Original post made
on Sep 19, 2012
HOORAY!!! good to see that money saved off the backs of the employees who serve this community can pay for yet ANOTHER park...
Why have more fields built if when it rains the kids cant use them?
Maybe I am not remembering this correctly, but wasn't there supposed to be a teen center also built on the Bernal site?
Pleasanton citizens deserve this addition to our sports facilities as we have been over-suscribed for years and teams are constantly scrambling for places to play.
It is too bad that personnel/pension costs continue to crowd out our general budget which makes the financing of this project iffy as Sullivan alludes to. Not only must we dip into our reserves but they are also considering charging organizations usage fees - a first.
Seems like the Council is desperately trying to make this their final impression/legacy to Pleasanton residents rather than the $176M pension deficit gift they are leaving us.
How about this ingenious idea? - Try SAVING the money so it can be used for more necessary things like making our cemetary halfway descent or repairing rough roads. Nice to have so many good people buried in a mostly NEGLECTED piece of dirt we call the cemetary. C'mon Jennifer, this would be a lasting legacy you could do for us. We don't need another sports facility to accomodate hyper active parents who think kids should be busy all the time - Let kids be kids.
Seriously, I love parks, but we have loads and don't we need to be saving money now as a community? I doubt fundraisers are going to work that well when we're dealing with underfunded schools and huge class sizes and requests for money non-stop.
Maybe we could get all those retired city employees with multi-million dollar pensions to volunteer their time to fix up the graveyard as it is their pensions that are starving the city of much need fundeds.
It's not like they retired at extremely old ages. Many of them are in their 50s.
You know, the more I think about this waste of multi millions I'm getting more disgusted! Let's start something here while we have a chance to steer OUR money where it needs to be spent.I suggest that people take another look & drive by our cemetary to see my point. It's THAT BAD! Some type of local movement is what should be done to make our point. NO MORE WASTE.
What you consider a "waste" may be an important resource for other families.
The true underlying issue here is that public employee compensation/pensions have been bleeding the city budget dry for many years now. This is why there is not enough money to service the community resources as they deserve.
Solve the underlying problem and then there will be more money for our various priorities.
like the park on Foothill Road..why did we need that I never see anyone there and I live across from the place.
start with the sports fields, don't spend money on the woodlands area, eliminate the outdor amphitheater, and cultural arts center. Figures the council's only real concern is thier legacy...who cares execpt for Hosteman and Sullivan.
The cemetery looks great for being a pioneer cemetery. It was never intended to be a manicured place since the people who purchased the plots paid the price of a pioneer and knew what that entailed. Those who bought there would need to pay a lot more in order to pay for the maintenance of a manicured place. Nicely manicured cemetery's have a much greater cost since the cost is supposed to provide an annuity to pay for the ongoing maintenance. I think the cemetery looks good now after it has been fixed up by the City, Scouts, and Rotary groups. I think it looks better than the cemetery next store that is all paved. Personally, I don't want to subsidize those who bought cheap knowing what they would get.
The City used to spend surpluses on capital projects like parks; that was how the capital projects were mainly financed. Since the increase in wages and pensions, and retiree medical from 2002 decisions, there is no more money for capital projects and we have a huge unfunded liability. The council at that time decided that pensions for employees was more important to Pleasanton than parks and facilities.
Great News! Anyone who plays, or whose kids play, on a field sport knows that Pleasanton is very short on all-weather fields. One rain shower and the grass fields are closed down for a couple days. Currently, the only turf fields are at the two high schools and they are booked solid by high school teams.
This will bring Pleasanton's fields to the same level as the surrounding communities.
Do we know for a fact that these fields will be turf, not grass? There will be serious competition for these fields if they are all-weather, year-round capable.
We spent enough on the cultural stuff for awhile - The Firehouse Center in particular, so we should be sure the fields get first funding...the woodland area should be last, if priorities need to be set.
but no teen center for kids who are not into sports... how many sports parks does this city need. really sad.
It would be great if the new fields would be turf we definitely need more since these other sports parks are no use to us during rainy season. I hated that year after year I paid for my children to play soccer, Football or Lacrosse and when it rained the games were cancelled but we never had all those games made up and we never got reimbursed for the money we paid for them to play.
The money that was spent on these soccer fields behind my house, hilarious because they dont get used as much as they should, it is beautiful but come on we paid for those fields to be used not looked at.
On the City of Pleasanton website, the City Council Agenda Report from last night states they will be "all weather lighted synthetic fields"
Yup. Sure looks like the pensions are bleeding us dry. LOL.
I suggest you read a bit more carefully ... this project is only partially paid for, draws down city reserves and is predicated on charging user fees. All of this is a direct result of the significant crowding out of the budget by employee personnel and pension costs.
In fact, personnel cost over runs these past 10 years have sucked out tens of millions of dollars out of this community. If personnel/pension costs were in fact what city management had projected, we could have paid for this and other projects many times over.
I suspect that the city council voted in this partially funded project to save face, obfuscate the fiscal predicament we are in, and fool the uninformed public. And I can see from the above comment that it is working for some.
Posted by Mmm hmmm." Yup. Sure looks like the pensions are bleeding us dry. LOL"
Not yet because we are only paying a fraction of the cost (just what CalPERS says the mimimum payment is - kind of like the minimum payment on a credit card). The problem is that while we continue to make the minimum payment the balance has gone from ZERO in 2002 to about 180 million today. That is a very scary velocity. And I'm not LOL.
But, in defense of your position, the city council and management seem to share your lack of concerm.
Mr. Sullivan - get off the tired horse you have been riding all these years. For $1M this city should welcome a JP Morgan Chase field.
I'll send several links in a little bit. Here I just want to note that banking science indicates that saving whatever surplus tax revenues are available will add immeasurably to the city's coffers. The interest rates the city garners alone should be able to get us past the first tsunamic waves; and we can continue to push for salary and pension cuts for our overpaid (public) servants. We don't need additional parks, and we don't need to let our servants off the hook. It is their greed which has brought the walled crescendo of water crashing down upon us and our easily drenched existing sports fields.
b, why don't you post under your own name?
"I'll send several links in a little bit. Here I just want to note that banking science indicates that saving whatever surplus tax revenues are available will add immeasurably to the city's coffers. The interest rates the city garners alone should be able to get us past the first tsunamic waves; and we can continue to push for salary and pension cuts for our overpaid (public) servants. We don't need additional parks, and we don't need to let our servants off the hook. It is their greed which has brought the walled crescendo of water crashing down upon us and our easily drenched existing sports fields."
If that is what you think you should own it. While I'm flattered that you continually use my name to post your twisted logic, I do think it would also be appropriate for you to use your own name when you post. If you believe what you say (nothing really) you should stand up and own it.
Boys, let's not fight. To Jill who commented on the cemetery, methinks you're confusing the conditions between the Catholic side of the cemetery, and that owned and operated by the City. At about $10,000 per plot (for two), I'm not sure if that's cheap or expensive. But it should be enough to plan for (eventually) some horticulture improvements.
My kids are grown so I can't comment on the sports field issue, but frankly, it does seem we have enough. The fields near the water reclamation plant and the Dunlon school SEEM under used for example. But hey, it gives jobs and does make the place look nice.
The other Arnold seems to think he's the only Arnold from some unspecified neighborhood in Pleasanton. Talks about name ownership. Wonder how much it cost him to have the name Arnold as his property and his property alone. Does he address the issues I raise? No, of course not. Is he capable of thinking about ANYthing without attaching ownership and property rights to it? Methinks this qualifies as a fetishistic personality -- i.e., a tendency to fetishize the very idea of ownership over all other life needs and values, such as love, community, justice, health, well being, to name only a few. Must be difficult navigating various fields of meaning while under the spell of fetishistic obsessiveness. Wow, what a cocktail party conversationalist he must be. Nice chatting with you, Arnold, oh!, gads!, I have to go check the air in my car tires outside!
I'm POed that Pleasanton is not doing the necessary maintenance on our streets, supposedly because the city does not have the money, and now they say they are going to build all this stuff on Bernal? That really ticks me off. If Hosterman and Sullivan want a legacy, we will erect an outhouse on the Bernal property and name it The Matt Sullivan and Hippy Mayor Memorial Outhouse. Vote wisely in November. We've got to get the left wing-nuts off the Council.
I like your suggestion Nomo. I'd like to make a contribution towards the legacy outhouse for our outgoing looney lefties, but i have to go out for Mexican food first.
Why does PW keep reposting repeat stories like this one and the Cook-Calio one?
Is it to bury and the critical comments/questions?