http://pleasantonweekly.com/square/print/index.php?i=3&d=1&t=10357


Town Square

Candidates present themselves and their opinions at forum

Original post made on Apr 11, 2013

The Pleasanton Council Chamber was packed last Tuesday with residents and supporters who came to the Pleasanton Weekly's City Council Candidates Forum to learn more about the four running in the mail-in election, which ends May 7.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, April 11, 2013, 7:27 AM

Comments

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Vote Narum
a resident of Pleasanton Middle School
on Apr 11, 2013 at 8:17 am

Sounds like 3 of them, all but Narum, want visible roadways criss-crossing Pleasanton's ridgelines and hillsides. If a road is steep enough to be on 25% slope, it will climbing hills, be visible and an eyesore throughout Pleasanton. Yes, as Miller says "if you have to put a road on a 25% slope that is something that can be considered," that means pretty soon Pleasanton will look like Daly City.

Narum has my vote.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Chemist
a resident of Downtown
on Apr 11, 2013 at 8:40 am

If you want more building and more roads, vote for Narum. She is the only one financed by the developers. Follow the money, not the talk. Vote David Miller if you want to keep Pleasanton's small town feel. His money is coming from citizens, and he will represent the citizens of Pleasanton.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Steve
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 11, 2013 at 8:43 am

Gutsy and independent call by Narum. I have not studied this enough to know the answer but i appreciate Narum's independent voice and not just going with the majority or others. Sounds like she is the only one who is focused on protecting our views which is also important to me.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Steve
a resident of Mohr Elementary School
on Apr 11, 2013 at 9:13 am

Chemist,

Please tell us the facts, not rhetoric. Too much rhetoric from Miller and his team and the public deserves the truth.

You say majority of Miller's donations are from Local residents and Narums are not.

The facts from the last campaign report are just the opposite. 75% of Narum's contribution are from local residents and there is a huge breadth of support from all areas. Even former mayors Pico and Mercer, who are very diverse support her.

In contrast majority of Miller's money is from out of towners, mostly the Tea Party group. You can see this on-line at city web site and also see this in article written recently in the Independent.

Please check you facts before posting spurious information. The misinformation coming from Miller campaign team is an insult to public. Thanks


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Truth
a resident of Birdland
on Apr 11, 2013 at 9:23 am

Miller only cares about his own political career and ego and does not care about Pleasanton. Nahum has a proven track record and will follow what ever the Mayor requests of her because she ran his election campaign. Sanwong is the only candidate with a proven record and the common sense approach to move Pleasanton forward.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Andrea
a resident of Birdland
on Apr 11, 2013 at 9:25 am

So let's see:
Olivia- too inexperienced
Hamilton- too unknown
Miller- too "Tea"
Narum- just right.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by June
a resident of Alisal Elementary School
on Apr 11, 2013 at 9:58 am

I am so tired of the rhetoric that is embodied by Chemist. Always a "us" against "them" mentality from the same people who can never come up with balanced solutions and innovative ideas for our community. I feel bad we are leaving a legacy to our kids about complain and get angry being the answer to everything instead of working together.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Common sense citizen
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 11, 2013 at 10:21 am

So let's see, Narum thinks a road is a structure, is beholden to the Mayor as his former campaign manager, and aspires to be a career politician.

The first point is nonsense, and the second and third points show she'll vote with Thorne (creating a voting block) every time.

If nothing else, I have no desire to vote for someone who really believes a road is a structure.

Miller gets my vote.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Leslie
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 11, 2013 at 12:12 pm

"This is quite an opportunity to combine jobs and housing," Sanwong said. "Businesses want workforce housing. When I think about our businesses I think about (people who work at) the mall, firefighters, teachers, city employees, who would like to live near where they work."
The most naive comment of the night. Our pubic employees are too well paid to qualify for the low income housing that was being referred to.

"An audience question was, "What is your definition of private property rights and how will you work to defend them?""

"People have the right to own and enjoy their property," Miller answered,

After Miller gave an articular and intelligent answer Narum said "I agree with him" Even the moderators laughed. She then parroted what Miller said.

"People should be able to use and enjoy their property as they want," Narum said,


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Joyce F.
a resident of Pleasanton Middle School
on Apr 11, 2013 at 1:33 pm

Thank you Leslie. I too found Sanwong's comment regarding housing very narrow minded particularly for a younger person being that the amount of newer technology, media and entry level corporate jobs in Pleasanton (and the Tri-Valley in general for that mater) are where the growth has taken place and where the need for affordable housing for the Jr.,Jr. Executive and up positions are sorely needed. If there was an emotional candidate I just wish I could get behind it would be Olivia, but she is just too young, inexperienced and yes, just perhaps a tad too naive.

What I simply cannot fathom however is all the anger, name calling and outright emotional bashing of David Miller from what appears to be a sound, logical and pragmatic economic formula for setting Pleasanton's economic future. If this were 25 years ago I too would probably think he was simply being a stingy bean counter with a painful plan for prosperity but after those same 25 years of seeing this State of Claifornia, Alameda County and yes, Pleasanton slowly slip into financial ruin that voice of financial reason is beginning to make more sense for the climate we currently finds ourselves locked into.

The long term viability, sustainability and prosperity of Pleasanton is what is at stake and it appears that no other candidate except for Mr. Miller seems to comprehend the importance of this and is willing to make the tough (and sometimes unpopular) decisions and keep the interests of Pleasanton and the residents his first priority.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Ted Christensen
a resident of Ridgeview Commons
on Apr 11, 2013 at 2:55 pm

I also found Sanwong to be really naive. I mean really really naive. And, no, I am not also posting as common sense, Leslie, and Joyce F. Really. ... No, honest, I am not. ... Stop it!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jennifer
a resident of California Somerset
on Apr 11, 2013 at 3:04 pm

Affordable housing is not low income. It is workforce housing for people entering adulthood, young families, and you g single adults. Olivia is absolutely right. The others see the town through their own eyes. We need housing for people just starting out!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Vote Narum
a resident of Pleasanton Middle School
on Apr 11, 2013 at 3:31 pm

Affordable housing in not workforce housing for people just starting out. In terms of meeting requirements for housing per the lawsuit that Pleasanton lost it means subsidized housing.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Rick
a resident of Parkside
on Apr 11, 2013 at 4:43 pm

Voting for Narum...

no question


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jennifer
a resident of California Somerset
on Apr 11, 2013 at 5:17 pm

@vote for Narum. You are misinformed. There was a lawsuit that prevents cities from requiring low income subsidized. These will be market rate apartments. Ask the planning commission or housing commission. Unless the city can negotiate there will be no subsidy.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Vote Narum
a resident of Pleasanton Middle School
on Apr 11, 2013 at 6:13 pm

You are wrong, Jennifer/Olivia/Olivia's campaign.

The Urban Habitat lawsuit that was won has to do with subsidized apartments, not market rate apartments. You are misinformed.

Do some research. It might help your credibility.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gus
a resident of Birdland
on Apr 11, 2013 at 6:41 pm

Olivia has my vote. The council could really benefit from her intelligence.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Narum has a god track record
a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Apr 11, 2013 at 8:16 pm

My take on informative debate:

o Olivia energetic and has big smile but na´ve and inexperienced. She seems to have had fairly junior jobs in market research at firm she was recently laid off from. All problems are not solved by technology.
o Hamilton hard worker and focused on schools. Needs to get more city experience too and hope he does. Like his passion.
o Miller is an angry man who appears unlikely to be able to develop collegial relations to influence getting a majority vote on anything. he may be best to continue as an activist. He seems more focused on bashing others than saying how he will accomplish his goals. Like his goals, but have no confidence he will deliver.
o Narum has a strong track record of standing up for residents and has the experience to provide leadership on the council. Some say she votes with Jerry Thorne. Her record does not show this and shows she is quite independent. For example:
- She voted just the opposite as Mayor Thorne on Downtown Hospitality proposal. He wanted to expand criteria to be more favorable for businesses. Narum wanted to narrow the downtown area for expanded hours to protect local residents.
- She was the only person who voted to reduce high density housing numbers so they were not greater than RHNA requirements. Other voted to go about 10% higher.

Please check out the facts. Narum is no one's puppet and her track record clearly shows her independence and capabilities.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jill
a resident of Birdland
on Apr 11, 2013 at 8:33 pm

Affordable housing is subsidized housing in Pleasanton. It has to be below-market rents. Only way to go below-market is to subsidize. All "affordable housing" in Pleasanton has been and will be subsidized housing.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Julie
a resident of Birdland
on Apr 11, 2013 at 9:36 pm

The Palmer case prevented cities from requiring rental units to be below market.

Wow you people are dense. Try reading first before spouting off.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by ???
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 11, 2013 at 9:45 pm

Developers want development agreements that give them longer entitlement. The City wants 15% work force housing so there is something to negotiate. The Housing Commission and the council will have a workhshop to discussion what the workforce housing policy should be given the palmer decision.