|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Pleasanton residents over special interests. That is one of Julie Testa’s several campaign promises she shared Monday as the City Council member announced her candidacy for the mayor’s seat.
“Every decision I will make will consider residents first,” Testa told the Pleasanton Weekly. “Everything we do should be able to support our vulnerable populations in Pleasanton, our future populations in Pleasanton and our current populations in Pleasanton, young or old.”
She will be the sole candidate challenging incumbent Mayor Jack Balch this November.
Testa, who has lived in Pleasanton for nearly 40 years, has served her community long before being elected to public office.
She sat on the city’s Human Services Commission for more than 10 years. She also served as board director for Tri-Valley REACH, a nonprofit that offers affordable, independent housing options for local adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and as a board member at the National Alliance on Mental Illness Tri-Valley.
Then, in 2018, Testa was elected at-large to the Pleasanton City Council for the first time. She later served as the city’s vice mayor, twice, and was reelected in 2022 as the District 3 representative, after the city converted to district-based elections.
In 2022, the city also launched its first-ever Alternate Response Unit, a mental health response program that Testa spearheaded and championed. The unit, also known as the ARU, pairs mental health clinicians with non-uniformed police officers to respond to certain calls for service.
“The ARU provides our excellent police force with yet another tool to support vulnerable persons in crisis,” Testa said in her campaign announcement. “This award winning program is a win-win for everyone involved, those suffering from mental illness, their families, officers, and all Pleasanton residents.”
But now that she will be termed out of her seat at the end of this year, Testa said she hopes to continue her service as mayor.
“For nearly four decades I have raised my family here, volunteered in our community, and worked alongside residents to protect the qualities that make Pleasanton a special place,” Testa said. “As Mayor, I will continue to put residents first, listen to our community, and provide thoughtful, independent leadership.”
According to her campaign, some of her priorities, if elected, will include protecting Pleasanton’s quality of life, maintaining fiscal responsibility, strengthening public safety, preserving reliable infrastructure and ensuring residents have clean drinking water.
She also said she’s not afraid of being the sole dissenting voice — as she has been for many council items in the past few years — becuase she believes her unique perspectives and life experiences gives the City Council balance.
Some examples she provided were how the state is handling the housing and affordability crisis — she has long been a strong voice in support for local control and has often questioned the state’s housing mandates — and the failed attempts to get a discussion on the City Council agenda regarding rumors about the federal government opening an immigration detention center in Dublin.
Testa also said she is not afraid to speak her mind when it comes to other topics like the city’s finances and continued to emphasize that, even though she is mostly anti-taxes, she was in support of the 2024 half-cent sales tax increase measure that failed to get enough votes.
She added that as the city continues to face budgetary challenges, including a structural deficit that she argues has not gotten any better in the last two years that Balch has been mayor, pension obligations that continue to increase and a local economy that is struggling, she has what it takes to steer the city back in the right direction.
“As our city faces increasing financial pressures and growing state mandates, Pleasanton needs leadership focused on practical solutions and long-term sustainability,” Testa said in her campaign announcement. “My commitment is to safeguard city services, support our local businesses, invest in infrastructure, and preserve the character and quality of life that residents cherish.”
She also said that, to prove she only cares about the best interests of residents, she is running a clean campaign where she will not accept any donations or endorsements from special interest groups.
“For me, this isn’t about a title or a political career. It’s about giving back to the city I love and making sure Pleasanton’s future is shaped by the people who live here,” Testa added. “I’m running for mayor because Pleasanton residents deserve a strong voice, a responsible steward of their tax dollars and a leader who truly puts them first.”
For more information on Testa’s campaign, visit julietesta.com.
“Pleasanton residents over special interests. That is one of Julie Testa’s several campaign promises she shared Monday as the City Council member announced her candidacy for the mayor’s seat. ”
Nice try Julie, but “Moms Demand Action” is a special interest organization. And this is one resident who does not feel any “safer” as a result of gun control messages being written on sidewalks and/or people wearing orange.
https://www.independentnews.com/news/pleasanton_news/moms-demand-action-group-holds-rally-for-gun-control/article_b91c8e64-2ebd-11ef-9e28-a38cee8590f7.html
Julie Testa says she will put “Pleasanton residents over special interests” and that residents deserve a leader who truly puts them first. Her record deserves much closer scrutiny.
As a District 3 resident, I have not felt that Julie has represented the views and priorities of her constituents. One glaring example is the failed 2024 sales-tax measure. Pleasanton voters rejected it, yet Julie continues to advocate for the tax rather than accepting the decision voters made at the ballot box. At what point does “putting residents first” mean respecting the will of those residents?
Residents should also look carefully at her political judgment, including her support and endorsement of recalled Alameda County District Attorney Pamela Price.
And I encourage everyone in Pleasanton to actually watch City Council meetings—not just read campaign statements. Listen to the questions being asked and judge for yourself. One that particularly stood out to me was Julie questioning the police chief about how “unreported” crimes are tracked. If a crime is never reported, how exactly is the police department supposed to know it occurred? That exchange raised serious questions for me about her understanding of the information she was asking the chief to provide.
Campaign promises are easy. Records are much more revealing. Pleasanton voters should pay attention to both before deciding who should be our next mayor.
Testa non est contra vectigal Testa est vectigal et expensa candidatus.
Pleasanton adopted Rosenberg’s Rules of Order precisely to ensure that council meetings follow a predictable, legally defensible structure. That structure matters. It protects fairness, transparency, and the public’s ability to follow what is happening.
During recent meetings, we have seen repeated instances where Councilmember Testa speaks out of order during the qualifying questions period — offering commentary, debate, and interruptions at a time reserved exclusively for fact finding questions directed to staff. Each time Mayor Balch has had to remind her that this portion of the agenda is for qualifying questions only.
This is not a minor issue. When a councilmember repeatedly disregards the adopted order of business, it creates several governance problems:
• It undermines procedural fairness, because other council members lose their opportunity to ask questions in the proper sequence.
• It forces the mayor to repeatedly intervene, weakening the authority of the chair and disrupting the flow of the meeting.
• It confuses the public, who rely on the agenda structure to understand when questions, comments, and debate are supposed to occur.
• And it risks the legal defensibility of council actions if discussion occurs outside the proper phase.
Pleasanton’s Rules of Procedure are clear: The presiding officer must maintain order, and councilmembers must speak only when recognized and only within the boundaries of the agenda phase. The qualifying questions period is not debated. It is not commentary. It is not an opportunity to argue with policy positions. It is strictly for clarifying questions.
I am asking the council to consistently enforce the rules you have adopted. Pleasanton’s governance reputation depends on disciplined, orderly meetings where every member follows the same structure. When one member repeatedly disregards that structure, it harms the integrity of the process.
Michael you are 💯 on this. I wish more people would watch the meetings or the recorded version of the meetings, very eye opening!
I’m glad the race is contested. Voters benefit when there’s a debate.