yadda yadda, and cut to the chase.
1 - The initiative's PRIMARY GOAL is to PREVENT the development of OAK GROVE. That is what it was designed to do based upon what is known of the Oak Grove PUD. It must be done in conjunction with the referendum in order to take effect. The Save Pleasanton Hills group is taking a gamble that both the referendum and initiative will pass. It was very transparently obvious from the beginning back when the petitions started circulating. Ask yourself, why did this initiative appear around the same time as the referendum? Why not last year or even earlier? The proponents DON'T CARE that this Council has had the development of a ridgeline protection ordinance on their 2-year workplan because the proponents DON'T CARE about ridgeline protection beyond how it would affect Oak Grove. If they REALLY cared about ridgeline protection, they wouldn't be fighting City Hall right now. Let's not forget this going forward. IT'S ALL ABOUT OAK GROVE!
2 - This is Pleasanton! Everyone LOVES ridgeline protection! Ridgeline protection is a prime Pleasanton value enshrined in our General Plan. And even better, everyone LOVES the housing cap! Let's face it, if it runs unopposed THIS INITIATIVE WILL PASS. I could bet money on that! The proponents know this and are trying to exploit this. That is why they are so against giving voters a choice that would damage their chances at preventing Oak Grove development. We've seen choices at the ballot box quite recently with Prop 98 and 99. The proponents want to characterize YOU, the voting public, as prone to being confused. They want to MUTE your voice to a single YES or NO on a single ballot measure and not give you any alternatives to vote on because they want you to pass their Communist agenda. Yes, I dare say it is Communist because Communists take away land through both legislation and force without just compensation "for the benefit of the public good".
Posted by Kathleen, a resident of the Bridle Creek neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2008 at 9:21 am
Give me a break!
Has Stacey ever been involved in Pleasanton beyond sitting at her computer and pontificating?
You are criticizing people that have been active, caring about an issue and getting off their butt and doing something about it.
Stacey you speak from both sides of your face on another thread you said, "I am discounting the posts here [even mine). These posts here should not replace the weight and consideration reserved to someone showing up at a public meeting or otherwise being recorded in the public record."
Were you there last night? Did you speak? Have you ever done anything for our community?
Stacey has no place to presume what these active citizen care about, they have and are working hard for this community.
Posted by Stacey, a resident of the Amberwood/Wood Meadows neighborhood, on Jul 16, 2008 at 10:48 am
I didn't say the agenda was evil. I said it was Communist. And neither did I criticize anyone for their passion in caring about an issue. I'm simply calling an ace an ace and stripping away the wool trying to be pulled over the eyes. Proponents of the initiative have written on this site in the past that they wish to make it so restrictive to develop Oak Grove that the Lins will just end up giving the property to the City as a tax write-off. That is just about as Communist as things come!
Someone spoke at the meeting last night pointing out that the people behind the initiative are former council members or have worked in planning, etc. and not some ignorant group of people sitting around a table in a dark room writing up the language of the initiative. That makes it worse! They know all the tricks and are trying to exploit them. They know that the citizens of this City will pass a ridgeline protection initiative if it is unopposed at the ballot box! Let's not pretend to be naive.
And since you attempted to take my own words from another thread out of context here, let me clarify. Elected officials should not seriously consider gossip at a third-party venue to influence their decisions. They have an obligation to stick to due process of the law. Third-party gossip sites like this are not part of that due process. And as such, I have never written here in an attempt to influence the decisions of our elected officials nor have I ever expected them to vote a certain way based upon the amount of gossip on this site. That would be HIGHLY IRRESPONSIBLE of them!
PS. I'm a product of Pleasanton, the PUSD, etc., lived here most of my life and now have a family of my own to raise here. I only became interested in local political issues within the past year. When you try to criticize me based upon my starting level of participation in the political scene, I'll try to not criticize the fact that most people are relative newcomers to my hometown who are only here because us long-timers didn't believe in no-growth.