Y

et another asinine decision was made by the Pleasanton City Council majority when it voted March 7 to defund Leadership Pleasanton, a program led by the Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce for more than 30 years.

Just like the Feb. 7 decision to scrap the Lions Wayside and Delucchi Parks conceptual plan, Mayor Karla Brown and Councilmembers Valerie Arkin, Jeff Nibert and Julie Testa voted to scrap the relationship with the chamber of commerce with the justification of money —

and staff time in the case of LP.

I didn't buy that money was the reason behind the vote on the parks. Money was no object in June 2022 when Brown, Arkin and Testa voted to take $2 million from the Rainy Day fund to put toward rehabilitation of Century House.

Perplexed, I speculated in my last column that park neighbors might have been whispering in the ears of Brown, Arkin and Testa. The people named assured me they didn't.

After seeing the staff report for Tuesday's City Council meeting, it dawned on me that maybe the decision on the parks was indeed about money. Diverting it, anyway.

The March 21 agenda included a discussion about the city's operating budget and the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The skatepark that Testa really wants is third on the priority list. By killing the parks' master plan, money that would have gone to fund that project has now been freed up for other projects — like a skatepark.

I definitely don't buy the LP vote is about money, staff time or making the program more accessible, as the majority claims.

After removing the $950 participation fee for up to four city employees per year, the city's commitment was a paltry $6,200.

The concern about staff time is valid. That's why the majority's next directive to staff is spectacularly absurd: Launch and maintain a city-run program with modules held in the evenings and on weekends at no cost to participants.

So they want to sever the relationship with a program that's worked very well for 30-plus years and have the short-handed staff busy with urgent internal initiatives to create and execute a program.

Who will be planning and implementing this city program? If it's held during evening hours and weekends, will there be overtime paid, or will the staff be told to stop doing other tasks?

The incongruence between the majority's justifications for defunding LP and desire to strap city staff with creating and implementing a program is obvious to most.

Testa's passion to do away with the city's connection with the program and the chamber — which she believes is too "politically active because it has a political action group — is also obvious.

Testa apparently thought the subject of LP funding was closed in 2021 when it came up during a council priority-setting meeting.

"The messages and the intent and the concerns were very clear," Testa said, "and shouldn't have been ignored."

Balch asked for clarification on the action taken at that meeting and Testa turned into a petulant child. She literally put her hand up and said, "I think, I'm not going to engage with you, Jack."

The chamber's PAC has never supported Testa or Brown in any of their campaigns, nor has the chamber endorsed either over an opponent. Is that enough to incur the wrath of Testa? Well, Balch asked a question and got the "talk to the hand - I'm not engaging" response.

Perhaps residents should start asking questions of the council majority, starting with why the parks' master plan was tossed aside before a solid estimate could be done.

Also, does Brown truly not understand the $10 - $14 million estimate for the parks' project was a guess by staff because the concept plan had to be approved before a solid estimate could be provided? Or is she hoping that by repeating the amount often enough we will forget the majority scrapped the plan before a real estimate could be developed?

Why was staff directed to return with an estimate of, basically, rebuilding the bandstand "with minimal public outreach"?

And why not re-agendize the parks' plan, as Balch asked for support to do on March 7?

Why are Testa and Brown hellbent on spending $6 million to build a skatepark, which will serve a very limited group? Especially since it's a new amenity, meaning there will be ongoing maintenance costs and a new repair and replacement budget line item? They're worried about money?

Here's my question: Do a majority of residents agree with the direction this council majority is taking the city?