No to Everyting Committee of Ayala, Brozosky, Arkin, Fox, Brown Take Over the City Around Town, posted by Watch Out, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2010 at 9:37 am
Now we know that "No to Everything" committee of Kay Ayala, Steve Brozosky, Valerie Arkin, Anne Fox, Karla Brown-Belcher, et. al. are blackmailing our city. They used false statement (aka lies) tactics to scare the pubic in believing that Measure D was bad for the city, just as they did for Measure G (school parcel tax). The development will eventually be approved. They are trying to be a thorn in the side of the Lin family until they give up or sneek their mole, Valerie Arkin, on to the the city council.
Its time we stood up and told the "No to Everything" committee to get out of town. They tried to run Brian Arkin (Valerie's husband) to the council. He went down in flames. They tried to run Brozosky to the mayor's office (twice) via the school board. He went down in flames. Valerie Arkin is next. She pushed the school board to force the city to have a "school board memeber" on the Hacienda Task Force in order to pursue her "No to Everying" views for city development. Stoneridge Extension: NO; School Parcel Tax: NO; Oak Ridge: NO.
Just watch the "No to Everyting" team put up a candidate for school board and the city council.
It's time we take back our city from the a bunch of winers. Just Say No to the "No to Everyting" committee.
Posted by steve, a resident of the Parkside neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2010 at 9:49 am
what's your take from the development? $$'s from construction, supporting services or something else? I'm trying to understand your motivation...you obviously think you have something to gain from the Lin's gamble on their property investment. How about full disclosure.......no one favored this project just for the Lin's to exercise their property rights. No investment comes with guarantees.
Posted by Watch Out, a resident of the Amador Estates neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2010 at 10:16 am
I believe that sustainable development is good for the city and good for our community. The City does not build infrastructure they rely on developers to do it for them. I donít have anything to gain from the development. I do believe in property rights. This project was approved by appointed planning commission and the elected council. Let our elected leaders lead. The initiative process in California has corrupted the democratic process where our elected leaders wonít take an unpopular position on an issue for fear of losing the next election. This leads to a do nothing legislature. Give our council credit for have the balls to do the job they were elected to do.
Posted by Jerry, a resident of the Oak Hill neighborhood, on Jun 10, 2010 at 5:21 pm
Hey Watch Out,
I could be mistaken, but I don't believe the "appointed planning commission" approved this project. I think the developer appealed it to the city council because the planning commission rejected the EIR...
As for running the "No To Everything" committee out of town, you might have a difficult chore since 53%+/- of those voting on Tuesday seemed to approve of this so call "committee" - if there is such a committee...
Posted by LOL, a resident of the Bridle Creek neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2010 at 12:36 am
The sad part is that there are still so many people following their lead...we need more new blood to take this city into the future and less old timers who still dwell in the past and impeding our growth.
Posted by LOL, a resident of the Bridle Creek neighborhood, on Jun 11, 2010 at 12:43 am
If this so-called "No To Everything" committee really have 53%+/- of those votes, then Ayala would be our Mayor today (scary thought). My guess is that many of the people who voted yes don't even have a clue which of the ridges is in question. I asked a number of my neighbors who put out those No on D signs and they all thought the development is on the west Pleasanton ridge. In addition, Yes on D folks did a pretty sloppy job educating the voters. In time we'll see that the No on D folks were wrong.
Posted by "sleezy" politics, a resident of the Birdland neighborhood, on Jun 14, 2010 at 8:32 am
Thank you to our community activists, who are the watch dogs of our quality of life in Pleasanton. I decided to vote no on D when I read the Times editorial that condemned Pleasanton's Mayor and two other City Council Members of "sleezy" politics.
Talk about David and Goliath. No on D won only spending pennies to the other sides half a MILLION?
Posted by Can't complain about YES on D, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 15, 2010 at 7:14 am
Hats off to the YES on D folks. They sent me 8 mass mailers, they have pages in the voter's pamphlet, they called my husband, they talked to me at Farmer's market, they took me on a tour of the property, and I got a call from Jennifer Hosterman's office. They spent over $500,000 educating our city of the benefits of Oak Grove.
If anyone did not educate the people it was the No on D folks. I got one green flier on my door step. No phone calls. No note from Kay A.) They only had 2 pages in my voter pamphlet. I spoke to them at Farmer's Market one Saturday. And I hear they spent less then $10,000 (a 1:50 ratio).
Even with the very uneven amount of "education", the vote is in - the people don't want it.
Posted by tyu, a resident of the Another Pleasanton neighborhood neighborhood, on Jun 24, 2010 at 10:15 am
So Watchout, you think it will be built no matter what the cost to the Lin's, or what people in Pleasanton want? I think that's what the Lin's thought, but were wrong. Once we are out of this financial meltdown the idea of a few dollars per classroom won't be as good of an arguement. This was their best chance, while everyone is searching for some extra money. It didn't work now, it likely won't in the near future, IMHO.