|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce has endorsed Mayor Jennifer Hosterman and City Council incumbents Cheryl Cook-Kallio and Jerry Thorne for re-election on Nov. 2.
Scott Raty, president of the chamber, said the group’s Business and Community Political Action Committee (BACPAC) believed the three candidates provided “decisive leadership” and experience over their current terms in office. At the same time, City Councilwoman Cindy McGovern, who is challenging Hosterman for the top post, too often delayed decisions, costing taxpayers more money, the chamber PAC decided.
The PAC also rejected council candidates Karla Brown and Fred Watson as lacking the experience needed for the positions.
“The Chamber based its decisions on interviews with five of six candidates and a recent public forum sponsored by the chamber in which all six candidates addressed priorities and answered questions rooted in ‘Pleasanton 2015: A Community Vision,’ the chamber’s local public policy platform with goals for education, transportation, public safety, health, jobs, housing, arts, culture and recreation,” Raty said.
McGovern declined an invitation by the chamber BACPAC to be interviewed as part of its candidate review process.
In the public forum, all six candidates agreed that Pleasanton is doing well, in spite of a weak and sluggish economy.
“Three candidates truly distinguish themselves with proven track records of accomplishment, demonstrating the leadership skills necessary to keep Pleasanton on the right track,” Raty said. “Incumbent Mayor Jennifer Hosterman and council members Cheryl Cook-Kallio and Jerry Thorne have earned our support and deserve to be re-elected.”
“Two challengers, Karla Brown and Fred Watson, lack experience and are simply not well versed enough in the issues to keep Pleasanton on the right track,” according to the BACPAC report. “Over the next two years, in a challenging economy, Pleasanton will need the experience of proven leaders, and cannot afford the distraction of the kind of “on the job training” both will demand.”
“In council member McGovern’s challenge of Hosterman, we see a candidate who has made a habit of delaying action to the point of impeding sound proposals, often saying she needs more time – senior housing at Pleasanton Gardens and Kottinger Place are but two examples,” the BACPAC statement continued. “Such delays often result in increased costs to the City in staff and consultant time, not to mention lost tax revenue to support needed public services.”
“The community needs the commitment to service and decisive leadership Jennifer Hosterman brings to help Pleasanton remain one of the most highly desirable communities in which to live, work and raise a family,” it added.
In its analysis of the candidates it endorsed, the BACPAC group made the following observations:
Jennifer Hosterman
Mayor Jennifer Hosterman has become an effective public executive and leader.
Mayor Hosterman (along with Council members Cook-Kallio and Thorne) worked hard to make senior housing, a new auto mall, freeway oriented retail and a community park a reality on the former Staples Ranch property at El Charro Road and I-580. This project is important to protecting Pleasanton’s tax base, creating new jobs, and helping our seniors, while providing new recreation opportunities for all ages.
Hosterman was effective in securing the county’s railroad right-of-way for additional parking in downtown Pleasanton. Anyone who attended the opening of the Firehouse Arts Center this month knows the value of that additional parking. She understands the value and importance of business to a community, and has been a proponent of streamlining government to become more efficient and responsive.
Hosterman has worked hard to earn the trust of elected colleagues in the region (she is endorsed by Livermore Mayor Marshall Kamena, Dublin Mayor Tim Sbranti, and Danville Mayor Mike Doyle), and has earned positions of leadership on public boards and commissions that will benefit Pleasanton directly over the next two years. Foremost among them are the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority (ACTIA) where Hosterman is working to secure funding for traffic solutions important to Pleasanton.
She also serves on the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) that determines land-use control at our city’s borders, where projects like that proposed for the former Staples Ranch are vital to the strength of the local economy and quality of life.
Based on her growth and maturation during her tenure as both a City Council member and mayor of Pleasanton, we believe Jennifer Hosterman is the best candidate for the job, and deserves to be re-elected to serve a final two years as Mayor.
++
Jerry Thorne
With a strong background in business, Jerry Thorne understands the importance of accountability in government. As a member of the city of Pleasanton’s internal audit committee, Thorne championed responsible fiscal policies that helped Pleasanton earn “Excellence in Budgeting” awards from the California Society of Municipal Finance Officers for the last seven years.
Since 1995, when first appointed to the Parks and Recreation Commission, Thorne has been a strong advocate of quality-of-life projects and initiatives, including the Veterans’ Memorial Building, the Bernal Community Park, and the Firehouse Arts Center. He has consistently worked to make Pleasanton a business-friendly city by streamlining the permitting processes and limiting unnecessary regulation
Thorne brings years of business experience to the Council so, when other cities turn to their taxpayers to bridge budget shortfalls, Thorne first asks where can we consolidate and streamline government to make it more efficient and less costly.
++
Cheryl Cook-Kallio
In every deliberation as a member of the Pleasanton City Council, Cheryl Cook-Kallio votes with the best interests of the total community foremost in mind. She supports maintaining a strong local economy and sensible initiatives to maintain and enhance Pleasanton’s exceptional quality of life.
Cook-Kallio was the early advocate for the Stoneridge Drive/Staples Ranch project. She, along with Mayor Hosterman, and council member Thorne not only recognized the importance Stoneridge Drive to improving traffic circulation in north Pleasanton, but due to their leadership saved Pleasanton taxpayers an estimated $8 million by agreeing to accept Alameda County’s offer to pay for its construction if completed earlier rather than later. Ultimately Cook-Kallio was instrumental in garnering unanimous Council support for Staples Ranch.
Like Thorne, Cook-Kallio has been a strong advocate for the Veterans’ Hall, the Firehouse Civic Arts Center and other projects that enhance Pleasanton as a place to live, work and play while maintaining a position of fiscal responsibility.
Raty said that the Pleasanton Chamber is a private, not-for-profit association with more than 800 members that employ more than 10,000 area residents. More information about the chamber can be found at its website: www.pleasanton.org.
Wow! That was a big surprise!
Tim,
I agree with you–big surprise–I remember there was a time that the Chamber would never consider endorsing Hosterman .It is amazing what the effects that big money has on these candidates.
Money talks–no wonder the public has such a negative view of politicians .Has Thorne or Cook ever voted against anything that the Chamber has endorsed, I very much doubt it.
There was a time that Hosterman did, but I can just imagine how much money or political favors were thrown her way for her to be in the Chambers back pocket now.
Time to get them out of office.
…. in the immortal words of Gomer Pyle.
In reality, we have a three member City Council. Cindy McGovern, Matt Sullivan. and Scott Raty (president of the CoC for the uninitiated). I hope that Pleasanton wakes up and kicks the Gang of Three (Hosterman, Cook-Kallio, Thorne) out of office in November so we get our government back from the current owners – the Chamber of Commerce.
I also think that Karl Brown lacks name recognition.
The article failed to mention the hiring of an L.A. law firm to defend the city against a lawsuit brought on by the Lin family and all the money that has already been wasted regarding the ridge issue.
Regarding Staples ranch, Hosterman was against the Stoneridge extension for years, which has cost many seniors the opportunity to live out their lives in Pleasanton.
Time for a change.
If you are voting against Hosterman over the senior issue, check out McGovern’s view. She does not want redevelopment of Pleasanton Gardens and Kottinger Ranch. She says she doesn’t want to displace seniors, completely ignoring the fact that the place is falling apart.
She wouldn’t even sit and talk to the Chamber of Commerce. Do you want someone who openly shuns a group that is a part of this city?
Cook-Kallio proposed the resolution asking that the Castlewood management and workers go back to the table for substantive talks, not exactly a Chamber supported action.
Please look at the reports. These accusations that ANY of the Council trades political favors for money is ludicrous, short sited and lacks substance. If you don’t want to vote for someone on the ISSUES then don’t. Just don’t make up stuff.
Where so you all think the revenue for the city is going to come from if not in part from the business community? There needs to be a balance. Every corner of our city needs representation. Just because it is the Chamber of Commerce does not mean their goals are at odds with the citizens.
Get over the personalities. Please vote on fact, not emotion.
I wouldn’t vote for anyone of them…..Pleasanton is starting to look like Dublin…
Why is the Chamber endorsing anybody at all, when you represent all of the people in the business community aren’t you suppose to be non-partisan. Hmmmmmmm ?
Let’s support experience in local government. these three have done a good job and they shouldn’t be thrown out of office just because they respect private property rights.
I felt that Hosterman had “on the job” training, but I now realize she had a lot more experience serving the public than Karla before landing a seat on Council. http://www.pleasantonweekly.com/morgue/2005/2005_01_07.cover07.shtml
Wow, Imagine a BIG MONEY Special Interest group endorsing their own puppet government.
Jeb, you misspelled Karla’s first name… You spelled it Karl…
I don’t blame Cindy for not taking part in the Chamber’s charade of “interviewing” candidates… Sounds like a FOX news gig to me…
I hope all the “NO” on Measure “D” voters get out and vote. I believe Karla was a huge part of the measure’s defeat. She and the her group’s $ 10,000. raised defeated the Chamber and the gang of 3’s
$600,000.+++
That BIG MONEY Cabal is really patient for another big payday at the expense of our quality of living here in Pleasanton…
I will never forget or forgive the sloppy, forced, half ass ramrodding
of the Stoneridge Dr. extension. The final report IS pretty sorry. The construction will violate every environmental standard set for our fine city.
They just say it’s “regrettable but unavoidable” that our noise pollution and air pollution standards will be ignored and the bull dozers will roll anyway.
Cook-Calio’s lame attempt at the end of the process asking about what one level of noise pollution do to our quality of life. Like she really cared!!!
I don’t trust the gang of 3 to care about anything but the developers payday. We need to get them out before it’s too late!
The people spoke but Cook-Kalio, Thorne, and Hosterman don’t want to respect that… They think the majority of voters are misguided and not too bright.
I hope this come home to roost when November rolls around.
We need Karla Brown to counter-act this rushed development at any cost hijacking of Pleasanton.
Jeb, please check my spelling…. and check yours…
Fired up and ready to roll in November..
Barry
Hi Stacey,
Nice article on your Web Link.
It just proves that Hosterman has flip-flopped over to the developers side after getting elected as a “Quality of Life” candidate.
She has thrown that all out the window.
Mayor, does more air and noise pollution add to anyone’s quality of life??
How can you trust anyone who has totally went back on most of her promises??
Oh yeah, I forgot this is politics as usual!
Cripes!
“Explanations exist; they have existed for all time; there is always a well-known solution to every human problem — neat, plausible, and wrong.” – Mencken
The reason Hosterman has seemingly “gone back” on promises made earlier, especially regarding Stoneridge, is because she’s had time to examine and learn the issue more thoroughly and discover that she was wrong. Karla Brown, if elected, is going to end up the same way. It’s a testament of Hosterman’s experience that she not only learned that she was wrong, but had the courage to abandon her wrong position. Stopping the Stoneridge extension was no way to solve traffic issue and only served as harassment of regional partners, who quickly pulled the plug on other regional traffic solutions that would benefit Pleasanton.
I mean, if Karla Brown ever wishes to be a successful Pleasanton leader, she’ll end up the same way.
“fact checker”, Facts? Really?
“fact checker” said : “[McGovern] does not want redevelopment of Pleasanton Gardens and Kottinger Ranch.”
The reality is that Cindy McGovern favors “renovating both senior facilities, not replacing them. She wants the city to use available federal and state funds for senior housing to build a new facility somewhere else in Pleasanton, not on a park site.” http://www.pleasantonweekly.com/news/show_story.php?id=4990
Cindy McGovern, the Council’s representative on the Affordable Housing Task Force, is looking at the big picture of affordable housing in Pleasanton, which includes the issues associated with Pleasanton Gardens and Kottinger Ranch. Considering that there is a several years wait list for these facilities, spreading any available dollars over more than just Pleasanton Gardens and Kottinger Ranch makes good budget sense, and will increase the availability of units to help with that wait list.
———
“fact checker” said: “[Cindy McGovern] wouldn’t even sit and talk to the Chamber of Commerce. Do you want someone who openly shuns a group that is a part of this city?”
OK, “fact checker”, let’s get the facts straight. Cindy McGovern did not refuse to talk to the Chamber of Commerce. She refused to talk to, receive funds from, or be endorsed by, the Pleasanton CofC’s Political Action Committee (BACPAC) – an organization whose sole purpose is to get candidates elected and ballot measures passed that further the Chamber’s political agenda.
Don’t believe me? According to Eric Nostrand, chair of the Chamber BACPAC during its inception, “We have motivated folks to have a voice in the community,” says Nostrand. “Politicians have hard time turning away from that.” This work falls directly in line with what Nostrand sees as the chamber’s main purpose: “The chamber’s value to take most seriously is political advocacy. If the chamber isn’t going to do it, who is? If not now, when?” http://www.calchamber.com/headlines/publicaffairspolitics/pages/03162007ts.aspx
———
“fact checker” said: “Every corner of our city needs representation.”
Got that one right! We need a Council leader who encourages and appreciates citizen participation and collaboration on matters affecting the city – one who is willing to undertake the hard work of balancing neighborhood, business, and individual concerns and issues with the huge task of maintaining quality city services, parks and streets, our great quality of life, and that small town atmosphere we all love. We need a Mayor who treats residents and business owners, as well as Staff and our commissioners with respect not contempt, including those who are expressing opinions she may not agree with.
As constituents, we may not agree with the final decision that the Council makes, but with Cindy McGovern as Mayor we will always know we’ve been heard and that our opinion is valued!
As a local business owner I appreciate the Chamber of Commerce taking the time to provide a forum for all of the candidates to provide their comments on what they have done for Pleasanton in the past and what they plan to do for Pleasanton if elected in the future. I was really looking forward to hearing from all of the candidates before making my decision on who to vote for.
It appears that my decision for mayor was made for me because Cindy McGovern never even took the time to show up to the candidates forum. If she’s afraid to speak to the local business community before the elections even take place I can’t imagine that she would be good leader for Pleasanton or the business community if elected. Thanks Cindy for making it an easy decision for me to vote for Jennifer Hosterman.
Hosterman, Cook-Kallio, Thorne are good for business, good for Pleasanton. They have our four votes.
Scott: sometimes “change” can be bad. The only other candidate is Cindy McGovern, and she has been in the city council, was against Oak Grove (which is now costing Pleasanton because of a lawsuit), plus I read on another forum she is teaming up with Karla Brown – yikes!
Hosterman has my vote.
If Cindy McGovern wins, we will need to have Special Election to fill her empty City Council position. The cost of the Special Election would be substantial. Don’t know how much, but am guessing at least $50,000. Also, Pleasanton loses all its representation on the county and regional boards. Good bye traffic mitigation in the Tri-Valley.
“Thanks Cindy” said: “It appears that my decision for mayor was made for me because Cindy McGovern never even took the time to show up to the candidates forum.”
——–
“TC”, as noted in the article at the top of this thread, ALL of the candidates took part of the public CofC Candidate forum. There was also a separate article published by the PW in the 9/17/2010 issue specifically about the CofC forum. http://www.pleasantonweekly.com/story.php?story_id=7404
Cindy chose not to be “interviewed” by the CofC’s political organization — their BACPAC — in a separate private meeting. As noted in the PW 9/17/2010 article, “McGovern also said she is accepting campaign contributions only from individual supporters, and declined an interview with the Pleasanton Chamber’s political action committee because she does not want money or support from a special interest group. She has been a long-time critic of Hosterman for accepting campaign contributions from developers.”
Barry,
So can you explain to me how cars driving down Stoneridge will cause more air pollution for Pleasanton Vs. a car driving through Pleasanton on 580? Seems to me that our air will benefit as a car sitting still will pollute for a long time and one driving past will pollute for only a moment. As for noise pollution, please, that is a last ditch attempt to rally troops to your cause.
Stoneridge was built with every intension of being extended. I know that because when I bought here about 7 years ago they disclosed that to me. Now maybe everyone did not listen to their realtor like I did.
As for the changing your mind part: The decisions to move forward or change your mind on a topic have a lot of conversations behind them. I do not expect you or me to know all the conversations that go on behind closed doors that make someone change their mind, but I guess you have never changed yours! Must be nice to be all knowing and all seeing.
If Cindy paid attention to the Kottinger Place/Pleasanton Garden task force she would have heard them say over and over again that Pleasanton Garden can’t be renovated. There isn’t space to make it ADA compatible. Once you renovate you must adhere to the current ADA standards. In order to be HUD it has to be ADA. They studied this for FIVE years!
The church group that owns the property free and clear want to GIVE it to the city in exchange for a renovation that will combine and bring both residences up to code and increase the number of units. The city can do this at Kottinger Place and then is free to do what they want with the gift of land.
Cindy’s position on the two properties is tantamount to saying NO only she covers it by wanting more study. She also made a comment at a council meeting that she didn’t think the city should be in the low income senior housing business.
Play this out. The city says NO to the redevelopment. The five church group gets tired of working with the city, CLOSES the facility and sells off the land. The city again looses an opportunity to do some good for elders.
The choice to renovate does not exist.
Wow! Surprise of the year. The Pleasanton Chamber PAC endorsed these same three the last time around. All three are pawns of developers. Remember that they are the ones responsible for the Oak Hills fiasco. Are you not tired of the Pleasanton Chamber PAC buying the elections for City Council and Mayor? Are you not tired of the Hippie Mayor and her left-wing politics? Is it not time to give these three the heave-ho? I urge you to join me in voting these three out of office. I also urge you to call Scott Raty, the CEO of the Pleasanton Chamber and tell him you are going to boycott businesses that belong to the Pleasanton Chamber unless they dissolve their election-buying PAC.
Dear Tim,
The NOISE and AIR pollution issues were really ignored in the Feb. meeting. Hostermnan, Cook Kalio, and Thorne were so busy trying to sidestep the city governments procedures that they didn’t even bother to look into what environmental damage the construction would cause. They wanted to rush through this shady deal really fast. It was kind of obvious.
The Stoneridge extension will decrease the quality of our air and noise, that is a fact!
Hosterman was the Quality of Life candidate in the past but not now.
The developers can’t wait to turn Pleasanton into another Dublin..
Traffic mitigation was not the goal or purpose of the Stoneridge extension. Other studies clearly stated that extending 84 is the best way to help our local traffic snarl.. That was ignored to rush the extension through. The extension makes the developer’s quality of life better not ours…
Take care…
Glad you mentioned 84, Barry. That’s exactly what I was referring to when I wrote this above:
“Stopping the Stoneridge extension was no way to solve traffic issue and only served as harassment of regional partners, who quickly pulled the plug on other regional traffic solutions that would benefit Pleasanton.”
So no, 84 was not ignored. It was one of the driving reasons behind getting the extension built now rather than later; one of the reasons Hosterman learned she was wrong and had to change positions. Pleasanton does not exist in a vacuum, is not an island. If Pleasanton was going to pull the extension from the plans (a road of regional importance), the leverage our regional partners have is to pull 84 from the plans. Now you talk about quality of life, how would Pleasanton’s quality of life have been without the 84 improvements? It sounds like under your plan, by stopping the extension, you would never get the 84 improvements.
It is laughable that we have gotten so politically correct that we even call business a “special interest”. One woman who doesn’t want traffic through her neighborhood, armed with 2 friends and clip boards can overturn a development as significant as Oak Grove with lies and misinformation and that isn’t considered a “special interest”, but on the other hand long time business owners simply want their perspective heard and work to get “pro business” candidates elected and they are considered a special interest? Give me a break.
Whoever compared Pleasanton (above), to Dublin when it comes to development needs to get their head examined…..
I appreciate the Chamber’s endorsement of Hosterman, Cook and Thorne! It’s important that we elect a counsil that will help grow Pleasanton in a positive economic direction. This is not the time to elect a counsil with little or no experience that will cripple our city financially through slow and indecisive decisions.
Stacey-Thanks for always doing your homework.
I find it scary that the some of the opinions on this forum belong to people who get to vote. Anyone that believes they will get their message through to Cindy has not been in town very long. I have been here long enough to remember ( 1985) when she steamrolled through the school system the same way she served on the school board and they same way she serves on the council. Her mind is made up-no input needed. Oh she may listen to what you say, nodding like a bobble head at your words, but as you all mention, she will not change positions-not even when she finds out her position is contrary to the greater good of our citizenry. Not even if it will cost the taxpayers hundreds of thousands in legal fees.
As for Karla-she does not want any more development in her neighborhood. You better hope you do not have any open lots in your neighborhood. We now have an obligation to more low income housing and it is not going to be anywhere near Kottinger with her on the council. Not near any of the streets she must drive. How do the people on Footlhill Road and Vineyard feel about apartments sprouting up?
Let’s elect people who serve the greater good-not their own self interests. Let’s elect people who listen and are open to new information as the times change.
And anyone who thinks that Jennifer Hosterman does not consider the environmental impact of each and every act she takes, has not been in town very long or has never taken the time to learn anything about her. Her “tree-hugger” nature was used against her early in her political career. Give her credit for learning to balance the needs of her town.
Barry,
I did not say that Stoneridge should be used as traffic mitigation. I just asked how it will increase the air pollution. The fact is that all those cars are going past us on 580 and you will still get the pollution. I still say that the noise issue is just another cry baby attempt at killing the Stoneridge extension.
Last, after TWO EIR’s how can you say they did not look at the impact the construction would have. That is just wrong. Did you know that the biggest hold up is over a weed that grows in the central valley? That is how in depth the study went. If this thing was growing in your yard you would kill it, but if it leads to a nice development then the weed should win. Pathetic!
Take care-
When I watched the City Council meeting where they presented the study about the extension of Stoneridge, the study showed that where we now have a clogged Valley Ave, an opening of Stoneridge will cause us to have two clogged streets, Valley and Stoneridge. How is that a benefit?
As far as holding up the senior living place, that could have been approved with or without Stoneridge going through to Livermore.
Maybe we should make Stoneridge a toll road. Then we can make some money from the rich people that can afford to drive alone and still use the diamond lane. Wasn’t the diamond lane supposed to get people to share rides and reduce pollution? Now we no longer care about pollution if you have enough money. Kind of like Al Gore’s house.
Robert…… Really????? “Pawns of developers? What development has gone on in Pleasanton in the last 8 years? Thats right almost NONE!!
It’s Oak Grove BTW, not Oak Hills, maybe you should hook up with “fact checker” before you post. The fiasco is what is about to happen given the Lin’s have been stripped of their property rights after Karla decided she didn’t want 500 car trips per day through her street and lied and deceived everyone into believing they were “saving our ridgelines”. No peak in Oak Grove would have been higher than Kottinger Ranch btw.
So is Jennifer the Hippie Mayor, or is she a pawn to developers? Just curious because I’ve never seen a candidate compared to both of these simultaneously.
Why don’t you research the money behind “save our ridgelines”? Oh thats right its never been disclosed to the public where that money actually came from!
Your comments Robert make me believe it is you in fact that are the pawn!
Wow! Surprise of the year. The Pleasanton Chamber PAC endorsed these same three the last time around. All three are pawns of developers. Remember that they are the ones responsible for the Oak Hills fiasco. Are you not tired of the Pleasanton Chamber PAC buying the elections for City Council and Mayor? Are you not tired of the Hippie Mayor and her left-wing politics? Is it not time to give these three the heave-ho? I urge you to join me in voting these three out of office. I also urge you to call Scott Raty, the CEO of the Pleasanton Chamber and tell him you are going to boycott businesses that belong to the Pleasanton Chamber unless they dissolve their election-buying PAC.
Hey Tim,
The thing that pissed me off the most was the way the Feb. meeting was run.
Mayor Hosterman was ham handed and clumsy the way she tried to ram the extension through…. She didn’t know the procedure and was in a huff when she didn’t get her way…
They added the extension at the last minute and tried to rush it through. They didn’t follow the current regulations and did it anyway. A TOTAL DISREGARD of procedure… Plain and simple!
It was either ignorance or total disregard of rules on their part.. You pick….
I’m not totally against development and the extension. But, as you know, when you rush things you make errors and you usually omit very important details. I don’t care much about the spearscale but I do care about the air we breathe and the noise we bear….
The noise abatement was totally left out of their rush job and they didn’t even know what the other pollution measurements were..
I don’t trust Hosterman, Cook-Kalio, or Thorne to do things in a safe and correct manner.
We are still living the nightmare of the Bush administrations gutting of almost any kind of common sense regulations.
This situation has the same SMELL FACTOR!
Take good care now…
Barry
Some people may have forgotten and some are in denial, but Democrat, Cook/Kallio had 0 experience when she was elected. VOTE out the incumbents! McGovern, Fred Watson and Karla have our vote.
Cook-Kallio had plenty of experience. Not all political experience comes in the form of a commission. It isn’t hard to look this stuff up.
All of the information needed to make a decision was in the original environmental report. You just had to read the entire report to find it. This was validated by the fact that the supplemnental report had NO NEW findings. Money spent that wasn’t necessary. Had the council not forced the issue the city would have been still studying the issue, the organization in charge of annexation would not have allowed Pleasanton to annex and Livermore or Dublin would have a shot at acquiring the land. It was the council’s vote that forced people to the table to solve the issues surrounding the completion of Stoneridge. What do we have now? A sound environmental agreement with the county, the county is going to PAY for the completion, we will have increased revenue from the businesses located there, and a park.
Matt, as the “insider” that you are you likely know _exactly_ what I’m talking about. The effort is well hidden, but funded by one individual with very selfish interests. Since we can name names in this forum I won’t but safe to say you get my drift 😉
Cook/Kalio had done very little if anything for THIS Community in all the years before her election. Those of us deeply involved in all aspects of our Community had never heard of her and never saw her at any meetings, committees etc.. Never saw her volunteering like so many of us have through the many, many years. Tell us of all her Pleasanton Community involvement before her election. Make a list. We’ll tell you if she was there.
Hey Barry,
I hear you on the Hosterman part. I am not a huge fan either, but just because she is not good for Pleasanton does not mean that some of the things she has approved are bad for Pleasanton.
Staples Ranch, Stoneridge extension and others are good for Pleasanton. The noise is such a wasted point. If you think about the time when the traffic and noise will be the worst you are looking at morning, early evening and weekends. Most people won’t even be home at those times. There has to be compromise on both sides. No one side can get it all their way. So pick one thing and make that your tool for negotiation. You can’t have everything.
By the way aren’t you in Southeast Pleasanton? How will your complaints about traffic and air even bother you? If I live right here and am fine with it and you live on the other side of town how can those even be factors for you?????
Take real good care now!
Sorry Tim,
I didn’t see the Stoneridge neighborhood on the pull down.
Staples Ranch is a good idea but I still didn’t agree with the way they tried to sneak the extension through. Bad politics!
Noise is never looked at but should be..
I just like the way they did things and I don’t trust them and never will.
Is it November yet?
When is MORE pollution a good thing???
I am sick of the Chamber trying to jam their agenda down our throats. This is nothing but a free advertisement for their own pawns. The Chamber and the Lin/Tongs paid for their last bid for office, now they are going to pay again. WHY? Because they are puppets for the Chamber’s marching orders.
Now we know why all 3 vote the same – because the Chamber BACPAC.
I want a list of BACPAC members becuase I am going to boycott all of their business! Including the Hopyard Ale house that Jeb has been pushing.
Our household of 20-year Pleasanton residents will vote for the incumbents, Hosterman, Cook-Kallio, and Thorne. This is no time to replace experience and knowledge. The fact is the Mayor and councilmembers have established strong and good relationships with the mayor/councilmembers of the Tri-Valley which colletively will have the juice to get funding for transportation improvements and other community enhancements. Pleasanton is a beautiful and desirable place and for those who criticize the business community and the Chamber for supporting and promoting business are just plain dumb as rocks. Do they not have a job at a company that makes a profit at least enough to employ them? Revenue from Hacienda Business Park and other businesses is what makes this community successful along with the school system which by the way is primarily funded by development fees.
I’ve been here 45 years and involved in local politics through my family. I worked on the General Plan set in 1996 and in the Stoneridge Drive alignment Committee in something like 1998 or 99. We decried that any buyer in Stoneridge area be aware that a road was being built and it was going to happen. We have some great experience on the counsel right now. I did not support Hosterman in the 1st run for election but she has learned. You can’t stick your head in the sand. The state and county and feds have a hand in what you do. There are things that must be satisfied. Do NOT glorify people for saying no! It’s easy to say no and it’s easy to get others to say no. Vote for people who help others understand the big picture. And Please make an effort to understand the big picture! I am pleased to support Hosterman, Thorne, and Cook-Kallio.
Dear D-Rock…
I will not vote yes just to go along..
The gang of 3 are not worthy of the public trust anymore… It’s very hard to earn trust and really easy to lose it..
They have lost my trust…
“Why don’t you research the money behind “save our ridgelines”? Oh thats(sic) right its never been disclosed to the public where that money actually came from!”
Save Our Hills is a registered political committee here in Pleasanton. You can view form 460 filings detailing their contributions received and expenditures here:
http://nf4.netfile.com/pub2/AllFilingsByFiler.aspx?id=6818283
Pleasanton’s Public Access for the E-filing of all campaign finance reports is here:
http://www.netfile.com/agency/cop/
Just click on the “Public Access Portal” and search for the group or candidate. Please note that the next filings for the current election are due by October 4th.
Oops, sorry – the group’s name is “Save Pleasanton’s Hills.”