|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Former Pleasanton City Councilwoman Cheryl Cook-Kallio said Tuesday that she will seek the nomination for the 16th State Assembly seat in the state’s June 7 primary.
If nominated, Cook-Kallio, a Democrat, would run against Republican incumbent Assemblywoman Catharine Baker in the General Election on Nov. 8. Baker, who was elected to the Assembly last year, is expected seek the nomination for re-election in the June 2016 primary.
Cook-Kallio’s decision was not unexpected. A public school teacher for more than 35 years, she served on the Pleasanton Council for eight years, being termed out in 2014. She said friends had urged her to seek another elected office, with many urging her to run for the Pleasanton school board.
She decided against that opportunity in the November 2014 school board election, and also was sidelined by Democrats who chose former Mayor Tim Sbranti as its candidate for the 16th District Assembly seat that year.
Cook-Kallio also sought election as Pleasanton’s mayor in 2012, which she lost to fellow Councilman Jerry Thorne.
In an interview with the Pleasanton Weekly, Cook-Kallio said that when looking at issues that matter most to the community, Baker’s record in Sacramento “does not match her lip service in the community.”
“I won’t sit idly writing op-eds about the traffic gridlock that spills off the freeways and clogs city streets,” she said. “I will take action. I will get BART to Livermore and the subsequent ACE Train connection by introducing legislation to create a joint powers agreement between Dublin, Livermore and Pleasanton and the transportation agency to ensure this connection happens.”
She said Baker claims to be pro-choice but a look at her votes in Sacramento on reproductive health, women’s health and rights, sex education and access to affordable health care tell a different story.
“Her voting record on women’s health issues earned her one of the lowest scores in the legislature when evaluated by PPAC, a women’s health advocacy organization,” Cook-Kallio said.
With years of experience teaching students in the classroom, Cook-Kallio said she understands the needs of students.
“I have the first-hand experience needed to ensure all California students leave our schools with a well-rounded education, a strong foundation and the skills necessary to be successful in the 21st century,” she explained.
Cheryl Cook-Kallio recently retired after more than 39 years as a classroom teacher. She holds a bachelor’s degree in History from the University of North Carolina at Charlotte, three teaching credentials from San Jose State University and a Master’s degree in History with an emphasis on the U.S. Constitution, also from San Jose State.
She plans to officially launch her campaign in January.
Her run against Baker is a waste of money. Baker is doing a GREAT job. I admire Catharine Baker, a Republican….and I am a Democrat..or was one, until the last election and I voted for Baker.
I am going to vote for Baker, again.
Helen, I couldn’t agree with you more. I wish they’d take all the money that is going to be spent filling our mailboxes with paper and put it towards education in the district!! Tim Sbranti, a sitting popular mayor, couldn’t beat Baker–what makes Cook-Kalio think she can beat Baker considering she was unsuccessful in becoming Mayor of Pleasanton.
I don’t think Cheryl Cook-Kallio is far enough removed from the teacher union and local developer interests to be considered a serious candidate.
I commend her for teaching at the high school level for 35 years, but it would be unreasonable to think that with all that time-in that she isn’t biased towards the teacher union. Plus she’s receiving a teacher pension and I doubt she’d engage in any meaningful pension reform issues.
Locally she received campaign contributions from developers and I’d expect her to get the same in this new run for office. She received endorsements from local politicians like Tim Sbranti, the Dublin mayor who who was clearly in the developers’ pocket, and who lost to Steve Glazer as a result.
Catharine Baker represents the opposing side of both the union/pension and developer issues…campaigning for fiscal responsibility and against special interests. She won the support of voters here in the Tri-Valley, and I’m surprised that Cook-Kallio would even consider running against her. Cook-Kallio bring nothing new to the table. Somebody’s got to run, and perhaps Cook-Callio is simply the sacrificial lamb.
@Joe,
What is the problem with developers?
In my opinion, the influx of highly motivated, and ambitious people into Pleasanton and Dublin has been great for both communities. Dublin school test scores have been climbing rapidly. I also like seeing the diverse ethnic backgrounds of the new residents. It has really changed these communities for the better, and I’d like to see more.
I think this next election cycle is going to be real tough and Democrats and liberals. I am a Democrat and in this environment this time around will be tough. No doubt we are soft on security and now is not the time to be that way.
Catherine Baker is doing a fine job and do not believe she can lose.
Perhaps Kalio knows something you don’t know? Besides, what makes makes the USA GREAT is that individuals have a right and a duty to participate/run for public office!
VIVA AMERICA!
Incidentally, I appreciate that Americans know that it’s costly to run for public office. Voters cannot depend on a shoo-in.
I believe that enuf money is already allocated for schools/education. If some folks are not happy, perhaps any money might best be spent on educational opportunities for Seniors and not on schools.
Perhaps it’s time for Ms Cook to get a private sector job for once, rather than being a career public sector figure. The last thing the SF Bay area needs is another life long government worker and politician with close ties to the public unions.
Assemblywoman Baker is doing a fine job. I am voting for her in the next election as well.
I have been real impressed with Baker’s involvement in the community. No other elected official has given Pleasanton this much attention. Even Cheryl as a city council member (i.e., smaller district) was not this accessible as a Pleasanton resident. Baker is also more middle of the road and I have not seen her use partisan politics. I did not even know she was a republican until I looked up some things as she is not just parroting the statements of either party (I am an independent). I am quite concerned on Cheryl with her active involvement with the public employee unions, and if you question her on it, she takes it personally (as I guess would be expected since she is a member of a public employee union).
Democrats are the party of human misery for all, except government employees. Cook-Kallio is an Obama-phile big government democrat.
We are witnessing the damage that Democrats are doing to America…and the world for that matter. Democrat policies taken to the extreme result economies like in North Korea, Cuba, Venezuela, and others of a socialist and communist nature.
No we have had enough Democrats like Cook – Kallio. Get a real job in the private sector Cheryl.
YES to Baker.
Given the tactics of APT leadership and our unseated former trustee I won’t for anyone affiliated with them. We need more moderates like Baker not partisans who tow the party line.
Can’t support any union affiliated candidate without evidence that person has actively pushed for, and preferably suceeded, in union reform.
I have seen Baker consistently make decisions that appeal to both Democrats and Republicans. She is logical, balanced, and empathetic. I would label her as a fiscally conservative Democrat. She is a rock star in today’s political climate. She also works her tail off as she appears at so many diverse venues.
Cook-Kallio doesn’t seem bad, but I can’t really find fault with Baker, so I’ll probably vote for her again.
After the public unions blew a fortune on ‘sure-thing Sbranti’, and Baker is doing such a great job, and truly liked by all, I can’t believe unions are again going with such an extremely active ‘public union’ person. City council is one thing, blatant, public union partisanship is quite something else. NO WAY!! We public taxpayers need one of us.. We now have ‘term limits’…time passes quickly. Obviously public unions much more money than they need, to immediately run ‘one of their own’ again….just too in-your face, too soon. Poor ‘political’ strategy….just way too cocky!!!
Hear that Jeb…the public is not ready to needless switch midway. Calio should wait for the opening. It works two ways..when we get such a dedicated good representative like Catharine Baker then yank her midway, that would be shame on us! The unions just have SO much money, they can’t cool their heels for even one election. You would think after all their expensive mailers of lies and phony claims last time, they could take a breather.
Baker has a huge support base in the Asian community in the trivalley. Many from the South Bay came to volunteer and drum up support for her in the last election. She looked like doing a good job so far.
I agree with the above comments. I think Baker is doing a great job. I voted for her and will do so again.I am a Independent voter. Cook has the smell of unions all over and I do not like that.
Cook-Kallio was bought and paid for by the Chamber of Commerce and developers. Her so-called political courage to support the Stoneridge Extension was simply to rake in the campaign bucks from the Chamber PAC. Her and Jerry Thorne’s cynical plan to thwart the citizens initiative to protect the ridges, Measure PP, in order to fulfill the wishes of real estate speculators the Lin family failed miserably. Despite the rhetoric that she is somehow owned by the unions, she did nothing when they opposed the Walmart grocery and even voted for it. She exemplifies what has become corporate democrats working for the oligarchy. There’s not even a “lesser evil” in this race.
The tragedy is, in recent years the Sacto legislature is so lop-sided, The public union representative totally own our CA legislature. To such an extent it was was officially a veto-proof, meaning they could over-rule their OWN Governor!!!! Electing Baker changed that. Not enough that her voice counts, but at least she HAS a voice!!! She has made a difference, they include her, and even the Governor has signed 5 or 6 of her bills. Otherwise it could not even be called ‘representative government”. We do not need to add to the one-party CA legislature. SO wrong. The limits are short, silly to be needlessly rush to prematurely kick out a popular, thoughtful Assemblywoman Baker. Going right back to one-party rule in CA
is over-kill.
I only hope that those paying attention to budget issues remember where Cook-Kailo stood. And she still doesn’t get it.
I agree Sknywench, zone 7 would be a perfect place for her to help the people of Pleasanton and the tri-Valley. Sadly though, being owned by the public-unions, she must do what they tell her to do. They need her in Sacto to vote FOR THEIR ISSUES!!!! It’s all about them. Logical timing and the wants and needs of the people are irrelevant.
I am a long time Dem, and a little embarrassed that this is the best my party could muster up. It also says a lot about how great Baker is doing for the district.
Baker should be celebrating.
Does anyone really thinks that the ACE and BART connection will help mitigate traffic? We have only three points in and out of the Bay Area 101, 80 and 580. What we really need is a new Freeway with a transit option from San Jose/Milpitas to the Central Valley. The pollution from sitting idle in traffic is worse than when your vehicle is moving. Kill the High Speed Rail to no where and build real infrastructure. I would vote for anyone who supports that.
Catharine Baker has done an excellent job.
The numbers and reference presented are not an indictment of wrong doing. How-
ever you presentation implies wrong doing.
It’s a political year!
I actually think it is an indictment of wrong doing. Cheryl was our representative of that agency. By her not showing up, we had no representation. Looks like she put herself on that agency for her resume only. If she had no interest or could not make the meetings due to her schedule, she had the obligation to make sure somebody else from Pleasanton was the representative.
Having spent a year as an Alameda County Grand Juror myself, I take all their case reports very, very seriously.
All I can say is WOW !!
Thank you for sharing the report info.
Thanks for the information concerning C-K’s involvement (or perhaps I should say, non-involvement) in ACAP.
You can judge from my previous post that I’m not a fan of C-K to begin with, given her closeness to both the unions and developers. She really shot herself in the foot with this ACAP governing board position.
Now, several years later, her non-performance is coming back to bite her. She could have, but did not, attend the various meetings the job demanded, nor did she pay enough attention to ACAP’s financials, which was her primary task.
She didn’t have the ability to look into the future and see that her job performance would have an impact on her electability to future office. In my view, that’s an automatic disqualifier.
Puzzling the Pleasanton Weekly would not have reported such serious and relevant facts at the time of the ACAP series of revelations as it was unfolding. Several violations of public trust it seems.
Having worked in the past on civic Grand Jury investigations I know the very serious hard work that quietly goes on when unraveling such events. Such happenings are serious business.
Perhaps the Pleasanton Weekly does not know the Alameda County Grand Jury exists. Here is the website https://www.acgov.org/grandjury/reports.htm
Along with not reporting about Cheryl Cook-Kallio’s mismanagement and neglect, it did not cover the Shawn Wilson grand jury report regarding the corrupt culture in Alameda County government including the issue with the Sunol Valley Golf Course. Shawn Wilson was the consultant for Greenbriar in the Lund Ranch II development prior to him taking the role as Haggerty’s chief of staff. The Pleasanton Weekly also did not cover the Zone 7 Patterson Ranch controversy and many others. It also did not cover the issue with Scott Haggerty including John Wong, the Fremont developer, purchasing Haggerty’s Livermore house during the Staples Ranch project with Pleasanton when John Wong had an option with Fremont Land to build a shopping center on the property. It is no wonder Haggerty pushed for a Stoneridge extension given the deal with John Wong. In a down market, John Wong purchased Haggerty’s house and at the same time, the Stoneridge extension would have greatly benefited Wong’s business venture adjacent to Stoneridge Drive.
Perhaps the Pleasanton Weekly could do several articles explaining these controversies rather than produce article after article of fawning, glowing accolades about how great the local public officials are.
Thanks to “Billie” for pointing out the grand jury report.
The Staples Ranch land deal between John Wong and Scott Haggerty is on the acgov.org website as well. Why did the Pleasanton Weekly not report that John Wong with Fremont Land was in land negotiations with the City of Pleasanton and Alameda County when Haggerty and Cook-Kallio and Hosterman and Thorne were pushing for a Stoneridge Extension. In addition, John Wong formed Fremont Land
http://businessprofiles.com/details/fremont-land-inc/CA-C1514771
Document Detail
Instrument Number: 2007022563
Sequence #: 0
Date Received: 01/11/2007 8:30:00 AM
Document Type: DEED
Book:
Page:
Names
HAGGERTY, SCOTT
Associated Names
WONG, JOHN S TR
WONG, CHI L TR
WONG TRUST
Instead, the Pleasanton Weekly never reported on this at all. Why not?
The fact is that Catharine Baker has done a great job for Pleasanton and deserves to serve for another 2 years. This is the wrong race at the wrong time for Cheryl Cook-Kallio–she should look at something like Zone 7 or the school board where change appears to be in order!!
I have known Cook-Kallio for many years. I was a student in her classroom over a decade ago. I can tell you, first hand, that there is no better candidate for assemblywoman. Cook-Kallio is a compassionate, principled, and intelligent woman. I have personally seen her devote hundreds of hours to projects and programs that benefit the lives of students, neighbors, her community, and am certain that she would make an impact in our lives if elected.
How often do you feel that a local elected official has impacted your life? Very rarely, right?
This woman is different. She has impacted my life, and the lives of all of her students profoundly. I remember dozens of former students of all ages would stop by our classroom to thank her and give her a hug. In fact, my AP Government class unanimously agreed that if we were ever elected president, we would appoint her as our Secretary of Education. I think that agreement still stands today.
As a closing note, I would ask you to think of someone you admire, trust and respect. You be may be thinking of a parent, or a friend. Focus on that indelible quality of integrity that you feel when you think of that person. That is what you’re getting with Cook-Kallio.
Anyway, this wasn’t intended to be an advertisement for one candidate or another, but how rarely do you get to see into the personal lives of the candidates we elect. I hope this was helpful.
(: take care folks!
As somebody who worked with Cheryl at the City Council, I can say that your experiences in the classroom were quite a bit different than the city council. I have been in this community for 30+ years and found Cheryl to be the rudest council member I have every talked with. If she did not agree with you on an issue, she got nasty. There was no room for agreeing to disagree or to have a discussion. At the assembly level she will do more harm to the state with her close ties to the public employee unions. Being she has been an active person in her teacher’s union and wants support and money from the unions, she has consistently voted to give the public employees more salary and benefits and did not think the pension problem was a real problem (that is because she personally benefits from the current pension issue).
In contrast, I am amazed at Assembly Representative Baker’s commitment to the community during her term. She has proven to work on both sides of the isle. Doing what is best without the party politics. I see no reason to take her out after two years and frankly upset that a good representative has to raise a ton of money for a two year term because Cheryl now wants that post, and the democrats will stop at nothing to pay for a big, ugly campaign to get that seat; no matter how well the current representative has been doing.
Cook-Kallio has done nothing since the announcement of her candidacy but campaign. In the meantime, member Baker has shown her support for higher ed by introducing bills to increase funding via bonds and to correct the student imbalance within the UC system. She supports intelligent use of BART funding and revenue, and seeks to correct the pay-for-play government in Sacramento. In that sense, she’s a lot like Sam Liccardo in San Jose – always striving for compromise between government and labor, vs rule-by-decree which doesn’t play well with anybody. Mayor Liccardo successfully navigated the city employee union / pension contribution minefield and worked out a deal agreed to by both sides.
I think it’s great that Cook-Kallio taught high school for so many years, but that doesn’t qualify her for elected office. In the one chance she’s had to demonstrate her skills, as a board member for the local Community Action Program, she failed miserably. A court decided that the CAP’s finances were mismanaged by that board, and as a result, the CAP was disbanded. So that the books could be closed in an orderly way (e.g., without bankruptcy), cities had to kick in taxpayer money; Pleasanton by itself had to pay over $121,000.
I’ll support Baker until such time as a better candidate comes along. Cook-Kallio isn’t that candidate.
The one problem I have with Catherine Baker is that she voted against stopping surprise medical bills. That’s a big deal for our family – or any family, really if there is a serious illness or accident. How many of us don’t have experience with cancer among our friends and family members? You can go to an in-network hospital and be billed thousands of dollars by some doctor you didn’t even know was called in to confer on treatment. And if you’re unconscious or really sick, are you supposed to be making phone calls to find an in-network replacement? It’s ridiculous. Until Baker comes around on that issue, I’ll be open to voting for someone else.
Catherine Baker does not accept, does not take Per Diem extras from the state of California.
Per Diem extras Catherine Baker does not accept:
Does not accept $40,000.00 for lodging and food.
Does not accept a state issue car.
Does not accept a state issue cell phone.
I am not aware of any democrat in the legislature that can make that claim.
I am not aware of any democrat running for the legislature promising to do the same.
Catherine Baker is not as moderate as she would like you to believe when she was campaigning and had no record…now that she has voted…
29% rating from Planned Parenthood…hmmm, I thought she claimed to be pro-choice.
27% rating from League of Conservation Voters…hmmm, I thought she claimed to be pro-environment.
Senator Steve Glazer on the other hand has 100% from Planned Parenthood and 85% from CLCV. Sorry, but with those numbers Baker doesn’t represent me. And Baker may be nice but she had zero prior elected experience and was elected because billionaire Charles Munger spent over $1 million dollars for her. Time for someone who represent’s my values.
Cook-kallio record is the defunct ACAP!
Is Catherine Baker pro life or pro death? I could never vote for any candidate who is pro death.
I believe she supports the death penalty, so she is pro death.
Julie,
So she is also pro death of the unborn also?
Susan,
Catherine baker is pro choice, anti-tobacco, and supports end of life options.
This district has been voting republican or conservative democrat over the last several elections.
I am a registered democrat for more than fifty years. After the Mary Hayashi embarrassment, Leland Lee and others in the democratic party. I have been voting republican.
I will be voting for Catherine Baker. She takes the time to call me and talk about local issues.
I much rather Cook-Kallio take on Pamela Harris for the U.S. senate seat that Boxer is quitting.
I AM ANTI UNION. Ms. Cook-Kalio is intelligent and smart. She represented Pleasanton on the City Council with distinction. However, I can not support union labor and public sector government. Both of which backed her in the past based on the campaign fliers.
On the other hand, Ms. Baker is really getting things done and building discussion across party lines on issues that are important to the Tri-Valley. I am very impressed with Ms. Baker and will vote for her again.
Maybe Ms. C-K would serve best on the Zone 7 water board?
DEAR CORRUPT,
Are you still whining about Stoneridge Drive extension??? That decision was made to benefit the entire community and not the Chamber or developers. Now people have another way to get to the hospital from the senior housing or beyond and long-time residents like me can get home when the freeway is gridlocked. I suppose you NEVER drive Stoneridge. C’mon, admit it, and stop blaming everyone and everything for whatever is (easily) annoying you.
I will *not* be voting for former Councilmember/Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio for a variety of reasons, but the one I think most aptly represents why is her representation of Pleasanton on the governing board of the now defunct Associated Community Action Program of Alameda County (ACAP).
In early 2011, when it was disclosed that ACAP was experiencing significant financial problems due to mismanagement, a decision was made to “wind-down” operations. ACAP was disbanded in Mar 2011.
The ACAP governing board, on which Councilmember/Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio had sat since at least 2008, was supposed to provide oversight of operations and funds. According to the 2011-2012 Alameda County Grand Jury, ACAP was dissolved “as a result of serious financial concerns and significant non-compliance with laws and regulations.†The Grand Jury found that ACAP was a “case study in lax oversight”, finding it “a tragic but excellent example of what can happen when a board does not adequately oversee the organization for which it is responsible.â€
ACAP’s annual required financial audits for 2009 and for 2010 noted deficiencies, but the Board took no action. The Grand Jury report states, “During this period, the governing board missed several red flags regarding ACAP’s inability to manage its operations in a professional manner, although it seemed to spend a lot of time clarifying the respective roles of the governing board”.
The Grand Jury report further states: “The ACAP governing board met only four times a year and often did not have a quorum,” ie 7 of 13 members. Councilmember/Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio was a frequent no-show, and evidently did not attend even one of the four special sessions held in Feb 2011, after the mismanagement scandal broke.
Pleasanton’s final payout, er, contribution to ACAP in May 2011 was $121,539.
Former Councilmember/Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio’s in-name-only representation at ACAP and her lack of oversight of Pleasanton’s funds, is not an example of the kind of representation and accountability I’m looking for.
Count my vote, again, for Assemblywoman Baker.
Grand Jury Report (ACAP see p.83 & p.114): http://www.acgov.org/grandjury/final2011-2012.pdf
City contribution to wind-down ACAP: http://weblink.cityofpleasantonca.gov/WEBLINK8/1/doc/236917/Page3.aspx
Who’s Watching Over ACAP? Not Everyone:
http://www.ebcitizen.com/2011/02/whos-watching-over-acap-not-everyone.html
Cholo,
It wasn’t intended as “an indictment of wrong doing”. It was more a criticism of doing nothing, as well as a waste of taxpayer money.
It’s definitely a political year. It’s also that time when we should take a hard look at those politicians running for office in order to make an informed vote.
It never surprises me when Supervisor Haggerty’s name is mentioned in conjunction with controversy and shady dealings. For example, while following County redistricting plans in 2011, I became aware of just how far he will go. In 2006 the Board of Supervisors approved a boundary shift that moved a portion of east Dublin from District 4 into Haggerty’s District 1. (Special Ordinance 2006-59, approved Dec 19, 2006) Haggerty was Vice President of the Board of Supervisors and living in Livermore at the time. He wanted that little part of Dublin in order to buy a house in the annexed area and still follow the rule that a Supervisor must live in the District s/he governs.
In 2011, as the chair of the 2-person (Haggerty & Carson) “Ad Hoc” Alameda County Board of Supervisors Redistricting Committee he wanted to split Pleasanton into two districts because “it makes it a lot easier when you have two supervisors representing the smaller cities.” Thank goodness a lot of us brought pressure to bear and that didn’t happen. However, when all was said and done, then Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio praised him for all he was doing for Pleasanton.
They seem to have a mutual admiration society. Supervisor Haggerty has endorsed former Councilmember/Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio in each of her runs for Pleasanton public office. In 2012, when she was running for Mayor, Supervisor Haggerty said, “Cheryl Cook-Kallio has shown courage and leadership since the day she was elected to the Pleasanton City Council.” Note that this was after the ACAP fiasco. I won’t be surprised if/when he endorses her this time around as well.
“Haggerty moves to east Dublin”: http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_5512583?source=rss
“Haggerty out of sync in plan to split city’s supervisory district”: http://www.pleasantonweekly.com/news/2011/06/02/commentary-haggerty-out-of-sync-in-plan-to-split-citys-supervisory-district
“Haggerty …endorse for Cook-Kallio Pleasanton Mayor”: http://www.pleasantonweekly.com/news/2012/09/19/haggerty-2-other-alameda-county-supervisors-endorse-for-cook-kallio-pleasanton-mayor