Town Square

Pleasanton Election Debate

Original post made by Stacey, Amberwood/Wood Meadows, on Nov 1, 2008

Jerry of Oakhill,

This story contains 677 words.

If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.

If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.


Like this comment
Posted by frank
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Nov 1, 2008 at 12:54 pm

If I recall correctly that personal attack was Ayala saying to Cook-Kallio something to the effect that if you are concerned about possible litigation in Pleasanton, then you don't belong on city counsel.

This was in response to Cook-Kallio explaining how a goal of QQ is to avoid litigation because of how PP was written. Clearly, since Ayala and her cohorts behind closed doors wrote the language of PP, Ayala inappropriately took Cook-Kallio's words personally and lashed out. It was clearly an inappropriate response. Cook-Kallio was simply explaining QQ and what it does.

Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 1, 2008 at 11:23 pm

Both McGovern and Brozosky had the same basic stance on so-called affordable housing. They both advocated for "small homes/townhomes", the thinking being that smaller homes, being cheaper than larger homes, will be "affordable". Pentin pointed out that that kind of housing may not work out well to achieve the goal of providing affordable housing considering that that kind of housing in Pleasanton is not affordable for many _now_. Pentin, Sullivan, and Hosterman all seemed to lean towards TOD in order to achieve affordability.

McGovern and Sullivan's stance on funding priorities was also somewhat the same, spend money building things that will bring consumers downtown and form, as Sullivan called it, a "critical mass" of people. The expectation is that those people will spend money downtown. Sullivan also focused on the TOD idea to boost the "Hacienda economies". Pentin wants to focus on being business friendly in order to help generate revenue. Sullivan mentioned TOD around an ACE train station downtown. I think that's excellent. People complain about the lack of business downtown. Let's get some businesses there that could cater to TOD, like a small grocery in the old Domus location (which is what that building used to house). Let's also build a better ACE train station. Too bad there's no Tri-Valley light rail system that brings shoppers easily to downtown. If the housing cap goes away, we might want to rethink using the rail corridor for parking.

Like this comment
Posted by Jerry
a resident of Oak Hill
on Nov 2, 2008 at 2:48 am

As to the Mayoral debate - I'll stand by the comments I made on the "Letters: Council majority hasn't listened to the people" thread.

One can, when critiquing political debates, "nitpick" a couple of answers that candidates give that may, or may not, be "entirely factual". Those answers are not the entire debate.

Hosterman weighed heavily on "her accomplishments" as Mayor, which, in fact, she couldn't have "accomplished" with out the consent/support of a majority of the council/city staff...

Overall, Brozosky was more professional and straight forward during the entire debate. No "Uh, blah, blah, Uh" or "And ya no, blah,blah". He was more relaxed, carried himself in a professional manner, his answers were concise, to the point and without hesitation...

That's the debate I saw...

Like this comment
Posted by anonymous
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 2, 2008 at 6:40 am

Hypocritical, untrue comments delivered professionally are still untrue and hypocritical. Brozosky is not a consensus maker among people with whom he serves/served. He often takes credit for things that also required a majority of a particular body.

I agree that professional delivery is important but having that and lacking the other part is not my idea of a leader.

I am voting for Hosterman.