Town Square

Post a New Topic

County board moves to place Pleasanton in Supervisor Nate Miley's district

Original post made on Jun 29, 2011

Responding to an appeal by Pleasanton leaders to keep the city in a single supervisor district, the Alameda County Board of Supervisors Tuesday voted to proceed with boundary changes that would move Pleasanton into District 4, which is represented by Supervisor Nate Miley.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Wednesday, June 29, 2011, 6:41 AM

Comments (7)

Posted by common sense
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 29, 2011 at 5:51 pm

I guess the point of all this is be careful what you wish for. And yes, the county is not just about the wishes of Pleasanton. The city government of Pleasanton wished for a single county representative and a plan is made to give Pleasanton a single supervisor. But, they get that and gosh golly it is opposed. For obvious reasons i might add. So what now, cede the land north of Stoneridge Drive to Dublin and move on, accept the proposal, or let the previous proposal to allow the sliver of Pleasanton be in another supervisor's district.


Posted by Boner
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 29, 2011 at 7:10 pm

Haggerty makes $234,000 dollars per year doing his job but I cannot for the life of me figure out what his job is?????


Posted by Billie
a resident of Mohr Park
on Jun 29, 2011 at 8:16 pm

The PW said:
"However, city officials said yesterday's decision by the board to place Pleasanton in Miley's district, which includes Castro Valley and parts of Oakland, isn't what they had in mind."

Which "city officials" would those be, PW??

Certainly not Mayor Hosterman who, when interviewed by the Independent for an article printed in their June 23, 2011, edition stated that although "she has not seen Map E" [the Board’s map that puts Pleasanton 100% in Supv Miley's District 4 with Oakland and the Castro Valley area], "after hearing a description of it from a reporter, she said, "People of Pleasanton welcome representation of the entire city by Miley. Congratulations to Supervisor Miley, if it comes to pass."

In that same article, Councilman Thorne said regarding Map E, "it's preferable to keep Pleasanton in a Valley district,"..."However, the top priority for Pleasanton is to stay together in one district" and "it supercedes being kept with the Valley cities".

Web Link

During yesterday's Board meeting, Vice Mayor Cook-Kallio told the Board that Pleasanton appreciated all that Supv Haggerty had done for us and would miss him if the Board's choice were Map E, but looked forward to working with Supv Miley if that was the decision. VM Cook-Kallio’s remarks were almost a repeat of Mayor Hosterman's comments to the Independent last week, without the point about running for one of the supervisor seats.

Web Link

As I’ve noted in various threads/posts, there were, of course, three proposals from the Alameda County Citizens Redistricting Task Force that met the Board’s own stated criteria for redistricting more closely than the two final proposals developed in-house at the Board’s request. Unfortunately, it was obvious the Board did not seriously consider any proposals but their own.

Our Mayor and Vice Mayor as well had plenty of opportunity prior to yesterday’s meeting to express their preference for one of the Task Force proposals, which ignored county politics and gerrymandering, and kept the Tri-Valley communities of interest intact. They chose instead, as the elected leaders of our community, to “welcome” a move into District 4 should that be the Board’s decision. It’s a little disingenuous now for any “city officials” to say that a move into Miley’s district "isn't what they had in mind"!


Posted by Incumbent abuse of power
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 29, 2011 at 11:44 pm

Pleasanton being thrown over the hils is very, very wrong for both the Congressional and Super. seats ! Constitutionally there are suppose to be common interests and natural geographical boundaries
to be considered. It is wrong for Pleasanton to be thrown over the hills to be with Union City for Congressional seat, and thrown with Miley instead of Livermore for Supervisor..Pleasanton has been dumped on badly ! ! Totally political...definitely not following NATURAL boundaries ! plesanton is NOT a Union City neighbor !


Posted by Whats Right
a resident of Canyon Creek
on Jul 2, 2011 at 1:10 pm

I concur with earlier comments. Names of city officials opposing the move are unlisted but those supporting the move are quoted by name. Stand up and be counted.


Posted by Well Informed
a resident of Mohr Park
on Jul 2, 2011 at 11:23 pm

Another standard play from the book of power politics. It goes like this, "If the public doesn't like the politician's proposal, then the politician responds with something more draconian, until the public begs the politician for the original proposal." This is referred to as the old, "If you don't want us to build Senior Housing in your neighborhood, then we will build a jail - OH, you don't want a jail! Now Senior Housing sounds better..." This is not about representation for Pleasanton, it's about strengthening Haggerty's political grip by giving him more folks in Fremont where his voting base exists. If Haggerty were to shift his District to include Dublin & less of Fremont, he knows that a number of folks would run against him...


Posted by Chuck Wiedel
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 3, 2011 at 5:14 pm

Politicians come and go, but boundary lines remain forever-- almost! I am ADAMANTLY opposed to Pleasanton being split up, and not being represented by ONE supervisor. This applies to County supervisorial districts, State Assembly districts, or State Senatorial Districts, and to CONGRESSIONAL districts. We have only been viewed as numbers (or is it campaign dollars???) for FAR too long now, and it is time we have what is in OUR best interests, and NOT the best interest of some overpaid politicians! I personally would not trade this priority for ANY ONE of the politicians that we currently think represent us-- and, for Heaven's Sake, keep Pete Stark away from the Tri-Valley area!!! Haggerty clearly has other aspirations, so let him pursue them --- with someone else's $$, and someone else's voter registration rolls!
IN THE MEANTIME, MAINTAIN PLEASANTON'S INTEGRITY!
WE DESERVE IT!


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:


Post a comment

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

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from PleasantonWeekly.com sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

Palo Alto's bold proposal to jumpstart home electrification
By Sherry Listgarten | 21 comments | 5,248 views

How Much Time do You Spend Outdoors?
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 2,142 views

Collaboration center opens to foster new partnerships for lab and university
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 639 views

A picnic by Lake Chabot
By Monith Ilavarasan | 3 comments | 534 views