Posted by Resident, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 8:43 am

"Cook-Kallio has picked up endorsements by a number of other regional politicians, including Congressman Pete Stark"

That is enough for me not vote NO for Cook-Kallio. Stark is , imo, a corrupt guy whose children are receiving social security benefits even though he is still alive and making a six figure income.

That would be like Bush endorsing Romney...

I will vote for the other person running, but not Cook-Kallio.

Posted by local, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 10:00 am

That list of endorsements is almost the same list that endorsed Nadia Lockyer in 2010 (you can go to smarvoter dot com to see that list).

Posted by annonymous, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 2:18 pm

What you ought to be looking at is the leadership skills and the things Cook-Kallio has done for Pleasanton. Gosh, look at what we could get accomplished if we had an elected official that actually understands how government works, has a backbone and gets along with people who sit on the same committees and those representing Pleasanton.

Posted by local, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 5:09 pm

Anonymous, that is why I am voting for Jerry Thorne. He has done a lot for the city and unlike Cheryl, he was involved in the city before running for office and he gets along with others on the committees he is on, and he can represent the city at meeting that happen during the day since he is retired. Oh yes, he has a backbone and will stand up to the other cities when needed and to the unions.

Posted by Concerned, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 21, 2012 at 7:43 pm

Cook-Kallio is a union member and is totally controlled by the unions. I definitely will not vote for her.

Posted by curious, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 22, 2012 at 1:05 am

It says a lot to me that our city commissioners aren't supporting cook-kallio. So she seems to be touting endorsements from these tax and spend politicians. My concern with cook-kallio is that it doesn't seem to be about pleasanton for her--rather Fremont, Sacramento, everywhere but Plesanton. We've had 8 years of a Mayor with higher political aspirations--I think its time for a Mayor that is going to be concerned about Pleasanton for a change.

Posted by GI Joe, a resident of the Highland Oaks neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2012 at 5:23 am

I am happy to be done with Hosterman! 8 years too many. Too many promises and rich union contracts. Thank goodness she is gone. But I don't see Cheryl as any better.

I am voting Thorne, Pentin and Brown.

Posted by curious, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 24, 2012 at 7:19 am

GI Joe, I have to agree with you--Cheryl has given new meaning to partisan politics. I'm with Brown, Pentin & Thorne.

Posted by Kyle, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2012 at 8:22 am

Can someone tell me why the Firemen are supporting Cook-Kallio and DeMarcus? Why would the fireman care?

Posted by justwondering, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2012 at 1:25 pm

The City council negotiates and approves the union contract for fire and police. Its in their best interest to support candidates that they believe are sympathetic to the union cause like pay, retirement, etc. So if you believe there's a problem with the unfunded pension liability that is going to continue to grow then you shouldn't vote for these two.

Posted by Unbelievable, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Sep 25, 2012 at 11:23 pm

Kyle, do you live in CA?? Do you live in a cave ? You don't seem to 'get it'. Have you ever had a job ?? IF you had a job, you would know the employer offered you a job that pays X. You take it, OR leave it. CA is an 'at will' state, meaning the boss can terminate you for anyreason, any day.

EXCEPT...

If you're a PUBLIC EMPLOYEE, when 'we the people' ARE THE employers. We should have the right to hire, fire, and set the pay.

EXCEPT...

UNION BOSSES decide those issues. In theory, we have representatives, representing taxpayers, who are suppose to negotiate for us. However, it has evolved that Firemen, and police & teachers, to an extent, campaign for, & contribute to those who have committed and promised they will give all the raises, retirements, and conditions that the firemen want 'demand'. They threaten according. Effective. The people they help elect, sell out the taxpayers, and cave in to threats from the firemen, (and police & teachers).So yes, firemen want to elect people they own & threaten withdrawal of support. Officials want all those free campaigners, election day workers, and financial contributions.It's a vicious circle, each feeding off the other, both ignoring they employers, the taxpayers, who get squeezed out of any conversation or power.

Pres Franklin Roosevelt (FDR) a PRO-union activist, who said it would be wrong and unworkable for our own employees to be unionized against us. But Gov Moonbeam came along 30 years ago and changed all that, by unionizing our public workers, and now we PAY as hostages, with no voice.