News


Mayoral candidate Julie Testa sues city clerk, county registrar after ballot statement rejected

Diaz says Testa's statement for printing with Sample Ballot filed after deadline

Pleasanton mayoral candidate Julie Testa is going to court to compel City Clerk Karen Diaz to file Testa's candidate statement for the Nov. 8 sample election ballot that will be sent to voters Oct. 10.

Testa’s required nomination papers were accepted just before the filing deadline on Aug. 12. However, the electronic filing of her candidate’s statement for the Sample Ballot, which was emailed at 4:30 p.m. that day, was not accepted by the city clerk.

Diaz first turned away Testa from qualifying as a candidate at all because she did not file the required financial disclosure Form 700 "Statement of Economic Interests.” Diaz relented after Testa and her attorney Matt Morrison showed that they had filed Form 700 directly with the county Registrar’s office.

However, the candidate’s statement, a crucial part of information about candidates that is printed with the Sample Ballot, was not accepted via email, even though it was sent before the 5 p.m. deadline. The hard copy of the statement required by the clerk was filed after the deadline and not accepted.

“Diaz turning Testa away for the missing Form (700) cost valuable time when the candidate discovered her candidate statement had been left behind at (my) office when Testa visited there to electronically file the Form 700,” Morrison said. “Diaz refused to accept a copy of Testa's statement sent via email before the Aug. 12 deadline expired.”

"The law is clear," Morrison added. “There is nothing in the Political Reform Act that requires a Form 700 to be filed prior to a candidate's nomination papers.

After returning to the City Clerk's office, Testa said she had barely five minutes to submit her paperwork when the discovery was made that her printed candidate statement was missing.

Even though Morrison had emailed Diaz a copy of Testa's candidate statement well-ahead of the 5 p.m. Aug. 12 deadline, Diaz informed Testa that candidate statements are required to be printed out and that she was not permitted to print a copy of the email for filing, nor accept the email itself as Testa's candidate statement.

Morrison said the issue is one of substantial compliance.

"Filing practices of municipalities vary,” he said. “Where a candidate does not technically comply with local practice, a candidate who is in actual compliance with state law should be held to have complied."

In filing a petition for Writ of Mandate with the Alameda County Superior Court, Morrison pointed to the Elections Code for statements submitted in writing that, according to the code, "... includes any form of recorded message capable of comprehension by ordinary visual means."

Morrison argues that definition fits the email that Testa confirmed to Diaz was Testa's statement and Diaz acknowledged receiving prior to the deadline.

Diaz in a follow-up email to Testa insisted she had no discretion in the matter, and pointed to a court ruling on election deadlines that "hard and fast enforcement...was the most reliable way to ensure that everyone is treated fairly and equally."

"The City Clerk left us with no choice but to turn to the courts," said Morrison.

Testa, as required by California Rules of Court, has informed Pleasanton's City Clerk and the Alameda County Registrar of Voters her intention to seek an order to shorten time until when the court will conduct a hearing on her petition.

Testa hopes the matter can be heard quickly. If the court cannot decide until after the voter pamphlets have gone to press, then any decision on the merits of Testa's argument is moot.

If that happens, Morrison said, “The real losers would be Pleasanton voters who may never learn more about Testa as an alternative to Pleasanton's incumbent mayor, Jerry Thorne.”

Comments

64 people like this
Posted by Ellen
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:21 am

I can see both sides of this. On one hand, if her filing technically fell within the law, maybe this potential candidate is correct and should be allowed on the baller.

On the other hand, if someone waits until 15 minutes before the deadline and can't properly file papers in time since she forgot the candidate statement at home, maybe this isn't someone cut out to deal with the complexities of our city.


2 people like this
Posted by Ellen
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:22 am

*ballot


55 people like this
Posted by Julieformayor
a resident of Sycamore Heights
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:25 am

Good for you Julie and thank you, Matt Morrison, for seeing to it that fair, democratic processes are upheld in Pleasanton. Small-town politics are not exempt from oversight.


36 people like this
Posted by Voter
a resident of Downtown
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:33 am

Her filing apparently did NOT fall within the law if a printed statement is required by a fixed deadline. I have doubts that a person who first of all does not allow enough time to follow the rules and secondly thinks that the rules should be changed for her is a person who can juggle the running of the city council.

Sorry Julie, now you can pay for your statements to be printed in the paper or however else you need to get your message out. Just know this -- if you, or any candidate, fill my mailbox with trash from dead trees I will not vote for you. And if you or your representatives have the audacity to ignore my no trespassing, no soliciting signs and leave your trash on my property I will sue you for trespass and littering.

I am so over politics, just go away and leave me alone.


68 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:35 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

I went to the Registrar's office in Oakland to file. I did not have an appointment. A young lady walked me through all the paperwork and provided me a new form when I had to make a change. There are computers there for your use in case anything is amiss. They printed my emailed candidate's statement, had me sign it, and then provided me a copy of that. They provide copies of everything you submit.

This is a stressful process--a Form 700 would stop most people from filing. There should be no difference in how you are treated at these two entities.


71 people like this
Posted by Shawn
a resident of Foothill Knolls
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:36 am

Nice way to start a campaign. Literally wait until the last minute, file paperwork incorrectly and then sue the city for her own (or her atty's) incompetence. Wasting city money with lawsuits already.


47 people like this
Posted by huh
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:39 am

Why is it all the other candidates didn't seem to have a problem following the rules? Oh, maybe because they didn't wait until ten minutes before the end of the filing deadline which had been well publicized not to mention the filing period was 3 weeks lone.

Now my taxpayer dollars have to be used to defend the City against this lawsuit all because Julie seems to think the rules don't apply to her. That alone is reason not to consider her a viable candidate for Mayor!


42 people like this
Posted by FED SHUTTERS
a resident of Foothill High School
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:48 am

And she wants to be our Mayor and not only cant follow the rules but then when she gets butt hurt sues the City she wants to run for. What a joke.


72 people like this
Posted by city breaks laws to retain pro-growth candidates
a resident of California Reflections
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:51 am

So Arne Olson on his Form 700 does not disclose his individual investments in business entities on the A-1 form as required by law and labels that he has between $100,000 and $1 million invested that are "personal." The city clerk and city attorney offices full well know that Olson's filings do not comply with state and local law. And they know Thorne has been driving the Costco development for years in spite of having a financial interest in Costco.

And the city won't accept a candidate statement that was electronically emailed to the city prior to the deadline?

Once again this shows the outrageous behavior which penalizes a female candidate. Meanwhile the boys club male elected officials are allowed to misbehave as long as they want to.


68 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:51 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

"Even though Morrison had emailed Diaz a copy of Testa's candidate statement well-ahead of the 5 p.m. Aug. 12 deadline, Diaz informed Testa that candidate statements are required to be printed out and that she was not permitted to print a copy of the email for filing, nor accept the email itself as Testa's candidate statement."

huh, I was required to file my statement electronically. The Registrar printed a copy for me. Why would the City have different rules; they are trained by the Registrar.


47 people like this
Posted by LOL
a resident of Castlewood
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:55 am

She has my vote.. "Rigged System" HA HA


Posted by Ptownlover
a resident of Kottinger Ranch

on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:57 am


Remember me?
Forgot Password?
Due to violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are only visible to registered users who are logged in. Use the links at the top of the page to Register or Login.


Like this comment
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:58 am

Michael Austin is a registered user.

Would Daniel Sodergren weigh in here?


60 people like this
Posted by city breaks laws to retain pro-growth candidates
a resident of California Reflections
on Aug 24, 2016 at 10:00 am

Pulling and filing papers in the County is a straightforward process and easy. Forms are required to be filed electronically.

Kathleen if you had pulled papers for the City, you would have been given a binder of complicated jargon and other nonsense to deter you from running for election. The Alameda County system does not have this binder.

Again, the city is breaking the law by not accepting Julie Testa's filing that was electronically emailed prior to the deadline..


69 people like this
Posted by res
a resident of Birdland
on Aug 24, 2016 at 10:02 am

The city clerk is a government employee and therefore a service to the people.

As long as things were filed in the legal timelime, the city clerk should have done her duty to serve the public; in this case Julie Testa. The clerk had the ballot statement in electronic form and even acknowledged she had it. So it was sitting on her screen, and she had a printer near by, and she refused to do anything. That is not what I call serving the people. I looked at the election code and there is nothing there indicating the ballot statement has to be on a piece of paper. Like Kathleen previously stated, at the county they help you out. Here at the city they do not want people to run against the incumbent. On a side note, not sure what the point of the form 700 is in Pleasanton. The current mayor ignored a conflict and went ahead with using his power. A council member just clumped all the stocks into a single item and did not disclose the stocks he owned. Why did the city clerk allow him to file this 700? It was not correct. Sounds like there are different forms of justice; depending on who you are.

On a side note, I worked with a candidate running for city office man years ago when the city clerk was Peggy. She did everything she could to assist the filer. Did not matter if she supported you or not. She was doing her duty to be a public servant and help you out. I believe she asked for an electronic copy of the ballot statement AND she printed it out. The electronic statement went to the county, so it was not subject to error by somebody typing it in again, and the printed one was used to determine the word count and to have another copy of it. If she asked for both an electronic copy of it and a hard copy, what would happen if those two are not the same. Very easy to do when filing as it is a stressful time and most candidates are tweaking their statement until the end, I believe she used the electronic copy, printed out, so she knew the printed copy and electronic copy were exactly the same. As an FYI, you cannot use Microsoft Word count as the election code counts works a bit different than a generic software package.


12 people like this
Posted by huh
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 24, 2016 at 10:02 am

Kathleen, from the article "Filing practices of municipalities vary,” he said. The question you should be asking is if all candidates were treated the same by the city clerk? As I said, none of the other candidates seemed to have a problem with their filing. I also don't recall there being issues with candidate filings in the last several elections. So again I ask the question why the same rules should not apply to her as well?


4 people like this
Posted by Louise
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Aug 24, 2016 at 10:02 am

[Removed because it didn't add anything to the conversation]


54 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 24, 2016 at 10:19 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Why are the rules different? She was there; the statement was submitted electronically. Not printing that 200 (?) word statement seems arbitrary at best. I would rather be in trouble for printing a 10 cent page for someone than be seen as possibly blocking a candidate's filing for this one very important page.


46 people like this
Posted by Lucy
a resident of Foxborough Estates
on Aug 24, 2016 at 10:57 am

Lucy is a registered user.

It did not take very long for the Julie many of us know to surface. Expect much more if this type of behavior if she wins. UGH! She is right in line with this crazy election cycle and bringing the circus to Pleasanton.


54 people like this
Posted by HT
a resident of Danbury Park
on Aug 24, 2016 at 10:57 am

HT is a registered user.

County supercedes City. She met the deadline. Pleasanton - suck it up, save the tax payers money and lets let us get on with the voting. All I can say is that the run around she was given LOOKS like trying to keep a qualified candidate out of the election. How un-American!
I knew money was corrupting Pleasanton politics - but this is ridiculous.
Shame on you County Clerk, trying to create road blocks and then stand on technicalities to barr a candidate!
Testa was honor bound to pursue this litigation not for her own candicy but to stand up to crooked politics trying to worm its way into Pleasanton.
Thank you county clerk - this makes her my candidate of choice!


40 people like this
Posted by kmary1
a resident of Country Fair
on Aug 24, 2016 at 11:05 am

kmary1 is a registered user.

This seems pretty simple. The County has certain rules and the City has certain rules. They are separate entities. A candidate reads the rules that governs that entity and abides by them. A candidate doesn't read them incorrectly, forget to bring paperwork, and then sue for his/her own mistakes. I look at this as a candidate's incompetence.


59 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Birdland
on Aug 24, 2016 at 11:15 am

res1 is a registered user.

What law is the city clerk citing that she is not allowed to print out the ballot statement that is in her inbox?

One thought came to mind that it could be considered campaigning and you could not use the city's resources (like mayor Hosterman did), but this is a filing situation and not a campaigning situation. If it were a campaign situation then Thorne is in even more legal trouble being he took a photo in the city clerk's office when him signing the papers with the city clerk and posted to his Facebook page. That sounds like more of an issue, having the city clerk while on the job as part of the Thorne campaign. From what I know, that was not a public meeting. So looks like the city clerk unofficially has endorsed Thorne?

I am not one of those conspiracy people but this is all sounding real bad:
1) Mayor Thorne has Costco stock but has worked for year on a financial deal between the city and Costo
2) Thorne is called on the stock ownership and must no longer work on the Costco project (as per city attorney)
3) Thorne asks if he can sell his Costco stock, that he has had for at least five years, so that he can participate in the Costco project.
4) Thorne is not allowed to sign the ballot argument because of his conflict of interest, so he has his campaign manager do so
5) Councilman Olsen, also supporting Costco, does not disclose his stock ownership in his 700 filings. All lumped into a single line.
6) City Clerk, who accepts the 700 filings, allows Olsen to make this filing without disclosing (which is the reason for the 700 form)
7) Resident decides to run against Thorne as mayor and City Clerk does what she can to block this.
8) City Clerk forces candidate to leave office to retrieve 700 form so she can accept the rest of the filing paperwork. The 700 form is not required to be filed with the filing statement as per state law
9) City Clerk refuses to print out candidate statement that is in her email, and she acknowledges, and then says the candidate missed the filing deadline for the statement as it was not on a piece of paper.

I have never seen anything like this in Pleasanton. Not sure what is going on. All these things related to Costco subsidy and the elected officials supporting Costco.

I don't know much about Testa but with all these things going on now in the city and with the current mayor, I am inclined to vote for any change. Perhaps the grand jury needs to look into all of this.


49 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Birdland
on Aug 24, 2016 at 11:20 am

res1 is a registered user.

Kmary1, The city and county are not allowed to make rules here. They are to follow the law and do their job. This is starting to sound like that case of the city clerk not allowing gay marriages. The clerk's role is not to make their own rules whether it is for religious reasons or convenience. In fact the city employees work for us and their job should be to assist us and help everybody comply if needed. Anything less is an abuse of power.


3 people like this
Posted by West side Observer
a resident of Oak Hill
on Aug 24, 2016 at 11:29 am

West side Observer is a registered user.

[Removed because it was off topic]


37 people like this
Posted by Lisa S.
a resident of Stoneridge
on Aug 24, 2016 at 1:06 pm

Lisa S. is a registered user.

I'm wondering whose idea it was to disqualify Julie Testa? Does anyone really think Karen Diaz made that final decision? I know Karen. She does all that she can to help people. This is not her nature. I realize that there are rules- but, we should be city- friendly to a candidate, especially running for mayor. I suspect there were influences; possibly special interests.


4 people like this
Posted by West side Observer
a resident of Oak Hill
on Aug 24, 2016 at 1:36 pm

West side Observer is a registered user.

Lisa, you asked. Jerry Brown and the NIMBYs mostly. Throw is a good dose ABAG (that is the quasi governmental agency that lies on their Website about how and why they were formed) and the Center for Biological Diversity. Oh, almost forgot the San Joaquin Spearscale, the Red Legged Frog, and the Pleasanton Whipsnake.


20 people like this
Posted by Flightops
a resident of Downtown
on Aug 24, 2016 at 1:58 pm

Flightops is a registered user.

Sounding real fishy, sounds like Thorne ( in our side) doesn't want any competion for the next election!!! I'm thinking that "California whip snake" isn't that close to extinction as everybody thought, did they count the ones residing at city hall??


47 people like this
Posted by blazebrook
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 24, 2016 at 2:54 pm

blazebrook is a registered user.

Julie Testa always wants to be the exception to the rule. Beware.


28 people like this
Posted by g7caligirl
a resident of Gatewood
on Aug 24, 2016 at 3:01 pm

g7caligirl is a registered user.

A lot of Thorne supporters piped up on here pretty quickly. Must be watching out for their candidate. These people almost sound as bad as the folks with the drive-thru traffic issue. Discredit discredit discredit. Bottom line now Thorne has competition. A conscientious city worker should have taken the time to make the whole process work without using the mentioned excuses. You reap what you sow - let the court decide and move on. So happy there will not be a rubber stamped mayoral election.


13 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 24, 2016 at 6:26 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@res,

" city clerk is a government employee and therefore a service to the people "

" she had a printer near by, and she refused to do anything. That is not what I call serving the people. "

Exactly! I walked into Bureau of Engraving and Printing Web Link and realized I forgot my wallet.

They had a printer right there and even print me a few replacements! Web Link

I pay their salary! They should have done everything they could to support me!


Like this comment
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 24, 2016 at 9:33 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@g7caligirl,

Who are the "folks with the drive-thru traffic issue" and what's so bad about them?


Posted by Name hidden
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood

on Aug 24, 2016 at 10:22 pm

Due to repeated violations of our Terms of Use, comments from this poster are automatically removed. Why?


34 people like this
Posted by Alexis B
a resident of Mission Park
on Aug 25, 2016 at 6:32 am

Alexis B is a registered user.

Let me get this straight.

She waits until the very last possible minute to file crucial paperwork. She wants the rules changed to cater to her irresponsibility. She blames city staff for her mistakes. Then she SUES the SAME city she is asking to lead?!?!?!?

Not one of those facts represents a mayor for P-town.


12 people like this
Posted by ShermanPeabody
a resident of Val Vista
on Aug 25, 2016 at 7:59 am

ShermanPeabody is a registered user.

The 700 form is not very difficult to complete. I complete one every year, just like any state or local official/employee with any decision making power over financial matters is required to do. It is an important public document that shows transparency in financial decisions. That is why we know about Thorne and Costco.

The statement is required to be submitted as part of the candidate packet in paper form by the deadline. Not by email, carrier pigoen, or any other medium. That is the rules the clerk is required to follow, as well as all other candidates running for office in the city of Pleasanton.

I personally would vote for any reasonable candidate that runs against Thorne (and I would like a Costco). I have issues with the other decisions that he and the Council have made during his tenure as Mayor. That being said, the rules are there for all candidates to have equal footing and if she cannot follow the simple candidate guidlines, then she should not run for office.


19 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 25, 2016 at 8:24 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Sherman, you are mixing up facts here. Julie was not allowed access to a computer to confirm her submission of the Form 700. It was completed. The Clerk then refused to print one page of her candidate's statement. The Registrar's office provides computers expressly for the use of candidates who may need to change or fill out documents. Upon completion, they provide a copy of all paperwork submitted to them, including the candidate's statement which is only required to be submitted electronically. The City needs to change its rules to match those of the County who actually run the elections.


9 people like this
Posted by ShermanPeabody
a resident of Val Vista
on Aug 25, 2016 at 9:27 am

ShermanPeabody is a registered user.

No, the facts are that the city election filing rules are different from the county and she did not follow them. The only concern is if the clerk printed them for other people and not her. If she can prove that, then OK, she has a legitimate gripe. The fact that there was not a computer for her to check things at the last minute, to me, is a mute point. She should have been more aware of deadlines and that worries me as a potential mayoral candidate.

Election rules should be left alone, as each city, town, or municipality elects based upon their charter and ordinances. They are sovereign. The State and County should not infringe on that right. Yes, the city needs to comenout of the stone age, but if the voters want to change that, then they are welcome to do so, but it should not be up anyone else.


8 people like this
Posted by g7caligirl
a resident of Gatewood
on Aug 25, 2016 at 9:32 am

g7caligirl is a registered user.

BobB Lund Ranch.

More Thorne supporters on this thread! Getting the attack on early! Must be worried and they should be!


12 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Birdland
on Aug 25, 2016 at 9:33 am

res1 is a registered user.

Alexis B, I think you have this backwards. Julie was following the law. While the city clerk might have thought the law was inconvenient for her, she cannot change the rules. If the city clerk does not like the law, she should work with the legislators to have the laws changed. It is unfortunate that a concerned citizen of our city has to go through this while she puts herself out there, and spends the time, to run as a representative for us. While you may or may not support a specific candidate, we all win in a democracy when citizens make the plunge to run for an office in our government. This is a non-paid job. It is a duty for us as US citizens to take the time to participate in our democracy. That is why our armed forces fight for our freedom. If we do not allow any qualified person to run on a level playing field, or nobody runs, our democracy and our freedom vanish and the lives given by our armed forces were for nothing.


10 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 25, 2016 at 9:50 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

Sherman, the Registrar works with the City Clerks. They are an extension of that office in practicality. Our school board candidates have to file with the Registrar even though it is a Pleasanton elected office. Candidates for any office should expect the same experience. Not having access to a computer or printing one piece of paper is arbitrary.


7 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 25, 2016 at 9:54 am

BobB is a registered user.

@g7caligirl,

What was bad about the Lund Ranch people? The voters were clearly with them. The measure passed.


15 people like this
Posted by Old Towner
a resident of Old Towne
on Aug 25, 2016 at 10:28 am

Old Towner is a registered user.

Diaz was wrong, fix the problem and move on... Let's be more accommodating the citizens of Pleasanton.





9 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Birdland
on Aug 25, 2016 at 11:19 am

res1 is a registered user.

Kathleen, the Pleasanton Unified School District is not a Pleasanton elected office. The boundaries of the school district are actually larger than the city. The school district includes unincorporated areas like Castlewood, Happy Valley, Remen Track. Plus there are parts of Ruby Hill that are in the City of Pleasanton but in the Livermore school district.

However, I agree with you 100% in your comment "Candidates for any office should expect the same experience. Not having access to a computer or printing one piece of paper is arbitrary."


15 people like this
Posted by kmary1
a resident of Country Fair
on Aug 25, 2016 at 9:34 pm

kmary1 is a registered user.

Kathleen Ruegsegger, I agree with your assessment that the county and city rules should be identical. Then there are no problems. However, at the present time they are different, and candidates should adhere to the rules. Julie did not.

I have watched Julie for 20+ years. She complains, whines, criticizes others for not improving our schools, yet does little to help the situation. It's easy to whine and much more difficult to join the process to make things better. When Julie speaks at any meeting, and she appears everywhere, to me, it's like hearing fingernails on a chalkboard. I block my ears. In the current issue, she's doing the same thing. She messed up and she's blaming the city and anyone else that it's not her fault, but everyone else. Like Donald Trump, she's just not qualified.


4 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 26, 2016 at 7:58 am

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

The candidate's statement, vital for the voters' pamphlet, was submitted electronically as required. Printing a 10 cent page would not been seen as an endorsement. I will even make a leap of faith that a photo posted on Facebook with the clerk and current mayor also wasn't an endorsement. Neither situation feels right though, does it?


18 people like this
Posted by Alexis B
a resident of Mission Park
on Aug 26, 2016 at 12:33 pm

Alexis B is a registered user.

Kathleen normally I find your opinions very balanced and well thought out, but I must say that on this issue you seem very different.

Let me start by saying that the Mayor can post photos of himself being sworn in, just like every other candidate. It was not posted on the city's website - the mayor himself posted it on his own facebook page. How on earth does that show bias or endorsement? Pretty much every candidate alive posts photos like that. It's sort of like saying that if the Mayor posts a photo of himself with the United States Flag, that the United States itself is endorsing him.

Secondly I get the rules are different, but that alone does not mean that the rules shouldn't be followed. I can't go to San Ramon and get pulled over for speeding in front a Safeway and say "Sorry officer but in Pleasanton the speed limit is 40 in front of Safeway, and because all the rules should be the same, I decided to not follow the rules in San Ramon." Nope - rules are different, but that isn't an excuse. The election rules might be different, but I would hope that someone running for office would be organized enough to follow the rules she hopes govern. Lead by example - which clearly Testa cannot muster. If she is not capable of submitting paperwork in timely fashion, and then sues the city because of it... it just mystifies me that someone like that could think of running the city.





6 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Birdland
on Aug 26, 2016 at 12:52 pm

res1 is a registered user.

Alexis B, I don't think you get it. The photo in question was not the mayor being sworn in. It was a photo of him in the city clerk's office, turning in his candidate information.

The laws being followed by the candidate are set at the state level. At the local level they do not have the option to make their own rules. Plus for rules you can set at the city level, this would be done through an ordinance at a city council meeting. The city clerk does not have the authority to set/create law. Taking your example, if a Pleasanton police officer pulls you over because your car is red and he does not like red cars, you believe the officer has the right to give you a ticket for driving a red car in Pleasanton. And even if the police chief tells the officer that he does not like red cars either, so go ahead with ticket. Neither one of those has the right to create a new rule like this.


5 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 26, 2016 at 1:00 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

I think balance is the issue. I had a much different experience at the county and that shouldn't be the case for a candidate at a city office. I've written to the city manager about changing the rules. Who knows, maybe they will.

So if the officer said, "Alexis, I understand your point, and I'm going to give you a warning", would you say, "Officer, you are bending the rule; give me a ticket"? Rules have flex points and those enforcing the rules can make a judgment call. I don't particularly like the implication of the photo, but like printing one page, neither case makes me worry about perceived endorsements. In both cases, photo or a page, isn't it just a courtesy?


3 people like this
Posted by Lance
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Aug 28, 2016 at 9:12 pm

Lance is a registered user.

So Kathleen, if the officer said "you broke the law, I am giving you a ticket" would that be wrong on the officers part? Of course not. Many of us have faced state and federal regulations that run up against a clock and we were bound by them. If you have a court date and show up late, do they shown leniency? If you have to file a form by 5pm and you show up at 5:05 do they show leniency? Of course not. I'm not sure why we would show leniency to a potential elected official who apparently doesn't know whether the require forms have been submitted or not.


4 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Aug 28, 2016 at 10:22 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

No one showed up at 5:05. The forms were submitted.


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

Couples: Drop Your Keyboard!
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 4,738 views

Julie Testa seeking election to Pleasanton City Council
By Jeb Bing | 0 comments | 409 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