Letter: Pentin's advertising pollution | October 31, 2008 | Pleasanton Weekly | PleasantonWeekly.com |


Pleasanton Weekly

Opinion - October 31, 2008

Letter: Pentin's advertising pollution

Much to my dismay, I awoke Saturday to the sound of a single engine airplane circling above my neighborhood. At first I just thought it was another passing airplane. When I noticed the same annoying noise recurring for about an hour, it didn't surprise me to see a banner-towing airplane, in my opinion the crassest form of advertising, making its labored, noisy journey around downtown Pleasanton, just like the advertising we inevitably get when something is happening at the fairgrounds.

What did surprise me was that the banner read "Pentin for City Council". Thank you, Pentin, for the noise (and air pollution) you filled my Saturday morning with. I wonder how much fuel that took. I'll ponder all that on election day.

Stephen Disbrow


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Oct 31, 2008 at 9:38 am

"I wonder how much fuel that took."

A lot less than your SUV. Those planes are light. If it is the one I'm thinking of, it is covered with fabric over an aluminum frame. It doesn't take as much energy to fly it than it does to drive an SUV around town. The pollution put out by general aviation aircraft is far below the amount generated by everyone in their cars sitting in traffic and the trucking industry. I would have had more respect for your letter if you focused on the noise and time of day and left out the whole pollution angle.

Posted by Glass half full, a resident of Amador Valley High School
on Oct 31, 2008 at 9:58 am

Ironic to take Pentin to task over something like this, when he is also the biggest advocate for a more comprehensive bike trail system. I applaud the attempt at differentiation vs seeing every candidates sign all in the same places, all piled on top of each other.

Posted by Jerry, a resident of Oak Hill
on Oct 31, 2008 at 8:12 pm

If he's such a bike trail advocate maybe he should have had someone riding around on a bike holding a banner instead of leaving a carbon footprint and noise pollution(learned about carbon footprints from Big Al Gore. Use the term every chance I get)...

Bad thing about aircraft - no idling once you leave the runway, you just suck up the fuel and spew pollution until you're once again at idle speed at the hanger... If general aviation engines polluted less than automobile engines wouldn't you wonder why they're not common in motor vehicles...

Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Oct 31, 2008 at 8:53 pm


I'm not sure how that is a bad thing. Idling also spews pollution, which makes things worse because during idling a vehicle is not actually moving towards its destination.

Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Oct 31, 2008 at 9:01 pm

I think you'll enjoy this if you didn't see it before: Web Link

Posted by Good One, a resident of Downtown
on Oct 31, 2008 at 10:20 pm

Stacey, You are an infomaniac!!!!

Posted by Give Jerry a break, a resident of Mohr Park
on Nov 1, 2008 at 9:06 am


I asked Jerry Pentin about the airplane and banner when I saw him walking a precinct this week. He said he was as surprised as anyone to see the plane, which he didn't even know about until it was flying over the city. In fact, whoever did the advertising on Jerry's behalf misspelled his name as "Penton" on the banner.

Give the guy a break. He must care about our city since he's runnning for council. Thank goodness for people like Pentin who care enough to want to make a difference.

Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Nov 1, 2008 at 10:13 am

Pentin's got it right. The biggest issue in this local election should be traffic. PP is a manufactured distraction designed to propel certain people onto Council. Traffic will always be there.

Posted by MainStreetDiva, a resident of Vintage Hills
on Nov 1, 2008 at 1:53 pm


If one morning with a little plane noise is all you have to whine about, you're pretty darn lucky. And of course, you found a way to bring the catch-phrases 'carbon footprint' and 'noise pollution' into your gripe as well.

Jerry has contributed time and energy to many P-town causes over the last decade. But apparently that doesn't matter to you as much as a single plane display on a single morning does.

Posted by Karen, a resident of Vintage Hills
on Nov 1, 2008 at 4:40 pm

So if I read the above email correctly, the banner author and sponsor cannot event spell Pentin correctly? Sounds like the Lin's or Tong's are trying their best to help out their Pro-Growth, Pro-Chamber PAC friend.

Am I the only one that has noticed the Tong/Lin/Inderbitzen group is "washing" money through the chamber PAC funds? When they got in trouble in Fremont, they must have decided to "hide" their funds through the Chamber's PAC group - which of course, M Inderbitzen sits on the committee to help them out!

Posted by curious, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 1, 2008 at 6:52 pm

I don't see money from either Tong or Lin going through the Chamber PAC based on the disclosures. Inderbitzen gave money direct to some of the candidate's committees--nothing hidden and nothing wrong with that.

I'm wondering why an expense for the full page ad in Friday's weekly wasn't disclosed on McGovern's latest disclosure. Ad's had to be paid for by last Monday so where's the expense for the ad?

Posted by anonymous, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Nov 1, 2008 at 7:41 pm

Ahh, the one worried about money going through the Chamber also should check how PP paid for the many ads in the Pleasanton Weekly. Someone paid for those ads and that should have been disclosed in the form filed with the city. The first time Pleasanton Weekly is shown on any report is this last reporting period. There were many more ads totaling in the $1000s. Each full page color ad costs over $1100. Who paid for those? Even if it was donated it has to be reported as gifts in kind. Again, we don't know who paid for these ads or even who wrote it.

Posted by Jerry, a resident of Oak Hill
on Nov 2, 2008 at 12:52 am


It's my opinion, although I'm no automotive/aviation specialist, that one aircraft at cruising power would produce more pollution than one auto sitting at idle...

If, in your first post, you were comparing one aircraft vs all the vehicles that were sitting at idle in downtown Pleasanton at the time the aircraft was in the air - I'd be inclined to agree with you.


Those Brit's can be a quite interesting. Now, after reading your Web Link, I'm not sure what I should do to reduce my contribution to greenhouse gases, but, I know for sure I'm not gonna shoot a cow. According to their research, think of the emissions I'd be responsible for by using all those calories to dig a big 'ol hole to bury it. I'm totally confused - think I'll eat a carrot and ponder the question...:)

Posted by CaseyUseni, a resident of Ridgeview Commons
on Apr 25, 2017 at 6:26 pm

wh0cd108201 [url=Web Link cialis online[/url]

Posted by DorothyHap, a resident of Ridgeview Commons
on Apr 26, 2017 at 11:32 pm

wh0cd649427 [url=Web Link to buy cialis online[/url]