Post a New Topic
Original post made
on Sep 12, 2008
For all the talk about open government and public participation, the politicians throwing their support behind Measure PP appear hypocritical to me. Measure PP is an example of proposed law created without public participation. Measure QQ on the other hand will reaffirm the principles of public participation and open government.
I wonder if Brozosky will hire Dan Carl "Rove" to manage his campaign this time around. Maybe Brozosky can, once again, avoid the real issues and make the election about email accounts and Hosterman’s bird. I think Brozosky would be a great fit for some backwards, redneck town in the Central Valley, but not Pleasanton.
Is this letter from the same George Reid that spearheaded the Kottinger Creek project, supported by Jennifer Hostermann and costing Pleasanton taxpayers millions of dollars for a...creek? No wonder he supports her. What's next on this guy and Jennifer's agenda for us Pleasanton taxpayers? How about a personal bocci court in Kottinger Park?
Robert, check the record but I believe that both Steve Brozosky and Cindy McGovern voted for the Kottinger Creek project. So the same question you ask of the author and the Mayor can also be asked of you and Steve Brozosky. And the answer is. . .
This post is about Hosterman versus Brozosky, why bring up Measure PP? But, if you must, please remember that the initiative process is a legal one and if all those residents signed the petition, it should be on the ballot. Your argument about no public participation mystifies me. If you don't like PP, you can vote no. You could also write letters to the paper, campaign for the opposition, etc. That is public participation! Do you for one minute think that the proponents of QQ will really go for public participation? That is exactly what they are against! They have even said it on record. No doubt they will get all of the pro-QQ people on their "committee" and then say, "look, we have public participation"! It's really quite a joke.
Why bring up Measure PP? Well for starters, this Letter starts with "Brozosky said he would be a more open mayor and listen to the citizens but his track record displays his hypocrisy on open representative government". Brozosky is a supporter of Measure PP.
Janet, you are only mystified because what you call "public participation" (i.e. writing letters to a paper, voting) has no bearing upon how law is written. Initiatives are written without public participation. Did you or I give public input on the language of the text before it was composed? Was everyone who would be affected by the restrictions of Measure PP allowed to have their say on the language? NO! And yes, I will be voting no.
I am so sad that due to the owner’s health issues, (how can this be blamed on anyone?) the water park improvements will not be completed. It would have been so nice to have an improved family amenity. My kids have used the water park in the summers and gone to birthday parties there but we always wished it was updated and there was more there.
The improvement plans would have created a modest but more enjoyable park. 3 or 4 more slides, a wave pool, and a lazy river ride to give more activities for families in the area. This was hardly an attraction that would bring in large numbers of people from outside the area. The traffic from this was only a few months out of the year and probably less traffic than the McDonalds down the street.
Brozosky was one of the three council members (Mayor Pico was one) that worked to find a compromise that would allow the improvements that the water park needed to be a better amenity for families of our community. The concern at the time was that if the improvement did not happen the park would continue to fall into disrepair.
By the way the project was approved by the East Bay Regional Parks District. Pleasanton did not approve the finance plans.
The opponents got what they wanted…and they are still complaining and blaming Brozosky this time?
Steve I hope you will continue to take the high road.
It is obvious that the Hosterman camp has started their campaign of negetive smear letters.
I hope Brozosky continues to take the high road. I don't want to hear three months of this, I already feel dirty.
What high road? Are you kidding? Saying it does not make it so. Whether you like Hosterman or not, no one can look at Brozosky, listen to him and think he takes the high road.
It is unfortunate that Hosterman would allow her supporter to put their name on letters that she knows has misinformation in them. She should have more respect for them to put them in such a compromising position.
Holding our elected officials accountable is not mean it is responsible.
It does not matter if you think the laws that Hosterman broke were minor legal violations, elected officials know they will be scrutinized and held to a high standard they must act accordingly.
On the other hand the lies and misinformation in the George Reid and Richard Roberts letters are dirty politic clearly orchestrated by Hostermans campaign people.
I hope Hosterman rethinks this strategy. Jeniffer don't do this to Pleasanton.
I was working on a local campaign, I was fairly new to the local politics but wanted to help. I was flattered when they spent so much time bringing me up to date about the opponent. I began to feel very passionate and concerned about the bad opponent. I started sharing the information with my friends and acquaintances. When I was asked to write a letter so more people would know of the bad opponent I was reluctant but thought it was the right thing to do. I later came to understand that I was being used to spread questionable information.
I learned to be careful about what I passed on and put my name to.
Steve is not honest. When he was on some local boards, he managed to sneak in his software (used for customer service) on those agencies, such as the airport and the bus outfit. I also don't trust Jennifer either. It's like the presidential elections -- no real choice.
How is giving the software to Pleasanton's partner agency's sneaky or dishonest? He saw they needed it, so he created it to help them out.
He gave it to them for free!
Sounds like a nice, smart guy to me.
But they now pay a monthly service fee for it. So he did sneak it in. I have met him in person before, at a Wheels transit meeting (portion removed by PW staff for libelous content).
That is an outrageous statement. Steve is a pleasant respectful person. That comment crosses the line , PW please remove that comment.
That is a LIE!!!!!
There is NO maintenance fees for the airport or wheels, ever. People can even verify this with the agencies if they do not believe it. They support both agencies with their software, hosting, maintenance, and backups without any charge. They did this as a community service to help their community.
You are spreading malicious lies!
Either way between these 2 we are in trouble. Neither offer anything of value to the future of Pleasanton.
Not sure why part of my comment was removed. I was expressing my personal experience when I met Steve at a transit meeting and it WAS NOT libelous.
Anyway neither Janet or Steve gets my vote, pretty much like the presidential race.
Look on bottom, a link to his company's website. During election time, this is a violation since public agencies are not supposed to promote candidates.
Please give us a hand while we flout federal law
By Tim Hunt | 12 comments | 666 views
A good year for Pleasanton; 2018 could be even better
By Jeb Bing | 0 comments | 623 views
Home & Real Estate
Send News Tips
Circulation & Delivery
© 2017 Pleasanton Weekly
All rights reserved.