Matt Sullivan Voice of Pleasanton When you think like Matt Around Town, posted by lessismore, a member of the Mohr Elementary School community, on Oct 24, 2012 at 2:06 pm
I was watching the City Council & Mayoral debate on TV last night, and found Matt Sullivan's comment/question to the candidates as very arrogant. Whit him leaving there will no longer be a voice on the City Council for the people of Pleasanton.
I have reached out to you twice about issues and you never return my calls.
So it would appear to this voter you are only the voice of people you know.
Posted by Normal, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 24, 2012 at 9:20 pm
I about chocked at that planted question during the forum. Cindy and Matttake off in such scary directions, I certainly would not want anyone like either one of them again. If you mean putting an individual with extreme fringe issues ahead of the whole of Pleasanton...maybe so. I'm SO glad their days are numbered !
Posted by Joan, a resident of the Highland Oaks neighborhood, on Oct 25, 2012 at 8:19 am
I disagree with you both. Matt Sullivan and Cindy McGovern have both worked hard to listen to my issues and be a voice for residents, not just the Chamber of Commerce, realtor pro-growth groups or the developers. I will miss representatives that are truly independent of organizations.
Posted by Chemist, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2012 at 8:44 am
It's fine to agree or disagree with your Council members and Mayor. Unfortunately, some of their campaigns are heavily financed by unions. Can we then trust them to represent us during negotiation with public service unions? The answer is clearly NO. There is a severe conflict of interest, and the financial state of the state can be traced back to this root problem. At the end of the day, we don't need Matt Sullivan, Jennifer Hosterman, or Cheryl Cook-Kallio to represent us - we might as well just let the unions represent us.
Posted by livin life, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2012 at 8:53 am
Joan, if the Chamber of Commerce, building trade folks, and union workers (teachers, police, fire) are not "the people" who are???? Let's not be so narrowly minded. Every voter I know wears lots of hats, but for sure they are "the people"! Personally I'm looking for elected officials who are great leaders. Not too many of those folks choose to run for office unfortunately.
Posted by Meat Axe, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2012 at 9:59 am
While government workers are people, they and their unions have become a major problem. The average government worker compensation is now TWICE that of the average worker in the private sector. It's time to make some serious cuts in goverment worker compensation. And, when I say that, I am not referring to teachers (who deserve every dime they make for the thankless jobs they have educating our children). I am referring to municipal, county, state and federal government employees, many of which are not employable in the private sector. Their compensation should be cut to 80% of that of the private sector (as it used to be for decades), since private sector employees don't get guaranteed employment. That means, on average, goverment worker pay should be 40% of what it is now (50% times 80%). Our state and local governments are nearly bankrupt because of hugely excessive government worker compensation.
Posted by Dave Walden, a resident of another community, on Oct 26, 2012 at 11:15 am Dave Walden is a member (registered user) of PleasantonWeekly.com
Dear "Pleasanton Voter" I rarely agree with Matt Sullivan but he is not an idiot and does not belong in a garbage can. It is one thing to disagree with someone but to personally attack their character shows what kind of person you are and belittles your opinion.
It is good to have a mixed opinion on the council because it brings in more ideas that allow for a better decision. As I wrote, I rarely agree with Matt but I do respect his opinion.
Posted by local, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 26, 2012 at 1:51 pm
When everybody thinks alike, nobody is thinking...
The voters elected these people. You might not have ever thought of this before BUT not everybody thinks the way you do. Eric, are you stating that anybody who voted for him should move out of the Tri-Valley? That is what is sounds like. Pretty arrogant position to take.
Posted by Ptown Dad, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Oct 27, 2012 at 6:11 pm
It's fine to have a dissenting opinion. However, Matt will postpone a vote (Walmart) when it looks like he can't get his way. If he wants people to respect his opinion then he must learn to respect others, and not just sulk. Respect goes both ways. Matt and Karla Brown both say they support "slow growth" or "smart growth." What they mean by that is if they don't agree with the way things are going they will become obstructionist until they can change everyone's opinion to agree with them. This isn't slow growth or smart growth. This is government obstruction and it serves nobody.
I appreciate dissenting opinions, but not when it delays progress. I am glad Matt is gone, and I'm hoping his protege, Karla, is not voted onto the council.
Posted by Jill, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Oct 27, 2012 at 9:44 pm
You are mistaken if you think Karla is Matt's protege. While they agree on some things, they are far apart on others. On being for slow growth, it can be difficult because all the money for lobbying is on the other side. Karla did things the right way by bringing the issue to the voters, and the voters overwhelming agreed upon some protections. We need more people like Karla that will stand up to developers by going through the correct process. I am thankful she has done this along with others in the past who have done the same thing. Without advocates like them, Pleasanton would look just like Dublin.
Posted by June, a member of the Alisal Elementary School community, on Oct 30, 2012 at 1:16 am
I completely disagree that Matt Sullivan is open minded, listened to peoples' issues, and was respectful even when he didnt agree. And that he should be commended if for nothing else than adding another perspective. To the contrary, I believe Mr. Sullivan caused loss of business by purposeful delaying tactics, heartache between neighbors/neighborhoods by an inability to make decisions and constantly referring matters to a third party arbitrator; and finally providing a roadmap for two successful lawsuits against the City which cost us all significantly in terms of money, local control and reputation. I do applaud public service even when I dont agree with an official's viewpoint, but unfortunately, ego trumped community service in Mr. Sullivan's case. Moving forward, lets get solution oriented residents elected
Posted by Ms. October, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2012 at 7:11 am
Everyone touts how great Pleasanton is, well it got that way through slow and planned growth elected officials like Ben Tarver, the early Tom Pico, Matt Sullivan and Cindy McGovern. In her first election, even Jennifer Hosterman promised slow growth to our voters, before she sold out.
The point is the majority of Pleasanton voters want slow growth, and I am proud to be one of them. I will cast my ONE vote for council to the only slow growth candidate running in this election, and that is Karla Brown!
Posted by Can't wait for the investigative report, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Oct 30, 2012 at 9:05 am
Speaking of Demarcus, but this would make a fascinating in depth investigative reporting article. Demarcus was a consultant for James Tong regarding a project in Pleasanton regarding Vintage Hills shopping center that New Leaf is currently going in to (demolishing it and building high density housing) and interestingly, did not address the Pleasanton City Council on any matters at all related to ‘transportation.’ Demarcus operates under the Fictitous Business Name of The Demarcus Group, but did not define that name until quite recently -- August 14, 2008.
Also, she was present and sitting next to James Tong, Martin Inderbitzen, and paid consultant Tom Pico and architects in many of of the Oak Grove hearings at the Planning Commission and City Council in Pleasanton City Council Chambers between 2006 and 2007.
Also, she was present and sitting next to James Tong in the Promenade rezoning hearings in Dublin and photographed sitting next to James Tong in the City Council Chambers on September 20, 2011. If she has not worked for James Tong for 10 years, why is she sitting with James Tong with his team of representatives at all of these public hearings?
And let’s not forget her personally arranging for Jennifer Hosterman to use the Chabot Drive Charter Properties Suite 100 location for her mayoral campaign in October 2004 to put mailing labels of 15,000 pieces of Jennifer Hosterman mailers.
What a coincidence!!!
And let's not forget that in 2010 Erlene Demarcus who has obtained thousands of dollars from people with the last name of Tong and Lin is listed as Secretary where Mei-Chun Lin is President for the Boulder Creek Foundation in filings with the Federal government from 2010. If Demarcus claims no business relationship with Tong/Lin in 10 years, why is she listed on forms for a 2010 business filed with the Federal Government?
Mei-Chun Lin is associated with Chang Su-O Lin and Frederic Lin in the Fairway Family Community LP/Fairway Family Community Apts LP company and Dublin Ranch Senior Apartments projects in Dublin as well as being the head of Boulder Creek LLC.
Posted by Melinda, a member of the Alisal Elementary School community, on Oct 31, 2012 at 8:28 pm
I dont support Demarcus even though I am a Democrat. But so what if she sat next to the Lin Family and their attorneys during the public hearing regarding THEIR property. Quit making them the evil people. If it was YOUR property, and obviously most people do think its THEIR property even though most residents in town who voted for PP dont actually have a clue where the Lin land is located (c'mon admit it, they were just voting for the phase "save our hills"). Oh, except the "2 percent people" who live on the hilltops already, who dont want to gaze across the Lin's acreage as their personal park. And to think, us plebeians could have had a public trail access. But I digress. If Demarcus was a consultant, get over it. You would want a full compliment of expertise at your side too if you had the land and had been dragged through the mud and courts. In fact, if I were the Lins, and I had PP leaders public refer to my family as "foreigners" which did repeatedly happen, I would never give up and I would sue again and again. Oh, and Matt Sullivan brought you that expense as well.
Posted by June, a member of the Alisal Elementary School community, on Oct 31, 2012 at 9:15 pm
Dear Ms. October, I believe the councilmembers you cited (except for McGovern who wasnt on the council at the time) adopted the growth control ordinance AFTER a majority of big developable land in Pleasanton had already been approved or there was limited acreage of properties zoned or suitable for zoning was remaining. The growth control ordinance simply meters the number of buiding permits that can be issued per year and not the number of units that can be approved. I generally recall its about 750 units per year but dont quote me. Now that my sound like alot but in a City of approx. 29,000 households, it is little. And the big builders typically spread out or phase the number of permits they actually want (a portion of the units they have approval for) in any given year to limit economic exposure. Look no further than the current economy which had permits issued in all of Pleasanton closer to 100 or less since 2006. My point is, with all respect to the council candidate Brown, she can not take any credit or call herself a slow growth candidate because the ordinance is already in place. Perhaps it would be more honest to say she is a supporter of very little new development and new development amenities (open space, public park funding,etc.). Just keeping it honest.