Council tables Oak Grove hearing until judge rules Comments on Stories, posted by Editor, Pleasanton Weekly Online, on Mar 8, 2008 at 1:15 pm
The Pleasanton City Council Tuesday postponed indefinitely a possible public hearing on a citizens' coalition's request for a referendum on the proposed Oak Grove housing and open space project until an Alameda Superior Court judge decides if their plea can be heard.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, March 5, 2008, 6:10 PM
Posted by Paulette Kenyon, a resident of the Val Vista neighborhood, on Mar 8, 2008 at 1:15 pm
Proponents of the Save Our Hills initiative have claimed that those who agree with the settlement with the Lins are anti-democratic - that those who argue against this initiative project wish to block a healthy exercise in living democracy. But, I must remind those who are leading (or quietly behind the curtains, supporting) this campaign that a group of citizens (who also happened to support Brozosky and Ayala politically) shouted down the opportunity for a townhall meeting on the Iraq War - which in my mind, is a much more viable exercise in living democracy.
So, that argument is suspect, in my opinion - least when it comes to the leaders of this initiative. Kay also voted no on the USAPATRIOT Act resolution that passed, by a hair when it came before the last council. Steve voted no as well, although, to be fair, he hasn't publicly supported this initiative in any big way since he became a school board member.
In any event, as much as I don't want to see more houses - especially gigantic luxury homes - built in Pleasanton, I do think that the deal is a good one. I was one of the first people on board when the Save the Pleasanton Ridge initiative came into being. I was at the Sierra Club meeting where Save The Pleasanton Ridge was hatched. The big difference between the Ridge campaign and this Hill campaign is that it's easier to build homes on hills than on ridges. So, from the get-go, we had that advantage going for us. It was a victory; but, it was a victory more easily given up by builders, who would've found fewer viable lots to build on up there, had we not claimed victory. However, even then, it didn't stop the opposition from fighting against saving the ridge. So, if that was a difficult and costly enterprise, I can only imagine what this one will be like, on property that's easier to build upon.
Now that it's gone this far and Kay has gotten alot of support from citizens, it seems that citizens will be footing the bill for an initiative process. So...maybe since it's costing us, people will be willing to support paying for this chunk of land rather than doing something else - like lending money to the schools to save their programs that are being cut. Who knows? Maybe miracles do happen. I'm a pragmatist(not a radical leftist, as Tom Tuttle keeps calling me); so, I'm hoping that the sane and reasonable will find solutions to this new dilemma. Perhaps, it is possible for a better deal, once you pull the whole city onboard. Although, my gut tells me that it may be unlikely that we will get the park that some of us had hoped to get if the Lins offer is turned down; and, this will be a waste of time and money, not the breath of fresh democratic air that the pushers of this intiative claim. With all this democracy in the air, can we have the Iraq townhall meeting now?
Posted by Jerry, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Mar 8, 2008 at 10:28 pm
Of course you can have your townhall meeting. Find a space such as the city library, or where ever, that can be used free of charge and have at it. Why do you insist on having this debate at a city council meeting. Why not have it at a location where pro/con can argue and not interfere with the business of the citizens of Pleasanton. Where would one find a better example of "living democracy". I would wager you would find little or no opposition to such a meeting.
At a recent City Council meeting, Councilmember Sullivan mentioned a townhall meeting such as you desire and received no support from the council, so you just may be out of luck there. But all is not lost, you can still speak about any subject you desire (well, almost any subject) during the public comments portion of the council meetings. One gentleman rambles on about something during this portion of all the council meetings.
One would hope you aren't hinting that those that don't agree with your way of thinking are less entitled to "democracy" than you. From what I observed, the group of citizens that supposedly "shouted down" your proposal for a townhall meeting were exercising the same rights we all enjoy. They just had more support and a more convincing argument. If you need to place blame somewhere, place it where it most likely fits - on the council members that wouldn't support your adgenda. But wait, they were also exercising their democratic right.
IMO, it doesn't matter how Kay, Steve, or anyone else, voted on an issue or if someone chose to collect signatures or chose to man a "Don't sign" table. They were exercising their rights as citizens.
If this referendum is upheld of course the citizens will "foot the bill" for an election process, just as they do when any citizens initative is placed before them. As for not getting a park, does anyone not believe some type of development will be approved for Oak Grove. It may not be what the developer is proposing at this time but some type development will be there.
Thank you for fighting for the Pleasanton Ridge. You, and others, have assured the beauty of the Ridge is there for all to enjoy. With the great weather we're having now, it's becoming more beautiful each day. As I sit on my deck in the mornings I'm amazed at the colors that appear.
As for school funding - that's being debated elsewhere on this forum.........
Posted by think big, not small, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 8, 2008 at 11:07 pm
"As for school funding - that's being debated elsewhere on this forum........"
it may be debated elsewhere on the forum, but it's not mutually exclusive. everything is interrelated. sorry you can't see that. think big picture instead of focusing on the details of a component of the big picture.