Letters | March 29, 2013 | Pleasanton Weekly | PleasantonWeekly.com |


Pleasanton Weekly

Opinion - March 29, 2013


GOP not endorsing

This story contains 1374 words.

If you are a paid subscriber, check to make sure you have logged in. Otherwise our system cannot recognize you as having full free access to our site.

If you are a paid print subscriber and haven't yet set up an online account, click here to get your online account activated.


Posted by member, a resident of Birdland
on Mar 30, 2013 at 10:49 am

GOP not endorsing? Who are the GOP members in council race? Would like to know party affiliation. Thanks

Posted by member, a resident of Birdland
on Mar 31, 2013 at 4:42 pm

Why is Narum talking to Public Employee Unions? Why is the Mayor doing damage control?

Received an interesting email last week from the Mayor stating that Narum is talking to Public Employee Unions, but not taking their money.

Could this be a conflict of interest?


Posted by Longtimer, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 31, 2013 at 7:25 pm

First, city positions are NON-partisan. They are about what is best for all of Pleasanton. They are not about far- reaching platforms. I certainly hope all candidates have meet & talk with all constituents. Anyone shallow enough to label anyone by party, is doing a disservice to all in Pleasanton. We have little control. Informed residents know that. There are so many federal and Ca state laws, rules, and mandates, we have a small voice in our town. That is determined by the fools voting for Ca state legislature, and Gov who sign the crap they come up with.
I've always thought anybody who only listens to one station or one commenter, is blinded by tunnelvision. I watch and listen to all stations enough to make ongoing opinions based in facts, from issue to issue. Thus, I have little desire to waste time in discussing any issues with shallow people, who don't know multiple sides enough to engage with all the facts. There is a reason we have under cover spies, and military intelligence. Regardless of issue, always know the opposition. Narrow, single-issue people, are not fully equiped to even debate, much less lead, or vote.
Those who CAN,....DO. Those the CANNOT,...just SHOUT LOUDER.

Posted by justwondering, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 31, 2013 at 9:47 pm

Of course, the candidates should be talking with the employees. Candidates should be talking with employees since they carry out the Council directives. That's common in business for managment to talk with employees. My understanding is that 3 of the 4 candidates are talking with the employees to understand their perspectives and issues. Frankly I think that's a good thing in having knowledgeable Council members.

I, too, received a copy of the email from Mayor Thorne. It sounded to me that he was trying to set the record straight about statements made by at least one candidate that aren't true and aren't supported by fact. I looked at the financial disclosures for 3 of the 4 candidates (1 didn't file which is interesting). None of them reported any union contributions. So how can a candidate make a statement that another candidate is supported by the union? No financial contributions--have they endorsed? I want a council member to be honest, ethical, balanced and able to work with everyone since it requires 3 votes to move something forward. The tea party candidate doesn't seem to understand that.

Posted by Longtimer, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Mar 31, 2013 at 11:36 pm

I have not received an email. Makes me a bit curious.
I just know I like the vast experience of Kathy Narum.