Town Square

Post a New Topic

Hosterman, council members Thorne, Cook-Kallio re-elected

Original post made on Nov 3, 2010

Mayor Jennifer Hosterman and city council incumbents Cheryl Cook-Kallio and Jerry Thorne were re-elected yesterday, ending a months-long effort to unseat them by a coalition seeking to gain control of Pleasanton's governing board.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, November 2, 2010, 9:48 PM

Comments (42)

Posted by Gary Schwaegerle, a resident of Downtown
on Nov 3, 2010 at 9:20 am

Gary Schwaegerle is a registered user.

Congratulations & Condolences to All the Candidates
for making the Sacrifice of taking your time to Serve

Keep up the Good Work to make our Community the Great Place it is.

Stay involve in making Our Community, State & Nation;
in the World even better.

Sincerely, Gary Schwaegerle


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 9:49 am

I am so happy that McGovern and Karla Brown did not win! I was a little worried because in my neighborhood, plenty of people have McGovern signs, and there were people standing on an intersection with McGovern and Brown signs (a scary thought if these two had won!, glad to see they did not. They proudly campaigned with their involment against Oak Grove, without realizing that many of us disliked them because they were against Oak Grove)


Posted by Elizabeth, a resident of Mohr Park
on Nov 3, 2010 at 10:06 am

I want to thank all the candidates for running positive elections. It was nice, in the wake of all the negative ads at state and federal levels, to see elections where the candidates respect one another, in spite of their differences. Hopefully the contributors to the Town Square can learn from you. Congratulations to the winners, and condolances to the those who did not win.




Posted by Pro-Law, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 10:26 am

Resident,


Exactly what I've heard from a lot of people. They did not like their stances on the Oak Grove project. Too bad ONE issue was what made many people decide how to vote, but the candidates maybe shouldn't have flaunted one issue. With that said, I guess you could say people thought it was the way the candidates would govern as a whole and voted appropriately.


Posted by Maria, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 10:35 am

Elizabeth, I agree. Really, a lot of the comments on these forums were nastier than the campaigns themselves.


Posted by sknywench, a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Nov 3, 2010 at 11:07 am

sknywench is a registered user.

Congratulations to the re-elected incumbents who have worked hard during their tenure on the council on behalf of Pleasanton residents. They have formed positive working relationships with the surrounding Tri-Valley communities, and have been successful in channeling funding here for important transportation infrastructure improvements on I580, I680, I84. Now on to the next challenges of meeting regional housing allocations which take experience and leadership which they possess. Pleasanton is a great community and we are grateful to live here.


Posted by Paul, a resident of Carlton Oaks
on Nov 3, 2010 at 2:02 pm

The challengers gave the incumbents a good run for their money. I would hope the incumbents understand that many informed Pleasanton voters question their leadership.

Every vote for a challenger is informed, incumbents get many of their votes from voters who do not follow local issues.
Once again many informed residents have shown a lack of confidence in Hosterman and this time sent a message of concern to Cook-Kallio.


Posted by sam, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 3, 2010 at 2:48 pm

congratulations to all the developers who have invested in this election. they won! the voters had decided yesterday to sell the city to them. let's all respect that and look forward to see thousands of low income families moving into the city. together, we can build a community as warm and cozy as Oakland, Richmond and East Palo Alto. In a few years, with the help of the wonderful developers and the valuable leaders re-elected last night, there will be no more traffic on i-580 as all of them are now confined in the city. our children will not feel lonely in their schools since pretty soon their classes will be filled with 50 kids each. no worries, as one Pleasanton lady in her 60s stated during the city hall meeting, "when my son was in school 40 years ago, the school was crowed anyway!" we certainly can succeed in that. You just cannot learn as effectively unless you have 49 kids competing with you in the same room! You cannot develop any economy unless you build at least 2700 affordable housing in the town. the trio people re-elected will make sure that is happening and that is happening now. The people spoke out and they clearly said they are sick and tired of being so special in the bay area. How terrible and boring it is to live in the town with so many quite parks and nice schools. Where are all the fun the other cities around the bay are enjoying. Let's work on it and make sure our city will be on the headline of the local news (at least) everyday and share the glory with Oakland! Together, nothing is impossible! Work on!


Posted by Furdog, a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Nov 3, 2010 at 2:56 pm

Sam - Really? You're going to compare Pleasanton to Oakland (all because McGovern/Brown didn't get elected)?

Wow....I think you need to get your head checked! Maybe it's time for you to move......


Posted by sam, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 3, 2010 at 3:09 pm

yeah, i need to get "my head checked" and it is time for me to move. thanks for being so nice to a guy who disagrees with you. your level of tolerance and passion for diversity is really admirable. it is ok. our town is a lovely place and whoever has a different opinion should just get the hell out. You are great!


Posted by Balanced, a resident of Downtown
on Nov 3, 2010 at 3:34 pm

Sam,

It is obvious based on your initial post it is you who is imbalaced. You start a tyraid about developers getting their way when a grand total of 40 building permits were issued all of last year. Virtually NONE of them to developers. You then go on to state Pleasanton is going low income housing and going to turn into Oakland. Who is the one lacking perspective here. Day after is frustrating but you rhetoric is misplaced and unneccesary. Funny how your hypocritical attitude is so reversed when anyone disagrees with you huh.....


Posted by Devon, a resident of Apperson Ridge
on Nov 3, 2010 at 4:03 pm

This is worth celebrating indeed. What a relief to see our mayor back in office. It goes to show that those against Oak Grove are not elected. That was my biggest motivation in getting out of the house and vote.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 4:14 pm

"Every vote for a challenger is informed, incumbents get many of their votes from voters who do not follow local issues."

Paul:

You are wrong! I voted for the incumbents because I followed local issues and did not like, for instance, what Brown and McGovern did against the Oak Grove development. Self-serving Brown looks after herself and her neighborhood, and McGovern is nothing but Ayala's puppet. Did you see who endorsed these two? Brozosky, Ayala, Arkin, all those against the Oak Grove project, which btw, the Lins sued because of it. It is PRIVATE property, you know? McGovern, Brown et all can NOT decide what the Lins want to do with THEIR PRIVATE property!!!

I am glad McGovern and Brown did not win!!!


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 4:19 pm

"let's all respect that and look forward to see thousands of low income families moving into the city."

Actually, it is McGovern who has said she is all for affordable housing. Go to smartvoter.org to see her position on that. It is well known that McGovern want "starter" and affordable houses (even agrees with giving loans to low income folks)


Posted by sam, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 3, 2010 at 4:29 pm

Balanced,

the city is planning to build 2700 units of low income, most of extremely low income, apartments within the next a few years! i am sure you think those three are all good and you are very balanced. but can you ask anyone one of those three to swear they never get any compaign fund from the developers? i am sure you are concerned by the business of those developers, i am sure you are going to say that those practices are all legal. but the fact is the developers are all lined up behind those three and they are ready to work! you wait and see how nice our town is going to become with that many low income apartments. and you wait and see so many of them will be built right next to your house! then you can come out and cheer-lead for those three again! well, i guess your house is already right next to a house so no worry for you. and you can feel safe since it is not in your back yard. in addition, it is safe for you to call anyone else "not in your back yard"! Talking about "hypocritical attitude"! How many times those three had said the people of pleansaton need to be "educated" to understand their great ideas! well, i guess you are already educated! congratulations on the graduation!


Posted by b, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 4:30 pm

"let's all respect that and look forward to see thousands of low income families moving into the city."

This was said about the candidates who were faulted for voting in favor of 50 multi-million dollar homes? This forum cracks me up.


Posted by sam, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 3, 2010 at 4:31 pm

oh one more thing. i disagree with many people over many things, but i never ask anybody to check their head and i never ask anybody to move! how is that for "balanced"!


Posted by Steve, a resident of Downtown
on Nov 3, 2010 at 4:49 pm

Here come the McMansions.


Posted by ricky, a resident of California Reflections
on Nov 3, 2010 at 6:42 pm

I swear its the "Ayala" curse. Any time this angry person endorses someone they lose. I kid you not!


Posted by Steve, a resident of Birdland
on Nov 3, 2010 at 7:10 pm

Resident, unfortunately you are not too well informed. Your statement "It is PRIVATE property, you know? McGovern, Brown et all can NOT decide what the Lins want to do with THEIR PRIVATE property!!!" Ummm....Yes they can, when done the way that any regulation or law allows you to. I guess by your ignorant statement, I can tear down my house and build whatever I please on my property without anyone being able to stop me. Because, of course, it is MY PRIVATE PROPERTY!!!


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 3, 2010 at 7:28 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

Unfortunately for the Lins, they can make plans for their property "done the way that any regulation or law allows" and yet still get their plans stopped _and_ the regulations changed. It'd be like if Steve were to tear down his house, make new house plans in accordance with what current regulation allows, then his neighbors decide they don't want him to build a house at all so they collect signatures to referend Steve's new house plans _and_ pass a law preventing Steve from even building a house.


Posted by Devon, a resident of Apperson Ridge
on Nov 3, 2010 at 9:38 pm

Very well said, Stacey. But Steve, of course, would think that's OK because he's well informed and not ignorant so he will just accept his neighbor's objection and move on.


Posted by Informed, a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Nov 3, 2010 at 9:48 pm

I don't usually post here, but I want to make sure council members and candidates on both sides know why I vote the way I did. I for one swore I'd never vote for Hosterman or any of the other incumbents on City Council because I saw her doing everything to be miss popular and nothing to work regionally and solve some of the tough issues, which can't be solved without taking a stand and making some people unhappy. They were letting the loudest voices block everything that came before them, from projects that would have provided homes and nursing care for our local seniors to churches that wanted to upgrade their facilities to the Stoneridge extention that had been in the approved master plan since before all the surrounding neighborhoods were built. But in the last couple years, I thought I saw some change.

After so much acrimony over the Linn property in the past, I thought they'd done a reasonable job of getting the developer and members of the Kottinger Ranch community to sit down together and hammer out a solution. The city and neighbors got fewer homes and a huge park that would preserve the open space forever. Hosterman and some members of the council started working more regionally and got an agreement that the Stoneridge extension will be part of a multi-city cooperation to relieve traffic. And when the shrill NIMBY voices started screaming about McMansions on the hillsides they didn't just cave. (Note that most of the voices emanating those living in McMansions that were built on the hillsides before they ever moved here and some of whom told me to my face that they already hiked those hills but they didn't want everyone in town accessing them!)

I thought maybe we'd start to return to the planned progress model that turned out downtown from a dump with seedy thrift stores and bars into the attractive place it is now; that brought business and tax revenues and BART here -- all amenities I enjoy every day. But no, the shrill voices got shriller and waved their petitions with photoshopped pictures in our faces and got us where we are now. We lost the park and the guarantee of open space. The city is facing an expensive lawsuit. We facing lawsuits because we're so afraid that housing normal people can afford will turn us into Oakland that our kids and seniors can't afford to live here. We're turning into a normal multi-generation city into a huge gated community for nothing but rich white 30 to 55-year-olds with school-age kids. That's not the Pleasanton I grew up in and it's not the Pleasanton I want to leave behind.

Bottom line: There was no way I was going to vote for the shrill voices that have prevented anything from getting done in this town. I wanted council members who would listen, think, and get things done for the best long-term interest of ALL of Pleasanton, not cave the neighbors who yell the loudest about THEIR property values with no regard to anyone else's property rights or values. The only one I saw that completely fit that description was Thorne. But Hosterman and Cook-Kallio sure looked like a lesser evil that Brown or McGovern!


Posted by Really?, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 9:54 pm

And then he will run for city council saying he is saving the land for all of us.

The ultimate tipping point for me was the letters to the editor from Brozosky- the guy who lives in a mansion on a ridge, go figure! As that crew would say (after the ridge election) the people have spoken!


Posted by Oak Grove did it, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 10:18 pm

Cindy's OK. But, It was all about Oak Grove for me. It was a great project on 'private property'. It summed up Cindy's attitude of 'my way or no way'. That is wrong for a viable community. A single issue candidate is usually the wrong candidate for any group.
...can't believe I voted for Hosterman, but felt I had no choice...it doesn't mean I'm thrilled.


Posted by Oak Grove did it !, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 10:35 pm

Then, when Cindy decided to run as joined-at-the-hip duo with Brown, the AUTHOR of the Oak Hill crap, that said real LOUDLY that she WANTED to make it a SINGLE issue campaign ! I couldn't chance 2 seats with out-of-touch limited thinkers.............so. no choice !


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 11:17 pm

My neighbor said today that he did not vote for Piderit for school board because of an endorsemente letter from Valerie Arkin, since, per my neighbor's understanding, the Arkins were involved in the anti-Oak Grove deal. Is that true? Is Valerie Arkin involved in the anti-Oak Grove issue? (my neighbor said it was her husband among the Ayala, Brozosky, Brown, etc crowd). Does anyone know?


Posted by Arroyo, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 3, 2010 at 11:19 pm

Oak Grove effect -- ditto for me. I NEVER thought I could cast a vote for Hosterman. However, when faced with the alternatives, (the "Oak Grove duo,") I caved.


Posted by Karin, a resident of Ruby Hill
on Nov 4, 2010 at 12:04 am

If Arkin is involved with the NIMBYs, she just lost my vote if she decides to run again.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Verona
on Nov 4, 2010 at 5:47 am

Want to respond to Sam.

The City only has to "zone" for housing, not actually build any. So, while the City, on paper, says a "zone" can allow housing for non-rich people, private property owners still have to get financing to build such home. Not a lot of banks funding projects for poor homeowners, given the recent melt-down. Seems that the City just has to follow State laws and on paper "zone" or "plan" for such housing.

As we live in Hacienda, this is the area of Pleasanton that meets the State requirements for housing by BART, so we'll get the "zone" for more houses, but I just doubt any actually gets built.


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 4, 2010 at 8:38 am

Stacey is a registered user.

When Valerie Arkin ran for school board, I considered her associations. I decided to give her a chance since running a school district and having a no-growth city planning stance interface only at a non-substantial level. I have not been disappointed in my decision to vote for Arkin.

As for Sandy, she isn't tied up in such local political factions (yet, if ever) because she hasn't lived here long enough. Her only involvement in local issues since she moved here has been with the schools. I hope she continues.


Posted by Steve, a resident of Downtown
on Nov 4, 2010 at 8:51 am

Stacey and Devon, actually I went through the process of getting approvals and permits and adding on to my house and was met with various bumps along the way, trying to comply mostly with neighbors concerns about heights, window placements, etc. even after I had the permits and had paid the fees. Same thing the Lins ran into except on a different scale. Bottom line is, your neighbors have the right to modify your plans if they are objectionable. I guess the voters in Pleasanton found them objectionable. Sorry.


Posted by Really?, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 4, 2010 at 9:18 am

Valerie Arkin did endorse the Oak Grove campaign with Ayala and Brown. It was brought up here at the time that this was an interesting position to take since the land would bring revenue to the school district.


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 4, 2010 at 9:23 am

Stacey is a registered user.

Steve,

And in the end, your neighbors could still not prevent you from building at all. Nor did your neighbors gather signatures to put an initiative on the ballot to change the laws you were complying with.


Posted by junebug, a resident of Alisal Elementary School
on Nov 4, 2010 at 11:26 am

To Sam: Blaming developers for affordable housing? Firstly, State law and local inclusionary zoning REQUIRE affordable housing in every new development, either units or fees. That is because the courts decided that new home building somehow makes it impossible for low income families to afford an apartment or home, so the burden is put on new developments and ultimately the cost passed to market rate homebuyers. Oh, did I mention the City and Special Districts combined charge approx. $ 100,000 per house in building fees? Developers, unless they are non-profit organizations and have funding from the City and State in place which is tough to find these days, do NOT want to build affordable units because they drag down prices, neighbors object to them and make the approval process risky, and are essentially a write-down. So quit blaming the development community for everything that annoys you which sounds like everything. Fact is development creates jobs, funds public services, and improves your property values and trust me there are plenty of regulations to cater to everyone's self-centered entitlement.


Posted by Steve, a resident of Downtown
on Nov 4, 2010 at 11:38 am

Stacey,
I was only adding a 3-story 3200 sq ft addition to my 2500 sq ft house (plus pool house and pool). Had I attempted to do what I originally planned (tear the house down and build 2 houses and some rental units) they might have stopped my whole little project. I went to the city and stopped my neighbor from doing something similar, so I know he would have returned the favor. So no, neighbors can (and judging from Oak Grove) do stop projects all the time. That's life. I think it was the mega-mansions that poo-pooed the project...


Posted by Valerie Arkin, a resident of Stoneridge
on Nov 4, 2010 at 4:36 pm

I decided to post on here since someone just informed me that I'm mentioned on this post.

I was in fact involved in the "No on D" campaign. If anyone wants to contact me to discuss why I felt the way I did, please call or email me and I will explain my position. My contact info is available on the school district's website. I do not want to go into a lengthly debate on this forum.

I endorse candidates based on who I feel is best for the office they are running for. I never expect to agree with any candidate on everything. I endorsed Sandy Piderit because I thought she would be a valuable asset to our school district based on her ideas and positions about education. I have no idea how she feels about Oak Grove (or any city issue). In fact, I haven't discussed city issues with any of my fellow board members, unless of course it involves a committee that the city and schools are involved in together (City liaison committee, Hacienda Task Force, etc).

Again, if anyone wishes to contact me to discuss my positions on issues, please feel free to do so.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 7, 2010 at 5:04 pm

Valerie:

It was my neighbor who did not vote for Piderit because of your endorsement.

I think that as a public official, you have to understand that your actions do have consequences and endorsing someone can be a bad thing if you have been involved in a highly controversial issue as was Oak Grove.

I did not know of your activities against Oak Grove, and I do not know if that would have influenced my vote (I voted for Laursen and Piderit), but I can tell you that in the past, I have looked at issues other than what the person is running for. For instance, as much as I wanted a republican to win the house of rep seat for district 11, I voted for McNerney, because Harmer is against abortion, and I highly disagree with his views of many social issues.

So, while it is unfortunate that some like my neighbor did not vote for Piderit because of your endorsement, I see their point. You opposed Oak Grove (I was for it btw), and that, in the opinion of many, is bad thing for Pleasanton as a town. How can you represent the best interest of all the PUSD students when you are not thinking of the best interest of all the Pleasanton residents, but only of the best interest of the neighborhood that would have been affected by Oak Grove? I can see my neighbor's point of view. People usually endorse like-minded individuals (Palin endorsed many who are as extreme on social issues as she is for instance).

I do not intend to engage in debate here with you, but I wanted to let you know that public figures (you are one even if at a small scale) need to be careful with what activities they engage in if they at some point intend to endorse candidates. It does influence many people.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 7, 2010 at 5:13 pm

To complete my thought. I wrote:
"I did not know of your activities against Oak Grove, and I do not know if that would have influenced my vote (I voted for Laursen and Piderit), but I can tell you that in the past, I have looked at issues other than what the person is running for. For instance, as much as I wanted a republican to win the house of rep seat for district 11, I voted for McNerney, because Harmer is against abortion, and I highly disagree with his views of many social issues."

should have read:

I did not know of your activities against Oak Grove, and I do not know if that would have influenced my vote (I voted for Laursen and Piderit), but I can tell you that in the past, I have looked at issues other than what the person is running for. For instance, as much as I wanted a republican to win the house of rep seat for district 11, I voted for McNerney, because Harmer is against abortion, and I highly disagree with his views of many social issues.

The fact that Huckabee, McClintock, anti-choice, etc organizations endorsed Harmer did affect my view of Harmer and made me decide to vote against him.


Posted by Valerie Arkin, a resident of Stoneridge
on Nov 7, 2010 at 5:21 pm

To "Resident" - My reasoning regarding Measure D was clearly articulated throughout the campaign. Please contact me (again, my info is on the district's website) and I would be happy to discuss this issue with you one on one.


Posted by Bill, a resident of Downtown
on Nov 7, 2010 at 5:29 pm

Resident and Valerie, Resident for you to vote against Hamer because of his views because he is not pro death is crazy in that he cannot impact the issue but only the supreme court at this point can change it not some little congressman from California and Valerie you should be completely non political in these issues. Pepperspraying your front yard with your liberal endorsements is hardly a way to be above it all.


Posted by Newsflash, a resident of another community
on Nov 8, 2010 at 11:58 pm

Over 72% of the east bay population in Pleasanton and surrounding communities do not support building on ridgelines and ridges and high elevations with steep slopes. Pleasanton, Dublin, Livermore, San Ramon, and Alameda County all prevent building on ridges and ridgelines, including the latest No on W San Ramon landslide victory Web Link


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Understanding Early Decision in College Admissions
By Elizabeth LaScala | 1 comment | 2,038 views

New heights for NIMBYs
By Tim Hunt | 29 comments | 1,330 views

When those covering the news become the news
By Gina Channell-Allen | 1 comment | 931 views

Earthquake Insurance
By Roz Rogoff | 2 comments | 746 views