|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Councilwoman Cheryl Cook-Kallio was appointed Pleasanton’s vice mayor for 2011 Tuesday, but not everyone is pleased with the choice.
Mayor Jennifer Hosterman announced her selection at the close of Tuesday’s nearly five-hour-long council meeting. Earlier, at the start of the meeting, Hosterman was sworn-in for her fourth and—because of term limits—final two-year term as mayor. Cook-Kallio and Councilman Jerry Thorne also took their seats for their final four years on the council. All three were re-elected on Nov. 2.
Hosterman chose Cook-Kallio for the second-top elected post in Pleasanton to succeed Thorne, who has served as vice mayor for the last two years. Before that, Cook-Kallio had also served as vice mayor.
Councilman Matt Sullivan objected, arguing that the vice mayor’s post is “traditionally” rotated among the four council members. During his six years on the council, he held the position only once and said it’s his turn again now. Councilwoman Cindy McGovern agreed, telling Hosterman that all council members are committed to serving the best interests of the community and should share in the vice mayor’s post.
“As long as I’ve been paying attention to City Council procedures,” Sullivan told Hosterman, “it’s been a rotation system. The council and the community benefits by having council members with diverse views serve as vice mayor.”
Hosterman said she has researched actions of past mayors and that many did not follow any kind of rotation system in selecting their vice mayors.
“Anyhow, it’s my choice and I’ve selected Cheryl,” she added.
The council approved her selection in a 3-2 vote.
The vice mayor’s post is largely ceremonial, although it has taken on increased importance since Hosterman is involved in a number of regional and national organizations that require her to travel out of town frequently, leaving the vice mayor in charge of conducting council meetings and other city business.
This cannot be a surprise when one socialist picks another. The Hippie Mayor and Cook-Callio are like two peas in a (socialist) pod.
And Matt Sullivan isn’t—don’t get that. I believe Cheryl is much more connected with folks at every level—city, state and Federal. I think we give her a chance.
WARNING! Snarky Friday comment forthcoming…
Let me guess, some of the 26.4% that voted for Karla “the Conqueror” Brown now fear that some ridge, hill, knoll or pitchers mound will be developed on without her to save the day.
Please, we need to keep the NIMBY-focused & anti-growth candidates where they belong, confined to heir (semi)gated enclaves & beauty salon/day spa’s so they can bicker amongst themselves and not bother the rest of the citizenry.
Matt Sullivan is against everything. Why would Hosterman pick someone who does not have the best interests of the majority of Pleasanton citizens. if it was up to Matt, we would not have Hacienda Business Park, The Mall, or any other tax generating entities that have made this a great place to live and raise our kids!
Matt, drag thyself to Berkeley..!! They will appreciate you much more than Pleasanton.
Why, indeed, would any mayor select a vice-mayor who fights almost everything the council votes on,usually with the backing of Ms. McGovern. It’s been a long time since we had such a 3/2 (or 4/1) council, and I, for one, do not necessarily think it is “healthy”!
“Nosy Neighbors” is absolutely correct! It is disconcerting, at best, that Ms. Nimby got as many votes as she did!!! Her experience is what? Fighting a 400 + acre jewel of a park for Pleasanton???
My best wishes to ALL of the council members for a successful, focused 2011, keeping in mind what is best for ALL of Pleasanton!!
“Why would Hosterman pick someone who does not have the best interests of the majority of Pleasanton citizens.”
Because she doesn’t
No, Me Too, because he doesn’t.
The biggest problems with politicians is that there is financial gain in being a politician. We are suppose to have politicians who will make the tough decisions, but all we have is politicians who try to make the most people temporarily happy because that is what will get the re-elected. A CEO sometimes has to make unpopular decisions of laying-off thousands of employees because its what’s in the best long term interest of the company and the remaining employees. I bet if the CEO had to be a voted position there would never be any layoffs.
Pleasanton council members receive $700 per month compensation. I have not found any other associated benefits. So, where is the meaningful financial gain for these people coming from?
Let’s see what the re-elected ‘gang of three’ does about pension reform. Could care less about the NIMBY and other nonsense being discussed in earlier posts. I’m not looking forward to having to pay the just retired ex-chief of police (who, btw, lasted all of 3 yrs. in that post so he could max out his pension and then take off) $190,000 a year for the rest of his life, plus benefits….ridiculous….now we’ll see just what they’re really made of, as that ain’t gonna be easy. Maybe they’ll just ignore it and kick the can down the road like the rest of the politicians in this state, who are too busy worrying about their next politic office, or protecting their generous pensions, too.
“Anyhow, it’s my choice and I’ve selected Cheryl,” she added. Isn’t this supposed to be about working together? This quote by Mayor Hosterman makes her sound more like a 2-year old. I’m just saying.
I’m not sure why anyone would be surprised with Mayor Hosterman’s appointment of Cook-Kallio as Vice Mayor, or why, in defending her decision, she wouldn’t say: “Anyhow, it’s my choice and I’ve selected Cheryl.”
Mayor Hosterman has made her lack of respect, even contempt, for those who are expressing opinions she may not agree with quite evident these last couple of years during Council meetings. It doesn’t seem to matter whether the person on the receiving end of her disrespect is on the Council, one of the Commissioners, on Staff, a resident, or a business owner.
On Nov 4th I received a broadcast e-mail from Mayor Hosterman regarding her re-election. In the message she states the following: “. . . I recognize I did not carry 100% of the vote! That means I will have to work doubly hard to insure I am representing the entire community of Pleasanton with respect [to] all issues which confront us in the years ahead. I give you my promise that I will do just that.” She also said she would “work hard to continue to earn your trust in me as your Mayor.”
We have major issues coming up in the next couple of years that will take all of us working together to resolve – whether you are a Council member, Commissioner, on Staff, a resident or a business owner. As one of her first acts in her new term, Mayor Hosterman had the opportunity to follow through on her “promise” to represent “the entire community” by appointing either Matt Sullivan or Cindy McGovern as Vice Mayor. This would have been a great step towards balancing Pleasanton’s leadership and showing that she was going to be open to participation and collaboration on issues affecting the city – from all points of view. Instead, it looks like the next two years will be business as usual for our Mayor – lockstep decisions with her Council majority and contempt for anyone who doesn’t agree.
Sullivan and McGovern has done nothing to foster collaboration. Sullivan votes NO every opportunity and McGovern has made comments about the mayor. She clearly holds her in contempt. Both have worked hard to derail anything the Mayor has recommended.
Hosterman was elected with 53% of the vote. It’s my guess that 47% of voters are not happy with her choice of Vice-Mayor.