News


Pleasanton Weekly recommends No on Measure MM

Also urges Yes on Pleasanton school bond, county affordable housing bond; No on BART bond

In an editorial, the Pleasanton Weekly has recommended that voters cast a No vote on Measure MM on the Nov. 8 ballot.

The newspaper pointed out in its Oct. 7 print edition that Measure MM, if approved, would change the city's General Plan to permanently require that zoning of a 40-acre-plus site on Johnson Drive restrict retail development with buildings no larger than 50,000 square feet.

"This would allow only businesses commonly found in strip malls such as restaurants, small groceries, specialty shops and service-oriented businesses like tutoring centers and dentists," the editorial stated.

It continued:

"These are not big producers of sales tax revenue and would likely compete with similar businesses in downtown Pleasanton and neighborhood retail centers.

(The measure) "would also stop the City Council-appointed Johnson Drive Economic Development Zone (EDZ) task force from continuing its work on determining the best uses of vacant land on Johnson Drive, where Clorox relocated its large research center that has since been torn down.

It continued:

"A 50,000-square-foot zoning restriction is not warranted on Johnson Drive, an industrial-zoned street highly visible and commercially appealing as an Interstate 680 frontage road, with a FedEx regional center at one end and Home Depot on the other. Larger buildings and businesses belong there to add to Pleasanton's sales tax base and employment opportunities, including Costco, which would like to build there.

"We only need to look at local history to see the effects of blocking businesses that are determined to locate in an area. Home Depot wanted to put a store on Bernal and Stanley. After much debate and public outcry, the plans were scuttled. High-density apartments are currently being built on that land.

"A number of years ago Costco proposed a store in San Ramon. San Ramon residents' public outcry against a Costco in their city deterred approval by the City Council, so Costco went to San Ramon's neighbor to the north, Danville. Costco is now the top employer in Danville and the town receives hundreds of thousands of dollars in sales tax revenue annually. San Ramon receives most of the traffic.

"We recommend a No vote on MM. However, we would like to see Pleasanton negotiate a better agreement with Costco/Nearon than what we believe is currently on the table, with the city subsidizing less of the necessary traffic mitigation and other infrastructure changes. The other key to that statement is that we would like to see the level of transparency on this project increase tremendously."

In its editorial, the Weekly also recommended:

Yes on Measure I1, the $270 million Pleasanton school bond

"It has been 20 years since Pleasanton voters have passed a bond measure, possibly the reason the board worked hard to reduce the amount on the ballot from the original $450 million to $270 million.

"While the board might have found that a more palatable dollar amount for voters, thus giving it a better chance of being approved, we feel they should have stayed with the $450 million planning and financial experts recommended.

"The list of projects for existing facilities is long, the costs are significant and the work necessary. Unfortunately, while we are fixing what has been needed for years, this bond doesn't have sufficient earmarked funds for a 10th elementary school that is needed now, nor any money for another elementary or middle school that will likely be needed over the 30-year life of the measure.

"Pleasanton's population is 72,000 and could reach close to 80,000 by the time all of the high-density apartment buildings now under construction are filled. Within the next 30 years, still more will come with many more school-age children.

"There will be local control and local oversight of the $270 million, with none of the funds being used for salaries. There are no alternative funding sources identified aside from Proposition 51, the $9 billion public school facilities bond also on the Nov. 8 ballot. If Prop 51 passes, PUSD would have to provide matching funds to qualify for any of that state assistance.

"Without question, the school district needs the $270 million. We just wish the school board had taken a longer-range look and asked for more. With only a 55% favorable vote by those voting on this measure needed for approval, it's likely a larger bond request would have passed."

Yes on Measure A1, the Alameda County affordable housing bond

"We have a housing crisis in Alameda County. The lack of affordable housing affects everyone, but particularly the low-income families and other "vulnerable populations" such as veterans, seniors and people with disabilities.

"Some of these people are being forced to commute long distances because they can't afford to live here, and others end up homeless. The Alameda County Board of Supervisors placed a $580 million general obligation bond measure on the Nov. 8 ballot to fund affordable housing options through rental and home ownership programs.

"The funds will stay in the county, and independent annual audits will ensure the money is spent according to the measure's direction. The cost to property owners is projected to be $12 to $14 per $100,000 of assessed value. This seems like a small price to pay to ensure people who work in Alameda County can live here, and to help get the homeless off the streets and back on their feet.

"We recommend a Yes on Measure A1."

No on Measure RR, the $3.5 billion BART bond measure

"The BART Board of Directors is seeking a $3.5 billion "loan" from voters to pay for capital investments, but the money will likely go to cover outrageous labor costs. Instead of planning for the future by putting money in reserves for capital improvements that will inevitably be necessary with such a system, BART officials have made poor decisions and expect taxpayers to bail them out.

"Shortly after a labor deal was made earlier this year, BART announced that the system expected a $477 million deficit over the next decade, including $77 million from the labor agreement they had just made. This was right around the time employees were given $3.3 million in bonuses.

"But, according to BART General Manager Grace Crunican, all that's needed to make up this shortfall is to pass a $3.5 billion bond measure. And she promises the money will go toward capital improvements. This is technically true of this money. However, money previously set aside for capital improvements can go back into the operating budget.

"We recommend a No on Measure RR. Send a message to BART that there is not an unlimited supply of cash to cover their poor planning."

Comments

41 people like this
Posted by Long Time Pleasanton Resident
a resident of Mohr Park
on Oct 7, 2016 at 10:40 am

I am in full agreement with PW recommendation on the Measures that affect Pleasanton residents.


10 people like this
Posted by Bonds
a resident of Bonde Ranch
on Oct 7, 2016 at 12:12 pm

Another idea I have heard around town is to vote yes on all bonds. Housing, BART, state school bind, local school bond etc. it will make taxes so high in Pleasanton it will keep the riff raff out and also many seniors will be forced to sell their homes and will open up more older homes for sale.


12 people like this
Posted by Tim A
a resident of Birdland
on Oct 7, 2016 at 12:23 pm

@Bonds

And pay Costco $20 million too. But that will bring in riff raft you speak of, to shop, that will offset the property tax from seniors who we have displaced.

Yes on MM. Keep Pleasanton Pleasant.


28 people like this
Posted by Patriot
a resident of Birdland
on Oct 7, 2016 at 12:24 pm

Remember a no vote on MM means YES on Costco! Vote No means we want Costco. The proponents for mm meant to confuse us and weasel worded it ! I'm for Costco for reasons listed by PW!


29 people like this
Posted by Bill
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Oct 7, 2016 at 12:54 pm

Shouldn't MM be the BW measure, since it about Mr. Wheeler's parking spaces at risk? He had $130k to pump into the measure, so he certainly isn't a hurting small business man. [removed] I'm voting no on MM.


17 people like this
Posted by Tom M.
a resident of Castlewood
on Oct 7, 2016 at 1:23 pm

Tom M. is a registered user.

Citizens of Pleasanton in Uproar over this absurd deal with Costco. Important information has been withheld. Lies and more lies. There has been no transparency. What is city manager Nelson Fialho thinking? What is Mayor Thorne thinking? This is crazy. This is a terrible deal for Pleasanton.

Costco must be patting themselves on the back! High fives over this deal!

This deal needs to be stopped! Vote Yes on MM!!


15 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Oct 7, 2016 at 1:31 pm

res1 is a registered user.

"What is Mayor Thorne thinking?" Ha-ha. Obviously he is not thinking as he was told by the FPPC that he had a conflict of interest and could not participate in the Johnson Development Zone. To be extra sneaky about it, he had his campaign manager signed the ballot arguments for Costco since the public realized his conflict.

In a recent forum, our mayor, Jerry Thorne, said his biggest regret was not selling his Costco stock. That shows you his mentality. His biggest regret should have been him working so hard to get Costco here while he had a conflict of interest. He takes absolutely no responsibility for his action here. No apologies either. His statement to the city attorney asking him if he sold his stock now, could he continue working on the Costco project shows his disconnect and thinks the laws do not apply to him. Tired of elected officials who think the laws do not apply to them. It is time for him to be removed from office.


13 people like this
Posted by Happycamper
a resident of Highland Oaks
on Oct 7, 2016 at 2:43 pm

I really wish the council would consider a unique plan instead of Costco. Pleasanton Why don't we consider something different and cool. I would love to see a development that would allow me to have a nice lunch or dinner, boutique shopping, hotel events instead of a store that is in nearly in every town. I am a Costco member but do not feel this is the best plan for this site for the ENTIRE community.


4 people like this
Posted by A Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 7, 2016 at 8:08 pm

I think having a Costco in Pleasanton is a good idea with one proviso. Improve the driving lanes near the site. Perhaps offer to take over the ATT site which will add a lot of a space and be closer to Stoneridge Drive and freeway.

Failing all that, and if the Measure does pass I would hope Costco could still build a gas station there.

If you have ever gone to Costco on a weekend you will know what I mean


3 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 8, 2016 at 6:54 am

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Hate the deal.
Love costco.
Special interests are forcing the voting public into a no win situation.

Support costco pay $20m
Support MM continue to get gouged by shell, subsidize free parking for black tie, and forever lockout the chance of a Costco or like store.

Round up the politicians they need to be dealt with


32 people like this
Posted by Ar Udumb
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2016 at 10:36 am

Ar Udumb is a registered user.

I hate the big baby's that ALWAYS complain about traffic. What Ever goes in there will bring more Traffic. They wanted to build another Home Depot on the opposite side of Pleasanton, and they cried traffic. SO WHAT GOES UP INSTEAD. OVER 200 APARTMENTS AND OF COURSE A STARBUCKS! How is that any better! Twice we tried to have a nice family water park so kids a nd families could do something in Pleasanton, but no! "TRAFFIC!" I have lived here 47 years I'm sick of the people with sticks up there butts. Something will be built there and poor Bill Wheeler(Black tie) will have to park all his limos somewhere else not all over the streets. And for the gas stations that are complaining that there's going to be too much traffic scam they want the traffic more traffic will bring more revenue for them. Don't try to cover it up. Something will go there. And traffic will be there when whatever is built. Costco is a family store we're a family town build it.
"The area is within a 40-acre area Johnson Drive Economic Development Zone, meant to attract businesses to the city."

This area was MEANT to attract businesses.

50,000 square feet on 40 Acres that was zoned for businesses. Really.
Black tie will not generate nearly as much, not even close the tax revenue for the city as Costco. Not even close!


13 people like this
Posted by Nan
a resident of Rosewood
on Oct 8, 2016 at 11:52 am

Nan is a registered user.

I will vote Yes on MM.

I will not pay:

$10,767,006 In borrowing
$ 5,335,000 From our Traffic Reserve
$ 3,170,000 Nearon refund "open to consideration"

$19,272,006 Total to be paid by City for Costco (April 5 agreement)

No way! The City had 2 1/2 years to negotiate with Costco. This was the best each side would do.
Vote Yes on MM to stop this bad deal.


21 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2016 at 1:36 pm

BobB is a registered user.

This is a great location for Costco. I am voting yes.


12 people like this
Posted by Kelly K.
a resident of Ruby Hill
on Oct 8, 2016 at 2:08 pm

Kelly K. is a registered user.

I will vote YES!

Costco is a waste of our taxpayer money, an abuse of special interests' influence on our city leaders, lack of transparency, and political corruption.

Almost $20 million!!


13 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 8, 2016 at 3:12 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

So I just went to Costco in Livermore today, and they actually have an employee at a table with a sign behind him saying "No on MM". The employee asked me about voting "no", and I told him that I would be voting "yes on MM".

In another thread, I asked any city representative to come on this blog and defend their position. I was told by a candidate for city council that all the numbers are wrong. But no one came on the thread to either defend the city's position of say that the numbers are wrong.

So I challenge the mayor, the city council members, the planning commission members, the candidates for office, or any city employee to write here on this thread, that something that has been written (like what Nan posted above) is incorrect in any way. I want the facts, and if what has been written is incorrect, then let us know. So far, your silence has spoken loudly.


1 person likes this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 9, 2016 at 7:44 am

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

I agree that anything new will bring traffic. But MM states it will bring less traffic and generate more revenue. Over costco?!

I've questioned the revenue numbers from the smaller business option, it doesn't make sense that less traffic will bring more revenue. Costco trips are expensive I can't imagine what would be planned to go in that drives higher per purchase spend. Maybe a casino 680?


8 people like this
Posted by Lisa S.
a resident of Stoneridge
on Oct 9, 2016 at 11:39 am

Lisa S. is a registered user.

Hi Pleasanton Parent

It is all rather confusing. According to the August City-ordered study, Costco will bring more traffic - but, also slightly more revenue. The additional traffic with Costco is 2500 more cars per day on weekdays and 3600 more cars on weekends when compared to smaller retail.

On the revenue side with Costco in the mix, the JDEDZ will bring in $2.5 million in sales tax revenue at full build-out, and smaller retail $2.1 million in sales tax revenue.

So the question becomes, do you spend $19-20 million to get $400,000 extra per year and have the extra traffic. If you believe the extra traffic is no big deal; then you have to conclude that it would take 50 years to get your $19-20million back at $400,000 per year- this does not include interest on your investment.

Some people will say "no way, this is a bad deal" and vote Yes on MM; some people will say "I don't care if it takes 50 years to break even" and vote No on MM.

Personally, I do not believe in a $19-20 million subsidy to bring us Costco. I will vote Yes on MM.


7 people like this
Posted by chas
a resident of Parkside
on Oct 9, 2016 at 2:01 pm

chas is a registered user.

@BobB if you are wanting Costco a yes vote will not get it.
Yes will stop it, No is what you want if you want Costco.


30 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Transplant
a resident of Birdland
on Oct 10, 2016 at 9:28 am

Pleasanton Transplant is a registered user.

Don't be fooled!!!!

A YES vote will prevent Costco from coming in!

A NO vote will allow Costco to come in!

I think a Costco in Pleasanton will be great! It won't stop me from shopping at Lucky, Safeway and other stores around town. I do that anyway and drive over to Livermore or Danville to do my bulk shopping. By having it in town, my tax dollars will stay here, and I will be helping with the environment by not putting my car onto the freeway and saving wear and tear on it as well!

No on MM!


7 people like this
Posted by perrymac
a resident of California Reflections
on Oct 10, 2016 at 10:47 am

perrymac is a registered user.

So Costco--a $116 billion company that will be making more millions from Pleasanton residents--offers a plan where they pay little in traffic mitigation and front a loan that earns them another $3 million. And residents are so eager for their 50 cent hot dogs and bulk items and don't want to drive 8 miles for them that they can't see how this is a monumentally bad deal for the city? Tax revenues will be decreased because we will be paying back the loan, which would not happen if other more interesting retail stores, restaurants and entertainment options went into that space. Don't be fooled, as another commenter said.


8 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 10, 2016 at 10:56 am

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Agreed the deal isn't great. The alternative doesn't exist, and not bringing costco in allows Valero and Shell to continue to gouge you on gas. Either way we pay. Would you rather pay for something new that does eventually pay off (albeit not a great deal) or perpetually continue to get screwed at the pump by those that have and continue to gouge Pleasanton residents on fuel prices.


18 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 10, 2016 at 10:57 am

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Siding with costco or siding with Shell and Valero? I'll take costco.


21 people like this
Posted by chas
a resident of Parkside
on Oct 10, 2016 at 1:05 pm

chas is a registered user.

Voting NO on MM. I'll take Costco. Was just at the Livermore Costco and it was more crowded than usual. That store is maxed out, as it the parking and gas station! They need another store as the population here increases.
Why doesn't this city put a ban on more housing! Every vacant lot is being filled with condos and apartments. Just where in our school system are all these kids supposed to go to school.


27 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Country Fair
on Oct 10, 2016 at 5:23 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

No on MM.

There is no better use for that "armpit of 580/680" area, let alone the proximity of the waste water treatment plant. No retailer brings in more tax revenue per location than a Costco (that is documented fact). Everyone I know complains about the traffic on 580/680 to get to the other costcos, which are getting over-crowded from their own neighborhood customers. Let's keep Pleasanton residents and their tax spending in town.

And Costcos don't bring "rif raf" as mentioned earlier, given that Costco members have the highest average household income for major retailers. The rif raf goes to the Walmart.

I agree we should negotiate harder with Costco, but if MM passes and the city has its hands tied, then maybe we'll end up getting a dollar store, a check-cashing store, a liquor store, and all the other great <50K sq. ft. retailers that DO bring in the rif raf. No "boutiques" want to be located there... look what's there now. It's never going to be a nice place to visit, to stroll, to window shop. It's noisy, smelly and dirty. If it's perfect for a bunch of Limos to park at, it's perfect for a Costco and some competitive gas stations (that the limos can fill up at!) :-)

By the way, note that the apartments by Bernal & Stanley have nearly 350 units. Be careful what you wish for if you vote yes on MM - you may get it, and then really regret it!


3 people like this
Posted by Bob QP
a resident of Rosewood
on Oct 10, 2016 at 5:46 pm

Bob QP is a registered user.

That area of Johnson Drive is deemed a non-desirable area because the City has never put any effort until redeveloping it until now. They first came to people in the area, trying to sell the JDEDZ with the idea of making it into an interesting and lively gateway, knowing that hundreds of thousands of commuters pass by it every day. Why do you think Costco wants to be there? What they didn't tell people was that their idea of "interesting and lively" was Costco, because the developer told them this was the easiest path to get something new there. But it has tremendous potential, in spite of the water treatment area. Any area can be turned into something better, if you have creative planners who care about their community and the vision to step out and imagine it.


12 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Country Fair
on Oct 10, 2016 at 7:23 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

What would you suggest would make that area desirable -- and for what purposes? What would mask all the loud highway noise, or hide the eyesore? What would filter out all the exhaust and pollution? What would hide the smell from the waste treatment plant or the swampy runoff creeks?

If you have ideas that would achieve all that, and make the area more desirable - and provide good tax revenue to the city - then please lay them out.

And putting in another strip mall like all the ones around Walmart wouldn't be better.


28 people like this
Posted by Uncle Sam
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Oct 10, 2016 at 9:44 pm

Uncle Sam is a registered user.

No on MM.

Alternatively, we lose all control on 40 acres forever, not just a badly needed Costco.

Folks, we elect our representatives and then we think we know better than them about how to run the city. If you believe that, please run for office...in the mean time, let our elected officials do their jobs and stop second guessing them!

Where can I get a yard sign with "No on MM"?


20 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Country Fair
on Oct 10, 2016 at 10:05 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Good question! Would like a No on MM yard sign too!


30 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 10, 2016 at 10:23 pm

BobB is a registered user.

Correction, I am voting NO! I want Costco. This is a great location for Costco.


27 people like this
Posted by PTownCtz
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 11, 2016 at 12:10 pm

PTownCtz is a registered user.

No on MM and YES for Costco!

For all the reasons that have been well expressed.


5 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 11, 2016 at 6:46 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

"Folks, we elect our representatives and then we think we know better than them about how to run the city. If you believe that, please run for office...in the mean time, let our elected officials do their jobs and stop second guessing them!"

We "elect our representatives" to represent us! Many people have stated that they do not want a Costco, or the giant loan we are giving Costco, so we will vote. The polls will tell. But don't blindly elect representatives and let them do their jobs with no questions, you must always question your leaders, make them do their jobs properly, make them respect the will of the people. Winning an election is not carte blanche to do whatever you think is best (though sadly, many politicians think it is).


4 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Oct 11, 2016 at 9:36 pm

res1 is a registered user.

I think we should also question all the council/mayor candidates on whether they support this development zone, and do not vote for them if they support it. If the Council approves the development zone, the uses in the zone are by right. That means, the public has no way to stop or referend any proposals that are consistent with the listed uses. I can see why the chamber and their BACk-pocket PAC STRONGLY support this development. It allows them to get their projects through without a chance of a referendum. Since they control most of the Council now, the residents lose big time. So even bigger than MM, we need to vote out the candidates who support this development.


6 people like this
Posted by Registered Joe
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 11, 2016 at 9:43 pm

Registered Joe is a registered user.

I disagree with the PW's stance on this measure, and will vote Yes on MM, for the following reasons.

1. Just as numerous parties took issue with Mayor Thorne taking sides on this issue when he is a Costco stockholder, I take issue with the PW publishing an editorial opinion when it stands to gain advertising revenue from the proposed Costco.

2. After reading the various documents concerning the back-room dealmaking between the City Council and Costco, I no longer trust them to do the job we elected them to do.

3. Whatever tax revenue increase comes from the proposed Costco, it's clear that the cost of the improved road infrastructure to support a large store in that area outweighs whatever increase in tax revenue the city might see. In the best case scenario - if the new store generates enough tax dollars to pay for its upkeep - and if there are other nearby alternatives (San Ramon and Livermore), why bother with a local option?


27 people like this
Posted by Ptown Dad
a resident of Amador Estates
on Oct 11, 2016 at 10:10 pm

Ptown Dad is a registered user.

I will vote NO on MM. The main supporters are gas stations who want to keep gasoline prices higher by eliminating Costco as competition, and Black Tie limo so their drivers can park on the street. You can't hold back something most people in Pleasanton want to please a few business owners.


18 people like this
Posted by Uncle Sam
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Oct 11, 2016 at 10:11 pm

Uncle Sam is a registered user.

Dear Get the Facts & res1,

By all means, let's vote in the folks that win elections and vote out the ones who lose. Doesn't democracy already do that? Please remember that the "residents" are the ones who voted them in, not folks from another city, county, state or country!

However,once the majority elects someone, let's respect them and their decisions versus implying that they have ulterior motives. I respect your right to disagree with their decisions, but assuming that our elected officials have ulterior motives is just insulting the democratic process - and the folks the "residents" elected, as well as the residents who elected them.

Elections are held on a regular basis. Use those elections to vote our leadership in or out instead of wasting tons of tax dollars and using the referendums to challenge their decisions during their term.

The city council and staff does hundreds and hundreds of hours of work before they take a position. Unfortunately, most voters will take just a few minutes to make their voting decisions.

With all due respect, my expectations are that the democratically elected city council - with the help of the city staff - is more likely to make the right decision than the owner of a single business, Black Tie Limousine, regarding what is right for the city and its residents.
Uncle Sam


17 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 13, 2016 at 12:48 am

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Not just a "single business," also the Gas Station cartel in Pleasanton. See this article put out today about a AAA study showing Pleasanton has the second-highest average gas prices in the Bay Area right now?

Web Link

No wonder the Gas Station cartel doesn't want the competition of a Costco to bring their prices more in line with the market. In the recent filing, while Wheeler (Black Tie) donated about $135K toward the MM campaign, the Gas Station Owners donated another $15K or so. Think they really actually care about any of the arguments for MM, or just have their own business self-interests at heart??


8 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 13, 2016 at 9:08 am

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

$15k - ha! Based on the price difference between Costco gas and Valero ($0.50 per gallon less) EACH gas station pulls in an additional $730k/year of our hard earned money.

The costco deal isn't good - but the status quo is worse


9 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 13, 2016 at 10:26 am

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Here is the article with the latest specific numbers. Actually a touch more from both parties than I noted:

Web Link

"On the "yes on MM" side, $157,522 was listed with the majority, $138,614 coming from business owner Bill Wheeler, a sponsor of MM. Most of the money was spent to pay for gathering signatures to qualify the initiative for the ballot. C&J Cox Corporation donated $18,907."


4 people like this
Posted by Bob12
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 14, 2016 at 9:46 am

Bob12 is a registered user.

Yes on MM, we need to stop additional "GRIDLOCK" in Pleasanton and Stoneridge, that now connects west Pleasanton to Livermore is primed for more cut through traffic. Our City Govt cares more about adding new business than taking care of Pleasanton residents - - if you do not believe me - - try and drive on Owens by Bart where to accommodate more housing, they cut the main traffic going east down to one lane. Insane! DO NOT LET THE CITY GOVT GET AWAY WITH INCREASING TRAFFIC GRIDLOCK AND CUT THROUGH - HAD IT UP THE TAIL PIPE.


2 people like this
Posted by Bob12
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 14, 2016 at 9:49 am

Bob12 is a registered user.

vote YES on MM to stop the additional gridlock and traffic issues on Stoneridge. Now that Stoneridge connects west Pleasanton to Livermore cut through traffic will only increase over the years. Our City Govt is more interested in adding business to Pleasanton than preserving our lifestyle. Check out the new gridlock on Owens by the Bart station where they cut 3 lanes eastbound to 1 lane to accommodate more building. They are creating more traffic and cutting down on traffic lanes - insane.


11 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 14, 2016 at 9:56 am

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Explain "cut through" in this context?? Today, Pleasanton residents are the ones getting on the freeways to get over to Livermore and to Danville for the Costcos there. Nobody from those regions would come over to Pleasanton to go to a Costco... they'd stay in their respective areas. That's how we reduce the crowding and clogging going on inside those locations.

I say inside though btw, because I still have yet to ever experience any traffic from the freeway off-ramp to a store. It's only once in the parking lots and the checkout lines where it's all clogged up.


24 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Resident
a resident of Country Fair
on Oct 14, 2016 at 12:37 pm

Pleasanton Resident is a registered user.

It seems that many in Pleasanton are seeking the truth about the potential impact that Costco would have on the City and everyone has a right to the truth.

One has to give credit to Bob Wheeler, owner of Black Tie Limo for having had the leadership and money, as a local businessman to create and lead a number of our citizens in a "lynch style" mentality toward trying to prevent a non-competing business like Costco from building on a neighboring property that is ideally suited for that purpose and would satisfy a majority of the residents of Pleasanton who are Costco customers. In the process, he and his supporters have chosen to demonize the Mayor and City Council members who may be in support of this project.

Mr Wheeler would have you and his supporters believe that he is acting in the best interest of the citizens of Pleasanton. He personally is reported to not be a resident of Pleasanton at all but rater a businessman operating what appears to be a rather successful business in Pleasanton. That is all well and good and he is to be commended for that but one might ask, if he is not a resident of Pleasanton, what are his true motives? It has repeatedly been stated that what he is truly interested in is protecting the free parking for his employees on the street which may be lost to him if Costco is to be developed. Costco does not offer limousine services so he surely is not concerned about that being a factor. Is he truly looking out for the well being of the residents of Pleasanton or his own self-interests?

There are reportedly 27,000 Costco members in the city of Pleasanton and they go to Costco by the thousands to benefit from Costco's high quality merchandise, the competitive prices, the liberal return policies, and yes, the cheaper gasoline prices. This is called free enterprise and consumers make their purchasing decisions on who can offer the best prices and the best quality. Will the Valero and Shell stations lower their prices if Costco comes in? Hopefully yes, but if not, they can compete as they see fit and satisfy those who choose to or are capable of paying more.

If all of the proposed bond measures pass on this ballot, then the citizens of Pleasanton and all of Alameda county will surely be looking for the closest Costco to purchase more of their food, clothing, supplies, and certainly gasoline when they realize how much their new tax bills are actually going to be.

It is sad to hear so many people demeaning a successful American Company that has done well to meet the demand of so many citizens, treats its employees with respect and provides competitive wages and benefits. If Costco is not the type of company that we can feel good about as Americans in meeting the needs of its customers and employees, then we are doomed as a free enterprise nation.

Hopefully, common sense and cool heads will prevail on voting day and enough Pleasanton citizens will vote NO ON MM and allow Costco to be a part of the Pleasanton business community.




8 people like this
Posted by patcher
a resident of Downtown
on Oct 14, 2016 at 2:21 pm

patcher is a registered user.

I vote Yes to having those who vote No on MM paying the $19-20 million subsidy. You want it, you pay for it. Don't pick my pocket.

Mayoral and city council candidates from Pleasanton were scheduled to attend the Pleasanton Voters candidate forum last night to answer the community's questions about our future, which included the Measure MM initiative. Only two of the five candidates were there to answer moderated questions. The other three, Jerry Thorne, Jerry Pentin, and Herb Ritter were no-shows.

Hugely disappointing and very disrespectful.

Yes on MM
No to Jerry Thorne, Jerry Pentin, and Herb Ritter


20 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 14, 2016 at 5:01 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

"Pleasanton Resident" - that was a very well-written letter. Can you send it to the Weekly and the Independent for publication in the letters/opinions section??

I agree it's important for people to consider that Costco is one of the best examples of a "responsible" retailer. It's the exact opposite of Walmart in its corporate practices, employee support, and customer profile. It fits great with Pleasanton, its demographics, and its ideals.

If MM passes - for the express benefit of the Limo company and the Gas Station cartel -- residents will continue to pay the 2nd highest gas prices in the Bay Area and may also end up getting something there they fundamentally regret. Hey, maybe we'll get a card-room casino, some liquor stores, a check-cashing place, and how about a bail bondsman too. Each could be under 50K square feet...

But seriously, something WILL go there... and nobody has offered any REAL alternatives that are truly better or would be more successful, and would benefit so many current residents. One argument talks about the risk of Costco going out of business? Seriously?!?! Frankly, anything but a Costco would harm existing small businesses (other than the gouging gas stations) according to the study.

For all those reasons and more, that's why I continue to find all of the people I've met planning to vote No on MM. There's a loud contingent of Yes on MM on this site, and they're spreading all sorts of fear for the benefit of a couple private business interest. But if you would like the significant benefits of a Costco, or whatever the JDZ taskforce will recommend in due process, then vote no on MM. Don't be misled to think everyone is against Costco. Be sure to go out and Vote NO on MM.




2 people like this
Posted by Kelly K.
a resident of Ruby Hill
on Oct 14, 2016 at 5:19 pm

Kelly K. is a registered user.

Costco has been less than credible with secret deals and greed of wanting more than the $20 million that Fialho offered. Finally settled on the $20 million. Aren't we lucky to have them grace our city with their traffic, smog, back door deals.

By the time we pay their loan in 25 years- they will be gone. Aren't we lucky?


13 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 14, 2016 at 5:41 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

I fail to understand this argument about smog. Smog isn't just over one little area, it spreads around the whole valley. When I went to Costco in Livermore this week, I had to drive an extra 10 miles round trip compared to how far it would have been to go in Pleasanton. That's an extra 1/2 Gallon of gasoline burned up and exhaust put in the air. The portion I burned in Pleasanton on the way to and from 580 would be the same regardless of whether there was or wasn't a Costco in town. So fundamentally, I put MORE smog into the Tri-Valley as a whole because of this. And there are plenty of people in the area who would save even more miles and gas with a local Costco (anyone in East Pleasanton can continue to go to Livermore if it's closer).

So if I could go 18-20 times a year to a local Costco, that's almost 10 full gallons of gas not burned by just one car. Now multiply all that times how many trips the other 21,999 local Costco members might do, and that's a huge net smog savings!


5 people like this
Posted by Tom M.
a resident of Castlewood
on Oct 14, 2016 at 5:49 pm

Tom M. is a registered user.

We must do better for the future of our city. Yes on MM


15 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 14, 2016 at 6:08 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

So again, as I keep asking, what would be the "better" that meets the necessary criteria? What would you propose for strong tax revenue and business continuity? And what would bring huge direct benefits to a large portion of city residents including shorter drives, less time in bad freeway traffic, LESS smog, and much cheaper gas?

We're not putting a park there okay? Nobody would use it. Nor should we restrict it to a bunch of rinky-dink little stores that will suffer due to the location. It has to be a singularly high draw option or it will suffer continual commercial turnover and low support.

So throw out some realistic options. Anyone? Anyone?? Beuller?

No on MM. Costco IS better for the future of our city.


19 people like this
Posted by Tom M.
a resident of Castlewood
on Oct 14, 2016 at 6:57 pm

Tom M. is a registered user.

@ PLSN Ask Fiaho!

Nelson Fialho's negotiated with Costco through email. Fialho stated on April I: "If your proposal is truly non-negotiable as stated in your email bellow, then we have reached an impasse. If this is the case, the City will continue with the planning process for the EDZ, with or without Costco. The EDZ contemplates many uses that are beneficial to the City, which makes the process beneficial to complete from a land use perspective."

"Many uses that are beneficial to the City"!

Yes on MM!






16 people like this
Posted by Registered Joe
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 14, 2016 at 11:21 pm

Registered Joe is a registered user.

For years we'd enter and leave Val Vista Park for kids' sports games, going through that traffic light handling Stoneridge and Johnson Drive. The same light that will be asked to handle the increased traffic from Costco. The traffic then, and now, is awful, and even worse during commute times. And there are mere dozens of parking spots in Val Vista, as compared to the hundreds that will be needed to feed the proposed Costco.

If traffic was the only issue, I'd still vote against the Costco (yes on MM). Add the Costco-mandated, city-borne development cost to bring a private business into town, add the City Council shenanigans to the mix, and all of a sudden we're zero for three.

Yes on MM for me.


15 people like this
Posted by Val
a resident of Val Vista
on Oct 15, 2016 at 10:00 am

Val is a registered user.

@Registerd Joe
I couldn't agree more. I live in Val Vista. Costco would be a nightmare for traffic. More people in my neighborhood need to get involved. Thanks for speaking up. Love your zero for 3!

The stuff that I read on Fiahlo's lies is amazing. Secret, special deals to refund all of Costco and Nearon's investment from other projects (our money!).


7 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 15, 2016 at 10:18 am

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

People - the arguments against costco are the same for anything else going into the area. There will be an increase in traffic through the area. The only unique issues to Costco are the deal and the company itself.

The company is a great company and there are no alternatives being presented.....maybe the Raiders can build a new stadium there.

The deal sucks, but relative to the other issues (traffic/smog/etc) it generates the highest revenue per trip than anything else (ie trips are more efficient).

The only reason to reject costco are
- you don't support the deal
- you don't want costco
- you enjoy getting gouged by Shell and Valero

Development of the area will bring traffic, it's a given. To minimize that traffic you want something like costco that will maximize spend per trip and diverts longer freeway trips to other stores for shorter ones to closer stores. In the bigger picture it's better for traffic and smog.


18 people like this
Posted by M. Jensen
a resident of Val Vista
on Oct 15, 2016 at 10:33 am

M. Jensen is a registered user.

The company is a greedy company. It preys off of our leaders who are financially incompetent. Look at the deal they tried to pull at Elk Grove- until Mayor Davis said: " we need transparency."

I'm tired of hearing about how great they are! Yes they have cheap gas and a $1.50 hot dog.

I don't eat hot dogs, and I will not wait in line 45 minutes to save a few dollars, breathing the pollution from 50 cars idling.

Yes on MM!!


9 people like this
Posted by Registered Joe
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 15, 2016 at 10:53 am

Registered Joe is a registered user.

Pleasanton Parent,
You may not realize it, but you're supporting all the arguments for the Yes on MM crowd.

-- You admit the deal "sucks"

-- You're focusing on the tax revenue, which would only be needed to build the new infrastructure for the Costco in the first place

-- We already have the ability to maximize spend per trip by going to the nearby Costco stores in San Ramon and Livermore

Concerning the gas, that's a false argument, like the false arguments the plastic bag companies have taken on Props 65 and 67. Even if residents were getting "gouged" by those gas stations you mentioned, it's a lot easier to get gas somewhere else.


Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 15, 2016 at 1:08 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

If you think costco is a great company because it offers $1.50 hotdogs and competitively priced gas then you're making a very misinformed decision around the company coming to pleasanton
- you should do your homework.


6 people like this
Posted by M. Jensen
a resident of Val Vista
on Oct 15, 2016 at 1:41 pm

M. Jensen is a registered user.

I never said they are a great company. They are a large company. I will not express an opinion on how great they are-- but, I am tired of hearing how great you think they are.
I said they are a greedy company, that preys off of our city leaders who are financially incompetent. Additionally,
--they will create more traffic than other uses under MM
-- more pollution

Large does not mean "great for our community". Yes on MM.


2 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 15, 2016 at 2:20 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Again, I suggest you do your homework on costco. It treats employees well, has a fixed margin model that supports sustainable and responsible growth, engages in the communities they are in, and competes on value, not just cheap crap. This is a good company to have in Pleasanton.

I don't blame a company for getting a deal, I blame the leadership that accepts it. Again, it's not a great deal, but I've been told on several times that it's this or some ambiguous magical unicorn alternative that generates less traffic, more revenue, stops global warming, feeds the hungry, and adds a third presidential candidate that is socially moderate and fiscally responsible.....and forever wipes out the possibility of costco....oh, but protects Shell and Valero $730k per station additional profits.

Perfect world, we force costco back to the negotiating table, but again I'm told this option doesn't exist. So I'm going to pick the option that doesn't shut the door on costco or renegotiating the deal.


6 people like this
Posted by M. Jensen
a resident of Val Vista
on Oct 15, 2016 at 2:30 pm

M. Jensen is a registered user.

Done my homework. Many examples of Costco trying to hide kickbacks like Elk Grove. Don't want them, don't need them.
Vote however you please. This deal is negotiated and done unless we pass MM. I will not vote for $20 million taxpayer subsidy.
Yes MM.


5 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 15, 2016 at 2:30 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Registered Joe,
You may not realize it but you're getting played by status quo special interests hiding behind their real motivations.

Funny how there are screams for transparency on the deals between the city and costco, but where is the same request on those funding and sponsoring MM?

Sorry, between two undesirable options I'll pick the one that
A. Exists
B. Isn't backed by Shell and Valero
C. Has the potential to be fixed still


7 people like this
Posted by Kelly K.
a resident of Ruby Hill
on Oct 15, 2016 at 2:35 pm

Kelly K. is a registered user.

Yes on MM.
Crooked deal. Not just undesirable; crooked. If you want more of this, just keep backing these deals. Chamber will love you!


9 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 15, 2016 at 2:39 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@M. Jensen,

I have been a Costco since over 15 years ago and have found them to be a great company. They provide goods and services that I can't get elsewhere. I remember thinking that location would be great for Costco even before it was proposed.

I'm voting NO on MM.


8 people like this
Posted by E. K.
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 15, 2016 at 2:42 pm

E. K. is a registered user.

Useless blogs. Pleasanton Parent just keeps saying same things. 6 recent blogs. Same rhetoric.
Yes on MM


Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 15, 2016 at 7:06 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Hearing rumors it would likely become an Indian based shopping center, similar to ranch 99, but for the asian/Indian community if costco doesn't go in. Not something I'd utilize, but I guess it would be a logical ethnic addition. Not sure how the spend per trip would compare to your costco.


Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 15, 2016 at 7:09 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

E.k,
Correct, my stance is consistent and transparent unlike those in support of MM. I take that as a compliment.


4 people like this
Posted by Fact Checker
a resident of Downtown
on Oct 15, 2016 at 9:01 pm

Fact Checker is a registered user.

It appears that No on MM yard signs can be requested from NOonMM.org or from their facebook page


3 people like this
Posted by Tom M.
a resident of Castlewood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 1:51 am

Tom M. is a registered user.

Measure MM allows the voters of Pleasanton to decide. Not the politicians!

I am not in favor of the financial subsidies now being negotiated with Costco. I will be voting Yes on MM.


7 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 16, 2016 at 9:12 am

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Tom,
I wish that were the case, but it's not. Shell, Valero, black tie, and unions are using this bad deal to forever block costco, not send it back to the negotiating table (what most would like). It's a deceptive move meant to protect their own interests- not those of Pleasanton's residents.

It's a bad deal negotiated by our representatives (whos job it is to negotiate and city plan - we shouldn't have to vote on everything). Now in this case people are correct in their call to review this. Unfortunately a corrupt few (shell, Valero) are using the opportunity to protect their additional $730k per station annual gouging.

The only hope for renegotiating the deal with costco is to vote no on MM and hold our representatives accountable. Now, full disclosure (something those supporting MM will never provide) is there isn't a guarantee this will happen. However, it does provide the opportunity for both costco and Pleasanton to move forward. Yes on MM only guarantees shell and Valero keep their $0.50/gallon markup. It provides no solution


1 person likes this
Posted by Tom M.
a resident of Castlewood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 12:16 pm

Tom M. is a registered user.

@Pleasanton Parent It's interesting to me that you are wanting to pin this on the local gas stations. Costco will affect many of our local businesses. My dear friends own All Star Sports on Hopyard Road. They are a family owned business since 1999 and live here in Pleasanton. Costco will greatly affect their business and in fact may put them out of business.

I do not like that Costco has a policy of attempting to avoid infrastructure fees.

After careful study of the various letters and editorials on the subject...I come down on the side of barring Costco from our town.

I will be voting Yes on MM


6 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 1:16 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Wait a second - how would a Costco put All Star Sports out of business?!? We just shopped there the other day and continue to support them because they have broad selection of gear and great service. Neither existing Costco in the area has that nor ever will... Costco might occasionally have some item, but they don't have the wide range of soccer cleats and baseball pants and bats and gloves and...and...and... And certainly nobody to help you get fit right. That's why local residents shop at All Star Sports and will continue to do so.

Meanwhile, if one's argument is that the existing Costcos are so close already that we don't need another, then they'd already be a threat to All Star Sports! And yet Sports Chalet and Sports Authority went out of business and not All Star. It is the likes of Amazon and online shopping that are the risk. And that's still a risk for All Star but its service and selection are key. Costco is not the threat.


2 people like this
Posted by Tom M.
a resident of Castlewood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 1:40 pm

Tom M. is a registered user.

@ Pleasanton Parent

You should talk to the owner. She has a great story on how the existing 2 Costco stores absolutely have an affect on her business. A 3rd Costco within a mile will be devastating. I'm glad you shopped at her store. They are a nice local family in Pleasanton.

You are in favor of Costco. I am not. Our votes will cancel each other out.



Like this comment
Posted by M. Jensen
a resident of Val Vista
on Oct 16, 2016 at 1:52 pm

M. Jensen is a registered user.

Agree Tom M. I've heard the same story from All Star Sports. Nice local family. No Costco for me killing small businesses. Including the gas stations, grocery stores, tire stores, etc, etc.

Many people just want their cheap stuff - and could care less about our small businesses. Not me.

Yes MM.


9 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 2:11 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Well we can certainly agree that the one business that would be really hurt by Costco closer is the gouging gas station cartel. The AAA article I linked above proves the prices in Pleasanton are 2nd highest in the whole Bay Area - and that's because of their oligopoly. Need real competition!

No on MM.


1 person likes this
Posted by Kelly K.
a resident of Ruby Hill
on Oct 16, 2016 at 2:18 pm

Kelly K. is a registered user.

I can go to Costco in Livermore or Danville. Ptown doesn't need Costco. People are changing their mind on this Costco issue. Too much money- $20 million.

We can build small businesses on that land, which will attract just as much sales tax.
Isn't it a Gateway to our community? Can't we plan something special?

Yes we can! Yes on MM!


8 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 2:54 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

No retail generates more sales per square foot than Costco. What small business would even come anywhere close?? What tax revenue would we generate from the empty stores during the typical small business turnover? There's already small business vacancies in Pleasanton as it is. Need more??

Black Tie would love it if nothing went there. What does that tell you? Selfish interests of someone who doesn't even live here.

I agree with others that the current deal isn't great and could be better. Remember it never went before the council ever for feedback. At this point the council has heard that loud and clear and a No vote on MM will allow the City Council to reject any Costco offer that has bad terms. But a Yes vote - given how MM is written - ensures all we get are small business storefronts that will likely be vacant or under constant turnover due to the crappy location. Would All Star Sports want to be there?!?!

Therefore, Yes on MM is a vote for Black Tie and the gas station cartel to win and Pleasanton RESIDENTS to lose! No on MM!


11 people like this
Posted by Dave J.
a resident of Parkside
on Oct 16, 2016 at 3:50 pm

Dave J. is a registered user.

Plsn Resident:
You obsessively mention the gas station cartel. So, I did some research on Gas Buddy. Looks like we have between 16-18 gas stations in Pleasanton. I don't think any owner has more than 2. Hardly, a cartel. We have all kinds of choices. The Safeway (with your membership card) is cheaper than Costco in Livermore.

So, tell me again the advantage of putting the equivalent sales of 12 gas stations in one spot on Johnson Drive? 10,000 tankers trucks of gasoline on our streets and freeway interchanges. People come from all over to gas up at Costco. 50-100 cars in line, idling 45 minutes or more?

Did this "cartel" try to block Safeway? If you want to pay less for gas, go to Safeway. Probably, better gas than Costco anyway! We don't need Costco for gas!


16 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 16, 2016 at 4:45 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

Pleasanton weekly made the right call when all others missed it.
Build Costco in Pleasanton ASAP!


3 people like this
Posted by Mike W.
a resident of Stoneridge
on Oct 16, 2016 at 5:00 pm

Mike W. is a registered user.

Not sure that is still their call! Didn't say so on Friday when they had a chance. New facts, details may have changed their minds. They said would limit needed sales tax - but that's not a "no".

It would also cancel $20 million giveaway. Cancel $7.5 million in borrowing. I think these outweigh the extra $400,000 in sales tax. Gina can do the math. Smart lady! She endorsed Karla Brown and went against the Chamber. Could do it again, if she feels it's the right thing to do for the citizens.


15 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 16, 2016 at 5:07 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

What part of front page, "Pleasanton Weekly Recommends NO on MM" is it that you did not understand?


5 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 5:12 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Yes, Cox owns 2 Shell stations in Pleasanton AND 4 more stations right nearby in Dublin (+1 in San Ramon). They donated the $18K for measure MM. Granted, that's only about 10% of money raised compared to Black Tie's 6-figure contribution. Since the Safeway station didn't go onto a ballot, we'll never know if they would have contributed money to fight it. In this case, they have the express opportunity on Black Tie's coat-tails.

BTW, if we're now concerned about all the gas being sold at Costco compared to presumably the same amount otherwise purchased in the stations all around town, then isn't better that those "10,000 tanker trucks" stay close to the freeway and in the arm-pit of 580/680 than come through town to get to all the stations in the residential areas of the city?? :-) Let's also be precise: most typical gas stations have at least 8-12 pumps themselves. So Costco's gas station wouldn't be the equivalent of 12 gas stations... I still can't find any way to defend Yes on MM based on the gas station argument unless you're in that business. People aren't going to buy net MORE gas because of the station... they'll just shift their preference from the second highest price in the whole bay area to the lowest.


5 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 16, 2016 at 5:13 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

All star sports is a perfect example of a community focused store that can thrive alongside costco. Their specialization, customer service, and overall services don't compete with the similar product offerings costco offers - and if I were them I'd be figuring out how to get my business in their store and services as well. Use costcos large buyer base to drive traffic to your services not available through costco.


Like this comment
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 16, 2016 at 5:17 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Kelly,
The rumor is a Desi focused / themed shopping center would be the alternative to quickly populate a smaller parcelled development- think the asian focused shopping center across from safeway but for the growing Desi population in the trip Valley.


2 people like this
Posted by Dave J.
a resident of Parkside
on Oct 16, 2016 at 5:34 pm

Dave J. is a registered user.

Plsn Resident,
Nope. Not in gas business, but I can read SEIR. I said the sales of 12 gas stations not the pumps of 12 gas stations.

20 pumps X 157.3 fuelings per day X 15 gallons X 365 days = 17,224,350 gal/ year.

I'm told that's about the sales of 12 gas stations. All in one spot. Lots of smog in one spot. Potential problems!

I'm not defending gas stations, just saying we already have plenty of choices of brands and prices.


8 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 16, 2016 at 5:40 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

Gina has stated on this forum:
"I do not care who supports MM and I do not care who does not support MM".

With your having an incorrect position is your ongoing misaligned opinion, which is driving and increasing the NO on MM as recommended by the weekly.


4 people like this
Posted by Mike W.
a resident of Stoneridge
on Oct 16, 2016 at 5:51 pm

Mike W. is a registered user.

I think her own opinion has changed. Of course, she doesn't care which side we are on.

BTW...was that last sentence a question? I use the word sentence loosely.


11 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 6:43 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@Dave J,

" ... just saying we already have plenty of choices of brands and prices."

No we really don't. We only have overpriced gas choices at this time.


7 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 16, 2016 at 10:16 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Big Picture: Here are some things I think are logical and reasonable outcomes:

1) A Costco in Pleasanton won't suddenly bring in droves of people from all the surrounding areas as if it were the newest thing in the Tri-Valley. The people on the east side of Pleasanton and Livermore will continue to go to the one in Livermore. The people in north Dublin and San Ramon will continue to go to the one up there. Therefore, the vast majority of people going to the one in Pleasanton will mostly be local Pleasanton residents, along with some from southern Dublin, and some from Sunol. That's a combined population of over 100K people these days, of which over a quarter are already members. This is why the other two locations are now over-crowded and another one is needed.

2) All things equal, Pleasanton area people saving 10-15 miles or more per round trip will actually reduce the amount of gas that's used AND bought in the area. I calculated that I alone would save about 10 gallons of gas a year. That could add up to over 100,000 gallons saved per year.

3) If the Costco is instead built just over the freeway in Dublin, Pleasanton will still get the smog -- it doesn't limit itself to city boundaries.

4) But if it IS built in Dublin, while Pleasanton residents will still be driving through town to get there, and we'll still get all the same smog in the area -- all the tax revenue benefit will go to Dublin instead of us.

It will be very interesting to see how the vote goes on Nov. 8... and we'll all go from there.


6 people like this
Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 16, 2016 at 11:26 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

Also, the area will be developed- voting yes on MM doesn't dictate who will come in, it just eliminates costco. It's a half solution that only solves the issues of its backers (black tie, shell, and valero)


1 person likes this
Posted by Brian Moore
a resident of Kottinger Ranch
on Oct 24, 2016 at 12:27 pm

Brian Moore is a registered user.

Pleasantonians

I want to first go on record that I am not trying to be demeaning to anybody’s opinion here. I only hope to give you some things to think about. Ultimately your vote is a choice between the pros and cons as you see them.

FULL DISCLOSURE
-I am a 13 year Pleasanton resident, a single dad of two young boys (7 and 9) in Vintage hills. I am a busy dad.
Bill Wheeler is a friend of mine and was a great partner in the RidePal business (see below). Also irrelevant in my analysis.
-I love Costco, and selfishly would love one closer. I am there weekly and time is my biggest life challenge. Irrelevant in my analysis.
- Costco is also a great employer. No argument.
- I have not looked into whether the deal cut by the city is good or bad as my decision-making framework does not let me even get to that stage.
- I am intentionally omitting all discussion on autonomous vehicles.

MY BACKGROUND HAS AFFORDED ME SOME UNIQUE INSIGHTS AND ACCESS TO DATA AND EXPERTS
For the last 3 years, as former CEO of RidePal, a shared-corporate commuting platform, I have helped companies leverage and share corporate commuter buses aided by the RidePal technology to get their employees to work in other than a single-occupancy vehicle (SOV). We helped avoid hundreds of thousands of SOV trips over the last 4 years. Our company mission was SOV trip-reduction to help reduce congestion, improve the quality of life of our commuters, and help employers with recruitment, retention, and productivity. I am proud of what we accomplished despite being just a drop in the bucket as to the traffic problem. The job loss, productivity loss, and impact on families as a result of this traffic pandemic is astronomical. Jobs are already leaving the Bay Area due to this problem. In this role, I have been in many think-tank sessions about traffic mitigation, affordable housing shortages, the housing-job dislocation, and the impact of traffic on different socioeconomic classes. I have been privy to a lot of data including MTC data on what 2020 will look like unabated. It is scary.

MY RECENT COMMUTING LIFE
In my recent role running RidePal, I rarely drove. I dropped my kids off at Vintage Hills school at 8a, drove to a residential area just south of Stoneridge, as Bart parking does not exist after 8a, usually went back one station to East Pleasanton to get a seat so I could work on the way in to make up lost time, took Bart to Civic Center, and finally took a RidePal enabled bus to 8th and Townsend, or walked 7 blocks if I just missed it. I left the house at 7:55a and got to work on avg. at 10:30a. To pick up the boys by 6p at after-school care, I had to leave on the 1st RidePal bus to bart at 3:50p and was often late for the 6p pickup. It was the RidePal way to not drive in a SOV but occasionally I had a meeting I could not get to without a car. I used the casual carpool pickups when possible on the way in but could not on the way home due to the race to get the boys. In the last 3 months, I have had one-way evening commutes from SOMA (8th and Townsend) to Pleasanton between 2 and 3 hours. I have similar stories from friends, neighbors or prospective RidePalers who commute to SF, Silicon Valley or the mid-peninsula. I had to end this role due to the impact of commute on my life and my kids lives.

MY DECISION MAKING FRAMEWORK
I will get to my conclusion first. I am voting yes on MM and have to put aside my selfish interests for a local Costco and don’t really care whether the decision is good or bad for BlackTie Transportation (Sorry Bill).

- 580/680 is a major interchange for commuters to SF, mid-pensinsula, Silicon Valley or even the East Bay (along the 880). These commuters come down the 680 from Walnut Creek, Danville, San Ramon and farther, and in on the 580 from places as distant as Modesto, Stockton, Brentwood and Lathrop. They come west to east to Bishop Ranch, Hacienda Business Park, and Eastern Dublin. Thus our decision impacts the greater region and not just Pleasanton.
- In my thousands of discussions with commuters, employers, government officials (state, county and city), transit agencies, and the Bay Area Council, we are in deep trouble. We can’t build our way out of this mess and it is going to get much worse. Bart and Caltrain are at capacity and have parking shortages causing SOV trips for commuters that could otherwise have taken Bart or Caltrain. We need to solve the 1st mile problem to Bart as well and not everyone can bike or take uber/lyft everyday. In less than 5 years, expect LA-like traffic from 5a to 9p with no midday lulls unless we act.
- I believe we have to have a zero-tolerance for policies or decisions that worsen regional congestion.
- We absolutely need to leverage technology to promote alternative trips and make them easier and more accessible.
- We need public private partnerships to help fund alternative commute solutions.
- We also need better carrots AND sticks for more employers to fund alternative commute solutions. SB 1339 just does not have enough teeth.
- I was recently at governor day and I can assure you that no near-term solutions are coming from Sacramento. Reduced gas taxes due to lower oil prices have infrastructure projects being cut that were previously approved.
- At that same event, major Bay Area employers along with the Bay Area Council were pleading for help from Sacramento as these employers can’t adequately staff their positions due to our traffic problem and these vital employers are now looking to place these jobs in other states.
- In other words, our highway efficiency is vital to our local economic interests.
- Now let me put my social-mission hat on. The pain of our traffic congestion problem disproportionately impacts lesser income families in Modesto that commute to the Bay Area than those in Pleasanton. Those in the trades, health assistants at Kaiser, or those making beds or cooking meals in SF hotels or restaurants are now suffering 5+ hours on the roads each day. The wealthier just move closer driving up the cost of urban housing further preventing lesser income families from living close to where they work. Shall we just say “It's not our problem?"
- In a recent meeting with the Golden Gate Restaurant Workers Association, SF restaurants are having serious challenges filling jobs. Housing prices have pushed many of their employees out of SF and the commutes are so horrendous, these displaced workers won’t commute to the city to work for restaurant wages. Remember that transbay transit virtually stops at midnight so the car is often the only choice. What is this going to do to SF as a destination/entertainment city and to your enjoyment of this fine city?
- A quick note about traffic flow. 10% more cars does not equate to 10% less flow. It is NOT linear. Once saturated, including the city on-ramp/off-ramp streets, flow reduction is exponential. Exiting and entering freeways creates even more flow reduction than just more cars. If you are in Palo Alto, check out the Arastradero exit on 280 and the extremely long lines to exit in the morning.
- I am also worried about the impact on Pleasanton’s city streets as Costco shoppers try to avoid the congested highways. I never take the freeway to the Livermore Costco. What will Stoneridge and Hopyard become? I might be better off going to Lowes in Dublin than Home Depot in Pleasanton.
- For those that make decisions with data, I would encourage you to look at Vital Signs data on the MTC website and PeMS on the Caltrans website (need to register to access). It is not the most user-friendly site but the data is good.
- I believe Tri-Valley needs to learn from cities like Mountain View, Sunnyvale, Palo Alto and counties like Santa Clara. These cities/counties have mandated stringent SOV trip-reduction targets on their employers and in some cases zero incremental trip mandates. So for every car added they have to reduce one. Inability to agree to these trip targets precludes obtaining building permits. Failure to meet trip reduction targets for already approved facilities can yield $1m+ fines for these employers. These cities/counties are serious. We should be too before 680/580 become as bad as 101/280/237/85.
- Are you happily married? According to one study in Sweden, you are 40% more likely to get divorced if your commute is over 45 mins long. Try 2 hours.
- Lastly, on a financial note. Our property in SF has doubled in value since 2005. My house in Pleasanton is flat to maybe a slight increase in the same period. In my opinion, if the 2020 traffic models come true, suburban housing prices will decline or at least not rise as much as urban housing or housing next to key job centers (e.g. Mountain View). The youth is going carless and urbanizing.

So I distill this down to choice between the pro of slightly more convenience with a closer Costco and the con of exacerbating regional congestion due to negatively impacting a major interchange that Northern Californians of all income levels depend on for their livelihoods. I think we should accept less convenience for the greater good. I would be more than happy to discuss in further detail by phone, email or in person as this is one of my passions. Although non-professional emails will not be returned. or just blog away! brianjmoore49@gmail.com


5 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 24, 2016 at 12:45 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Huh??? Too much to digest, but look, your argument at the end fails on two key points...

1) Freeway exit ramps on 680 and 580 at the two existing Coscto locations don't back up as it is, just the freeways all along the way there. And the exit to the Costco in Danville feeds a large, diverse commercial center, yet still doesn't back up. We would also be splitting the Costco traffic as is since most people north and east of us would go to their respective closer locations. So with the proper design, and knowing traffic wouldn't just be coming from 680, traffic wouldn't back up on to 680 at Stoneridge specifically due to a Costco.

2) If you're worried about the impact on local streets from a local Costco, keep in mind that most residents need to drive on city streets to get to the freeways to get to the existing Costcos as it is... I for one need to drive exactly to the same Hopyard/Stoneridge/680 route to get to the one in Danville for example...


3 people like this
Posted by Maxed Out!
a resident of Stoneridge
on Oct 24, 2016 at 1:16 pm

Maxed Out! is a registered user.

At the heart of this is a business deal.
*traffic
*pultion
* mega gas station coming pumping over 1,000,000 a month
* secret meetings
*loss of small town feel and impacting small businesses
* lack of road improvements from CalTrans

ALL OF THESE ARE SECONDARY ISSUES.

Any other aspect in life proves this. Want a car? First, looks at the numbers. Want to open your own business, before you worry about a loan, the numbers have to make sense.

FOLKS, MAY ANY ONE PERSON WHO IS AGAINST MM TALK ABOUT THE NUMBERS?? I AM CHALLENGING THE ANTI MM CAMP: before you talk about traffic or any other issue, PLEASE ADDRESS HOW THE NUMBERS MAKE SENSE. I have heard the deal costs 20 million and will take 50 years to break even. A few have said 30 years. How would I explain this to children?



9 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 24, 2016 at 1:28 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@Maxed,

Pleasanton doesn't feel like a small town. Trying to make it one is pointless and counter productive.


6 people like this
Posted by Seriously?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 24, 2016 at 2:18 pm

Seriously? is a registered user.

@Maxed Out

The price tag to do the infrastructure work (16-17 million) remains the same whether you vote yes or no. In other words, no matter if Costco goes in or not, we still have to pay that bill.

The advantage of Costco over smaller companies, is that we have a lot more sales tax revenue to go towards paying off the loan but also towards the city's general fund.

Also the latest version of the deal is actually a 25 year loan.

Finally, Costco has a MUCH less impact on small business than the alternatives for this zone. By 2028, Costco would result in a 1.3 million dollar loss for local businesses compared to (take a deep breath) 5.7 million dollar loss for smaller retail stores. Holy cow!!




3 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 24, 2016 at 4:49 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

"1) Freeway exit ramps on 680 and 580 at the two existing Coscto locations don't back up as it is, just the freeways all along the way there."

Ah, wrong. These exits back up in December, for traffic to the mall. And Stoneridge westbound onto 680 North gets backed up EVERY weekday evening. (I'm no expert on this area, but I used to have an evening job on Commerce Circle, and had to sit in this each time I went to work. It could be bad in other places, but I do not study traffic.)

580/680 is a mess, twice a day every weekday, and often on weekends too. Costco will make it worse, possibly only modestly worse, but worse nonetheless. It most certainly will not be better.

"The price tag to do the infrastructure work (16-17 million) remains the same whether you vote yes or no. In other words, no matter if Costco goes in or not, we still have to pay that bill."

No, it doesn't. If Costco doesn't come, then the infrastructure is not needed, at least not for now. Or, if the city wants to be smart, they wait out Costco until they are ready to pay for the whole thing. Do you think Livermore paid for the street improvements where the outlet mall is? I doubt it, please let me know if I am wrong.


8 people like this
Posted by Seriously?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 24, 2016 at 5:35 pm

Seriously? is a registered user.

@ Get the facts - I'm sorry but you are wrong.

We have to pay $16-17 Million no matter what. It's been a part of the general plan for a long time, and ANY development for JEDZ will have the SAME infrastructure improvement.

Would you like to call the city to verify? (925) 931-5002

I'm tired of Matt Sullivan (who probably told you that whopper) trying to sway people to vote based on FALSE information. People should have the TRUTH and then decide how to vote.


2 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Oct 25, 2016 at 5:36 pm

res1 is a registered user.

@Seriously, you are the one that is wrong.

All other development in Pleasanton has the development paying for the required infrastructure.

Depending on what ultimately goes in there, if the impacts to traffic are not larger that what Clorox had, the cost to improve the infrastructure will be minimal, and paid by the development going in here. If the impacts to traffic require $16-$17 million in traffic improvement, the development going in there pays for it. I cannot think of any other project in Pleasanton where the city paid for the infrastructure instead of the developers paying to mitigate their impact.

If the city handled other development this way, I could apply for additional housing on my property and tell the city that they should pay for the additional traffic concerns. To pay the city back, they could just use the additional property tax revenue from this additional housing. However, it does not work this way for any other development in Pleasanton. I would love to see the additional sales tax revenue from Costco going to Pleasanton but it would actually take quite a few years to see the additional revenue as the liability would need to be paid off first. Plus we would be taking money from our traffic fund that was paid by previous developments and using it for this project instead of using it for other traffic congestion areas in the city that are already affected by the additional development that is already there.

I do not always agree with Matt Sullivan but he is right in this argument.


11 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Oct 25, 2016 at 8:07 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@Get the Facts,

"Wait out Costco?"

Why would we do that? It looks like a good deal to me and a great location for Costco. Love the store and we need one close by.


13 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Oct 29, 2016 at 5:21 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

Be sure to vote no on Measure MM.
A yes vote leaves Johnson Drive property available for more stack and pack housing.


2 people like this
Posted by patcher
a resident of Downtown
on Oct 31, 2016 at 1:43 pm

patcher is a registered user.

@Bobb and @Michael Austin...being flip about such a serious issue, which is set to bring with it a myriad of long-term adverse consequences to us as taxpayers and as residents of this community, does nothing to advance your position.

Many people have expressed genuine concerns about bringing Costco to Pleasanton, many have spent a lot of their time researching the issue and educating us, many have raised thought-provoking arguments in support of a "Yes" vote; whereas your dialogue is to the contrary.

Unless you can bring something substantive to the conversation, that actually has merit, don't expect anyone to take you seriously, or think that you seriously care.


6 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 31, 2016 at 1:52 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@patcher,

So liking Costco, saying that Costco is a good corporate citizen, and that the proposed location is convenient for Pleasanton residents doesn't have merit?


2 people like this
Posted by Maxed Out!
a resident of Stoneridge
on Oct 31, 2016 at 2:00 pm

Maxed Out! is a registered user.

BobB,
Someone posted that Costco has enough money to rip out all the streets in Pleasanton and make them gold. Is this really true?


9 people like this
Posted by Isotope
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 31, 2016 at 2:54 pm

Isotope is a registered user.

@patcher - I don't see any valid argument to vote against Costco. Telling me that there are traffic issues on Stoneridge is a joke. It may take 2 to 3 cycles of the light to get though the light at Stoneridge/I-680 which means less than 5 minute wait at the busiest of times (unless one of the freeways has major accidents which happen a few times a year).

@maxed out - "before you talk about traffic or any other issue, PLEASE ADDRESS HOW THE NUMBERS MAKE SENSE." - pretty easy, even if you take the worst case scenario present by Matt Sullivan, Pleasanton would pay $7.5 million. Taxes from Costco are estimated at $1.2 to $1.5 million per year (and will only increase in the future). So in this worst cast scenario, in 5 years any money Pleasanton paid will be paid off. This is also not including taxes from the other proposed businesses in the area.

Now whether you think that is a good deal or not is up to you.


2 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 31, 2016 at 6:29 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

"@Get the Facts, "Wait out Costco?" Why would we do that?"

Because that's what you do, you wait for a better deal. Certainly there is a better deal than what is out there, I have never heard of an investment that takes over two decades to pay off.

"... and we need one close by."

What is the definition of "need"? I think most agree we don't NEED one closer, but if you WANT one closer, that's fine. I WANT a Ferrari, but I don't NEED a Ferrari. (And it would take me more than 20 years to pay for that Ferrari too!)


4 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 1, 2016 at 10:41 am

BobB is a registered user.

We can afford Costco. The price is not unreasonable.


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

Harding Park honors one of Pleasanton's best
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 406 views

Lab scientists find better ways to ID individuals who die in catastrophic events
By Jeb Bing | 2 comments | 401 views