News


ELECTION NEWS: Measure D failing by 700 votes in early returns

Just 4 of 44 precincts reported since polls closed at 8 p.m.

Measure D opponents took an early lead in their effort to block a 51-home development called Oak Grove in Pleasanton's southeast hills.

Some 40 minutes after polls closed, the first numbers posted showed 3228 votes against the Measure, and 2521 votes in favor. Yes voters would allow the project; no voters would block it.

MEASURE D-PLEASANTON

4 of 44 precincts reporting

YES 2521

NO 3228

As of 8:30 p.m.

++

Governor's race

Democrat

Edmund G. "Jerry" Brown 661,669

83.5%

Republican

Meg Whitman 525,376

64.5%

Steve Poizner 211,138

26.0%

++

Tea Party supporters gathering in Pleasanton

A group of local tea party members are gathering in Pleasanton this evening to watch the primary election results trickle in.

Bridget Melson, president of the Pleasanton Tea Party, said partygoers can expect a number of candidates to stop by, although she declined to say who for security reasons.

Although the party has been criticized by some as still being too small to have real sway in the California primary, Melson said her group sends e-mail blasts to more than 10,000 supporters. The candidates, she said, know that this is no small number in a primary election with fewer voters.

"They know that 10,000 votes is a huge amount of votes," she said.

Melson said more than 300 supporters are expected to attend tonight's event. They will be most closely watching the race for governor, lieutenant governor, Barbara Boxer's Senate seat, and the Congressional District 11 seat now occupied by Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton).

Although it does not make official endorsements for particular candidates on its website, the Pleasanton Tea Party does rate each candidate on how closely he or she aligns with the party's values.

As for a few of her own picks, Melson said she is rooting for gubernatorial candidate Meg Whitman and Senate candidate Chuck DeVore. Melson is confident that DeVore can beat Boxer, despite indications to the contrary by recent polls.

"That man can debate," she said.

The primary-watching party will start at 5 p.m. at 1037 Sunset

Creek Lane in Pleasanton. There is limited seating available, and organizers request RSVPs from attendees via e-mail at drb@pleasantonteaparty.com.

++

Voting light today in Pleasanton

Voting in today's statewide primary election and on the city's Measure D referendum appeared light today with precinct judges reporting only 10-15 percent of their registered voters had come to the polls by mid-day.

Absentee voting was expected to account for more than 50 percent of those casting ballots in today's races, so those voters wouldn't go to the polls.

At one precinct, No. 522400 at Trinity Lutheran Church, precinct worker Ed Cintrone said nearly 100 voters had come in to drop off their absentee ballots that had already been filled out but never mailed.

At the Ruby Hill fire station off Vineyard Avenue, it was more of the same--lots of polling booths for Vineyard Corridor and Ruby Hill voters, but none in sight at mid-day.

Polls opened at 7 a.m. today and closed at 8 p.m.

++

Only one real Assembly race

Pleasanton is divided among three Assembly Districts but only one – the 20th District – had a real race in today's Primary, with two contenders facing off to run on the Democratic ticket in November to succeed termed-out Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico, also a Democrat.

At 10:30 p.m., with 49 of the 209 precincts reporting, Fremont Vice Mayor Bob Wieckowski, 55, had the lead with 53 percent over Ohlone College Trustee Garrett Yee, 44. On the Republican side, Adnan Shahab had no competition.

The 20th District has 25 percent of Pleasanton's voters; the 15th District, 15 percent; and the 18th District, 60 percent.

In the 15th District, Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan (D., Alamo) was unopposed, as was the Republican candidate, San Ramon Mayor Abram Wilson.

Also, in the 18th District, Democrat Assemblywoman Mary Hayashi, a Hayward resident, had no opponents in today's primary, while the Republican candidate, Michael Havig, also ran unopposed.

Incumbent Democrat State Sen. Ellen Corbett did not face any opposition either. Republican Rob Maffit was unopposed for his party's nomination as was American Independent candidate Ivan Chou.

Comments

Like this comment
Posted by Unabashed PR
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Jun 8, 2010 at 4:21 pm

The Weakly is an unabashed PR rag for Hosterman and the business and development interests she supports. Why not show a picture of Cindy McGovern voting NO ON D at her precinct?


Like this comment
Posted by m
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 8, 2010 at 4:25 pm

Agreed!!!!


Like this comment
Posted by Dark Corners of Town
a resident of Country Fair
on Jun 8, 2010 at 4:28 pm

Is it 'volunteering' if you are paid to be a precinct clerk/judge?


Like this comment
Posted by Voted
a resident of Beratlis Place
on Jun 8, 2010 at 4:32 pm

I went and voted YES on D, just like our wonderful Mayor suggested. I'm proud to say that I'm doing my part to add more funding to our schools and open space to our community.


Like this comment
Posted by Ariel
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Jun 8, 2010 at 4:33 pm

Where will I hunt for food after Measure "D" Passes?


Like this comment
Posted by dublinmike
a resident of Dublin
on Jun 8, 2010 at 4:56 pm

dublinmike is a registered user.

Ariel, that's what the gravel pits are useful for... Good luck Pleasanton.


Like this comment
Posted by Voted already
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 8, 2010 at 5:05 pm

I voted YES on D. Hopefully it will pass! There were only about 5 people there when I went, but my spouse is going later, after work, so hopefully more people plan to vote and just have not gotten around to do so!


Like this comment
Posted by voted again
a resident of Del Prado
on Jun 8, 2010 at 5:34 pm

I voted No on D,,,
There's already too many people in Pleasanton.
I'm not for big mega mansions, and you know that's what'll go in.


Like this comment
Posted by Laura
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Jun 8, 2010 at 6:00 pm

'Votedagain' - What do you think the property will be used to build? Whether you voted for or against, mega mansions will be built. The question is - did you vote for 51 mega mansions, or 98?

The against Measure D people slay me. They honestly think that if they vote 'no', then the land stays as it is. Even I am not THAT naive.


Like this comment
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jun 8, 2010 at 6:14 pm

Turnout doesn't include absentee ballots yet. And there's a picture of Kay now, so we can leave Jeb alone for a few minutes. I know of several yes voters; I'm hopeful.

Oh, and Ariel, I certainly hope you weren't hunting on private property.


Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jun 8, 2010 at 8:45 pm

Absentee ballot......no reason to show up to a poll to vote.


Like this comment
Posted by Too Bad...
a resident of Del Prado
on Jun 8, 2010 at 8:55 pm

Too bad that only about 6000 turned out to vote--doesn't include absentee ballots, but still, really pathetic numbers. As far as I can tell from today and from last year with the number of voters who turned out for the Parcel Tax vote, the people of Pleasanton just sit back and hope it all comes their way.


Like this comment
Posted by MainStreetDiva
a resident of Vintage Hills Elementary School
on Jun 8, 2010 at 9:17 pm

MainStreetDiva is a registered user.

Early tallies show that most Pleasanton residents are voting NO on Measure D.
I was discouraged seeing the low voter count, we voted around 2:00pm and at that point only about 400 had voted at that Polling Center.


Like this comment
Posted by Voted Already
a resident of Del Prado
on Jun 8, 2010 at 10:01 pm

Yes Laura, that maybe so, but at least it holds them off for now. I am not nieve. I say enough building. Pleasanton was once a beautiful, quaint small town. I've lived here over 20 years, and looking around I dont like what I see as do most people who have lived in long enough to see where we were and where we are now.
You probably live in one of those mega mansions, leaving your green footprint everywhere
JUST A NO VOTE WILL DO


Like this comment
Posted by m
a resident of Bordeaux Estates
on Jun 8, 2010 at 10:09 pm

I failed to vote.


Like this comment
Posted by Matt Morrison
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jun 9, 2010 at 3:07 am

Measure D - City of Pleasanton
Total Precincts: 44
Precincts Reported: 44
Percent Reported: 100.00

No 6065 54.30%
Yes 5104 45.70%


Like this comment
Posted by No on D
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 9, 2010 at 9:31 am

Another win for the little, poorly funded, grass roots, environmentally sensitive folks who are the Majority in Pleasanton.


Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 9, 2010 at 9:43 am

Stacey is a registered user.

That's what was so interesting about this. Environmentally sensitive folks were to be found on both sides of the issue.


Like this comment
Posted by absentee
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 9, 2010 at 10:01 am

Absentee ballots are not routinely counted..Only if it's 'close' or a special request. So if the in-person ballot count is high enough that's it impossible for the remainder to change the results, they won't count....looks like a 10% spread. I'd like to know is absentees have been counted yet.


Like this comment
Posted by A KR Resident
a resident of Kottinger Ranch
on Jun 9, 2010 at 10:03 am

My sympathy to the poor Lin family which spent a few hundred thousand dollars and the council majority who did not care a damn about what the voters want.They were defeated by a citizen's group which spent less then $7,000. The council majority spent a lot of extra money to put this on the ballot in June instead of Nov. Should they not be answerable to the citizens for their actions. It would be great if they would have to pay the difference from their own pocket. Ha ha ha.


Like this comment
Posted by resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 9, 2010 at 10:07 am

I agree with Stacey. After studying the plan and visiting the site, I voted to accept what I viewed to be a reasonable compromise with the land owner. I voted for resolution of the issue through minimal growth, and more importantly, for guarantees that preserved the rest of the land in its natural state. I was undecided about this to the end. However I feel that some development is inevitable unless the residents of Pleasanton find a way to buy the property. I don’t see that happening and I foresee a difficult fight ahead. That is not an implied threat, as I have absolutely no interest in the outcome besides my interests stated in this message. It is just our process. And sometimes the process creates unintended consequences. It is time to turn the page, but I doubt we have closed the book.


Like this comment
Posted by Tour anyone?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 9, 2010 at 12:46 pm

Environmental people on both sides? IF Yes on D went through, I wonder how many tours they would give as the ridge top was cut off 43' and the huge building pads were carved into the hilltops? It is one thing to see the "before" views, it is another to watch as bulldozers cut up the hills and ridges moving 620,000 cubic yards of dirt, hundreds of trees, and over 40' of fill in the lowlands.


Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 9, 2010 at 12:51 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

Yes, there were environmental and trails advocates on both sides. I know that doesn't fit your world-view, but it is the truth.


Like this comment
Posted by sickofit
a resident of Amador Estates
on Jun 9, 2010 at 1:30 pm

Stacey - which advocates were they? Jon Harvey who sold his KR home? The GreenBelt Alliance - it was stated in a video interview that they supported this project but the reality appears to be something different. I don't know of a single 'environmental' group that supported Oak Grove. Individuals perhap but that 'ain't the same'.


Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 9, 2010 at 1:45 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

The statement above was "environmentally sensitive folks who are the majority in Pleasanton" not "environmental groups". Off the top of my head: Jennifer Hosterman, Jon Harvey, Becky Dennis, Dolores Bengston, Jerry Pentin. Let's not forget that Matt Sullivan advocated for the plan too before taking issue with the actions of the developer.


Like this comment
Posted by huh?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 9, 2010 at 6:19 pm

Hosterman "environmentally sensitive folk"??? You must be like Rip Van Winkle and have been asleep for many years. She was environmentally sensitive until she realized the money for her campaigns come from developers. Also, Becky and Dolores have been supportive of every housing development that has been proposed to the city in the last few years.


Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 9, 2010 at 8:08 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

That's like holding it against Kay Ayala for all the developments she approved while she was on Council. Just because a person's approach changes doesn't mean their core values change.


Like this comment
Posted by Not a Stacey fan
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 10, 2010 at 10:38 pm

Stacey, Jennifer said "over my dead body" about houses on the Lin's ridgetop property, then she voted Yes over and over for houses. Perhaps I am a bit naive, but no means NO in my book. She ran as an environmentalist then voted time and time again for house on the ridges. My grandma would call her a liar and so would I.

BTW, I don't remember Kay saying all development is bad-just this one.


Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 10, 2010 at 11:49 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

And Sullivan said the project was a good one then changed position due to other reasons. Was he lying too? But what's yer real point; that you'd never change your position even after your concerns have been addressed or new information has come to light, or that you're unwilling to compromise? Don't even bother sitting at a negotiating table.

"Councilmember Sullivan said at the last meeting he made his views known on the project which have not changed. The City spent 3.5 years working with the neighbors, the developer, and the City to come up with something that would provide balance, something that people could support and live with and provide an incredible amenity for the community which he felt has been done. He believed in the process; felt it was a good project, agreed there were trade offs. He does not like the idea of houses in the hills but felt there were also controls in place to minimize, reduce, or eliminate the houses from the [view of the] majority of the City." Web Link


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Couples: Drop Your Keyboard!
By Chandrama Anderson | 1 comment | 8,523 views

Interesting local elections shaping up in Dublin
By Tim Hunt | 0 comments | 350 views

Scott Raty bows out as CEO of Pleasanton Chamber
By Jeb Bing | 0 comments | 298 views

 

Nominations due by Sept. 17

Pleasanton Weekly and DanvilleSanRamon.com are once again putting out a call for nominations and sponsorships for the annual Tri-Valley Heroes awards - our salute to the community members dedicated to bettering the Tri-Valley and the lives of its residents.

Nomination form