Town Square

Post a New Topic

Mayor looks at road ahead

Original post made on Jan 6, 2017

Three out of four California voters cast a ballot in the Nov. 8 General Election, the highest turnout since 2008. In Pleasanton, close to 63% of voters decided to give me another two years in office as your mayor. It is a privilege and an honor to be able to continue to serve, and I'm grateful that so many of you share in my vision for Pleasanton and engage in our community.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Thursday, January 5, 2017, 7:21 AM

Comments (35)

1 person likes this
Posted by frank bermontes
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 6, 2017 at 8:34 am

need see more pd downtown at night


9 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 6, 2017 at 1:18 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

Mayor Thorne, keep in mind that over 37% did NOT vote for you, but instead voted for a last-minute challenger with basically no experience. To me that says to tread carefully, show transparency, speak wisely and with humility. The last one, humility, I feel was especially lacking.

Right about the same percent of voters wanted no part of Costco. I can only guess that those 37% of people voting no to Costco and no to Mayor Thorne are mostly the same people. You have many people, a large minority, who are against Costco coming to Pleasanton, even though it seems as it's now an inevitability. I urge you to please listen to these people, to please show humility and flexibility in the Costco negotiations and proceedings. You have shown no humility up to this point, but there is always time to start. 37% is a lot of constituents, please respect and listen to them.


2 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 6, 2017 at 5:10 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

The majority of voters said they want Jerry Thorne and they want Costco.
Get over it.
It is what it is.


8 people like this
Posted by spudly
a resident of Laguna Oaks
on Jan 6, 2017 at 6:27 pm

@ the comment for more PD needed downtown. I frequent downtown (Oasis, Lokanta, Sabio, Pasta's, etc) on weeknights and weekends and for years have never encountered a problem of any kind. There is ample parking too for those who think there is not:)

Why do we need more PD there? Pleasanton is one of the most boring nightlife based towns in existence.


21 people like this
Posted by Brad
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jan 6, 2017 at 7:23 pm

Mayor, by (removed) bringing in 1000s of new apartments and apartment dwellers, You've destroyed this beautiful little community.


1 person likes this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 6, 2017 at 8:20 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

President John F. Kennedy in the oval office at the height of the Cuban missile crises, when an American air craft was shot down by the Russians off the bearing straits. Said, "there is always someone that does not get the word". Although Kennedy had a rather different expletive, his comment was descriptive, of the uninformed. Brads comment, indicates Brad did not get the word, and is uninformed.


3 people like this
Posted by Dan
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 6, 2017 at 10:24 pm

If the Costco vote had been say 48% v. 52% then maybe the minority perspective would merit some consideration (but not acquiescence). But the nearly 2 to 1 trouncing is a pretty clear message from the voters that we approve of a Costco at that location. Election is over...


6 people like this
Posted by Flightops
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 7, 2017 at 7:38 am

Flightops is a registered user.

Good call "brad" on the mayor selling us out ( removed ), he must be proud of running basically unopposed and now has a couple more years to finish destroying my town of many years which I barely recognize anymore!


5 people like this
Posted by SHale
a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 7, 2017 at 9:27 am

SHale is a registered user.

Just remember this forum gets it wrong with major issues. Lund Ranch, Costco, the Mayor, the planning dept etc. This forum was hugely negative on them, but when put to vote 2/3 of the voters voted opposite of this forum.
And when you bounce out to the region they were all hugely in favor for a new Costco but, of course, we couldn't vote......
boink


5 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 7, 2017 at 3:50 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

Dan and SHale, when over 37% of the voters (not 2/3, SHale, it was less that 63%) state they don't want something, to me that speaks loudly. As I said above, these people should be listened to. Michael Austin wants to discount these people ("Get over it"), but I hope Mayor Thorne and the City Council listens to both the majority and the concerns of the minority in his next term. I doubt he and they will, just as I have my doubts about Trump, but hopefully they all prove me wrong.

And SHale, why do you want a Costco in P-town if you have one in Danville, that I would assume is equal or closer to your home? And "boink" ?? WTH?


6 people like this
Posted by Common Sense
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 8, 2017 at 1:13 pm

Common Sense is a registered user.

@ Get the Facts

And when nearly 63% of voters state they WANT something, that speaks even LOUDER than the little 37% of voters who merely speak loudly. Sorry, you lost so now get over it! We live in a democratic society where majority rules. If you don't like Costco being here, move elsewhere. I think Tracy and Castro Valley have yet to get their own Costco. Mayor Thorne is doing absolutely the right things, obviously, to get 63% of the votes. Keep up the great work, Mayor Thorne!


6 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 8, 2017 at 1:52 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

I believe you are missing my point. Mayor Thorne, we can agree, received a large amount of votes, if it were a presidential election, it would be called a landslide. But his challenger was last-minute and unqualified, yet still received a heck of a lot of votes. That would give me pause, but sadly I don't think it will slow down Thorne at all. He is locked in with tunnel vision, in my opinion.

"We live in a democratic society where majority rules."
Not always, 2.83 million more votes cast for the loser in the past presidential election.

"I think Tracy and Castro Valley have yet to get their own Costco."
Tracy has a Costco.


Like this comment
Posted by SHale
a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 8, 2017 at 2:47 pm

SHale is a registered user.

Facts: 2/3 voted to approve Lund Ranch new housing and close to 2/3 voted for Costco. And somewhere around 2/3 voted for mayor. My point, as I've made before, this forum of vocal opinions often are not on the majority side of issues.
I believe the mayor candidate was a bit late in submitting forms and then cried and launch a legal battle they lost, no? Who wants a new Mayor who stumbles out of the gate first thing?
Why do I want a new costco? Want is a very strong word. I'm midpoint between the Danville Costco and what could be a new Costco in Pleasanton. If the new Costco had good parking and fewer red lights, I'd try it.


1 person likes this
Posted by Common Sense
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 8, 2017 at 2:49 pm

Common Sense is a registered user.

@ Get the Facts

It seems, IMHO, you're the one who is locked in with tunnel vision by focusing on that 37% of ill informed voters. Put any idiot on a ballot and s/he will still get some votes. 37% is not "heck a lot of votes". Those numbers likely represent the closed-minded "NIMBY" population in our town and they are growing smaller and smaller by the number (Thank GOD!).


1 person likes this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 8, 2017 at 3:14 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

SHale, your points about the mayoral challenger only confirm what I am saying: despite all of what the challenger did, she received 11,777 votes. Just think what a stronger candidate could have done, the vote total certainly would have been higher.

"Those numbers likely represent the closed-minded "NIMBY" population in our town and they are growing smaller and smaller by the number"
Actually, it seemed very clear to me that the "Yes on MM" group was growing by the day, and with more time, MM would have passed. It would have probably taken months, not days or weeks, but from my perch I saw the MM-Yes/Costco-No vote gaining momentum, not losing.


1 person likes this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 8, 2017 at 3:17 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

The Val Vista neighborhood where the Costco will be built voted no on Measure MM with substantial majority.


13 people like this
Posted by Kathleen Ruegsegger
a resident of Vintage Hills
on Jan 8, 2017 at 4:19 pm

Kathleen Ruegsegger is a registered user.

" . . . and help us pave the road ahead." Maybe we could start by repaving some of the roads in town first? Can't help but wonder how many roads could be repaired for $4.2 million, especially with all the added housing, residents, and traffic in "the future" the mayor has planned.


2 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 8, 2017 at 6:37 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

The opinions on this forum are not on the majority side of the issues. The minority opinions on this forum post anonymously.

People supportive of the issues post their opinion and in doing so identify themselves.

Anonymous posters are nothing more than drive through traffic, creating congestion, attempting to cause confusion, and interfere with the needs and desires of the majority.


4 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 8, 2017 at 9:57 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

Michael, you once again are attempting to convince someone (everyone?) that this forum be only for those who use their real name. But the Weekly has shown that this in not important to them, at least not nearly as important as it is to you. All of us who choose to use a pseudonym absolutely have the right to do this. Please focus on the topic of the thread, I recommend you get off of your soap box, and please stop speaking for everyone. I give you kudos for using your real name, but I do not feel as comfortable as you do using my real name, we anonymous posters are here to stay.


16 people like this
Posted by Matt Sullivan
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jan 9, 2017 at 10:35 am

Matt Sullivan is a registered user.

Michael Austin,

Some of us in the minority use our real names – despite the onslaught of personal attacks unrelated to the issue that are certain to come my way.

You seem to be dismissing the almost 40% of people that voted against Costco as irrelevant, and would be happy to see Thorne do the same. That’s not democracy, that’s fascism (but of course, that’s the age we are entering).

You also seem to forget that despite MM the Council still needs to approve the project. To do that they will finally have to release the details of the subsidies that they tried so hard to hide during the campaign. The public needs information for democracy to function and we didn’t have that on MM. When government and business collude to undermine the public what is left is plutocracy.


Like this comment
Posted by SHale
a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 9, 2017 at 12:31 pm

SHale is a registered user.

I think the point MA was making, same one I've made several times, is this forum does not represent Pleasanton (or the region) as at least twice the vocal, regular, posters have been in the 1/3 minority. Lund Ranch, MM, Mayor etc etc. Most are afraid post here as they will be attacked by the silly screen name posters (kudos to those at least registered). AND how about the 'regular' posters who switch screen names to suit their mood? Hiding writing styles is tough.


3 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 9, 2017 at 12:53 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Matt, have you considered that perhaps the reason you didn't have the "full details" for the vote on MM is that the measure was not a City-lead initiative for the citizens to weigh in on a formal Costco proposal? It was a non-solicited, pre-mature/preemptive strike orchestrated by a non-resident focused on keeping out ANY usage greater than 50K sqft.

The vote on MM was as much about whether citizens wanted the City to be restricted in such a way in its planning for the Johnson Drive zone. And "nearly 70%" said NO SUCH RESTRICTIONS. It wasn't literally a vote for or against a Costco, and anyone who wants to publicly comment on such a formal proposal can still show up to City Council meetings to share those viewpoints. And in that regard, nothing has changed in the democratic process.


16 people like this
Posted by res1
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Jan 9, 2017 at 1:24 pm

res1 is a registered user.

Wonder how many votes the challenger of Thorne would have received if just the city clerk did not stop her from getting her ballot statement published. The ballot statement is a huge thing in local elections.

On Costco, I hope the council pays attention to that campaign, especially the subsidizing negotiations. I believe a lot of people voted No on MM because they were told that the the negotiations were not a done deal


Like this comment
Posted by Common Sense
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 9, 2017 at 1:53 pm

Common Sense is a registered user.

@ res1

Lick your wounds and move along...

Thorne's challenger can't even get her act together to meet a deadline so that says a lot about her. I wouldn't want someone like that for a mayor. So, no point wondering what may be.

On Costco, I believe a lot of people voted No on MM because they want Costco. I know I did and many of my neighbors voted No mainly for Costco. One of my neighbors who haven't voted for years went to the ballot box just to vote No on MM for Costco. So, no need speculating.


14 people like this
Posted by Matt Sullivan
a resident of Stoneridge
on Jan 9, 2017 at 2:12 pm

Matt Sullivan is a registered user.

PLSN and “Common Sense”,

In the three “town hall” meetings held for Costco – with over 100 attendees at the first two and 250 at the last – many people asked the city staff about the subsidies. They at first denied there would be subsidies and later backtracked and said “there is no deal”. Pleasanton Citizens for Responsible Growth submitted a California public records act request that revealed emails and other documents describing a “deal” for over $20 million in taxpayer subsidies to offset infrastructure costs normally paid for by developers. There were also documents outlining the city’s complicity with Costco, Nearon, and the Chamber of Commerce to undermine the Yes on MM campaign. If that’s not an attack on democracy, I don’t know what is. And it is a false argument to say that the deal is not “approved”. A city manager would never negotiate something like this unless he knew he had the votes. You can read these documents yourself on the PCRG Facebook page here: Web Link

I wonder how many of the people that voted NO would have done so if they knew the extent of the subsidies? Like I said before, an educated populace is necessary for a functioning democracy. When our elected representatives and appointed civil servants work to undermine this we have no democracy.


2 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 9, 2017 at 2:16 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Agree here too on Costco specifically. We want it. All but one of my neighbors want it, and other friends who live in Pleasanton want it. I was simply reminding Matt that democracy is alive and well - and that there was no conspiracy around "withholding information" for the vote on MM. It wasn't a City initiative or legally an explicit vote on Costco. Once it was filed for the ballot, the City agreed to "hold" on it and remain silent until after the election. Now the City can go back to the usual process of public Planning and Council meetings.

That said, yes, I think most who voted No on MM specifically want the Costco.


5 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 9, 2017 at 2:40 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Matt,
You don't think the hundreds of thousands of dollars Black Tie and Cox spent on "educating" people was sufficient? Signs everywhere and articles/forums/nextdoor all lit up with discussions?

People want the Costco. I know that's hard for the minority here to appreciate. [White Working Class folks voted for Trump over their own self-interests - and that's hard for me to understand too (talk about a mis-information campaign).] But the election is over. And you need to stop re-arguing it.

Now, that said, Pleasanton citizens have an opportunity - forward looking - to attend Council meetings and be heard by their legally (and overwhelmingly)-elected representatives if they want to. But when something gets 63% of the vote, it's a decisive win. And no matter how stupid or uninformed you think people are, it's democracy that lets them vote that way! :-)


3 people like this
Posted by PLSN Resident
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 9, 2017 at 2:51 pm

PLSN Resident is a registered user.

Oh, and one other thing about Mayor Thorne's challenger. I attended one of the forums and heard her respond to the various questions. I went in with an open mind and came away thoroughly un-impressed. I didn't think she had the skills, intellect, or experience necessary to effectively run the city council or lead on all the complex issues we face.

Frankly, in the context of 2016 -- the year of the protest vote (Brexit, Trump, etc) -- the fact that Testa got only 37% (almost 2:1 defeat) shows it was not a significant signal at all. In a normal election mentality she probably would have gotten far less.


28 people like this
Posted by Julie Testa
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Jan 9, 2017 at 6:23 pm

Julie Testa is a registered user.

Only one person posting here had the fortitude to step out from behind their computer when it was clear Thorne would otherwise go unchallenged. I did not run for self promotion, nor was running an easy decision to make knowing I would make myself a target, winning was not my motivation.
I do not feel that I lost, I accomplished what I intended to do. I denied Mayor Thorne the claim of a mandate that everyone is happy with the pro-growth agenda that is influencing Pleasanton's city council. I gave voters a choice, an opportunity to send a message.

11,777 Pleasanton residents (close to 40% of the voters) had the opportunity to say they are not happy. While not enough to unseat the mayor it is a statement that the mayor should be thoughtful of. It is true Thorne had clear advantages; he had the power of the incumbency, was well funded, and the city clerk wrongly blocked my candidate statement. Everyone of those 11,777 votes was a statement of concern over traffic, school overcrowding, water shortages, a clear plea for slow growth.

While I am qualified to do the job, I would be happy to support a mayor who will fight to preserve the quality of life that most of us moved her for, what we treasure about Pleasanton. I hope Mayor Thorne and our city council will fight for our community over special interest pressures.

Julie Testa

I filed my statement of intent to run for mayor in a legally timely manner, I met all requirements, the city clerk was in error when she denied my candidate statement. Because the city refused my informal appeal I was forced to seek an opinion from the court. The court's opinion was that I was in compliance, the city clerk should have accepted my statement, but it was too late to remedy the error.


3 people like this
Posted by Jack
a resident of Downtown
on Jan 9, 2017 at 7:42 pm

Jack is a registered user.

Mayor Thorne,
In your statement you profess to be "fiscally prudent with the use of taxpayer revenues," and then later in the paragraph you use the phrase, "creatively help finance." "Creative financing" and "prudent financial management" are on opposite ends of the spectrum...
And while we're here, I think it is shameful that the City had to "pass the hat" and collect cash from youth sports groups to construct the parks at Bernal. If we are so fiscally sound, we should be able to afford to build our own parks...


2 people like this
Posted by SHale
a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 9, 2017 at 8:25 pm

SHale is a registered user.

I think over 60% voted no on MM was they wanted a Costco; didn't give a fig if Black Tie lost their FREE parking or if the gas stations suddenly had competition. Let's not forgot who funded MM to begin with.
And let's not forgot no lease or contract has been signed. And that the landlord signs a lease with a tenant, not the City.
And over 60% voted for the incumbent Mayor, well because he was the incumbent and that 60% weren't quite as vocal and negative as the comments here were and are.
Just like we are about to have Trump as Prez y'all should move on; election is over; voting is over.


1 person likes this
Posted by Karl Aitken
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Jan 11, 2017 at 5:42 pm

Karl Aitken is a registered user.

Once again Mr. Sullivan tells the people who did not vote the way he wanted that they are a bunch of stupid, ignorant people. The reality is many people just don't agree with him.


2 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Jan 11, 2017 at 6:00 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

Matt Sullivan:

Quoting you: Michael Austin, "you also seem to forget that despite MM the council still needs to approve the project".

Mat, during the campaign on Measure MM, my argument all along was:

"THERE IS NO DEAL".


2 people like this
Posted by SHale
a resident of San Ramon
on Jan 11, 2017 at 7:33 pm

SHale is a registered user.

No signed contract either. the city also does not determine tenant; the landlord does. City is not a party to the lease.
anyway, doesn't matter case closed -- election happened.
for those few vocal posters, PLEASE show up at city or planning dept meetings to voice your concerns. Posting only here does nothing.


3 people like this
Posted by Get the Facts
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jan 11, 2017 at 9:44 pm

Get the Facts is a registered user.

"Once again Mr. Sullivan tells the people who did not vote the way he wanted that they are a bunch of stupid, ignorant people."

Karl, I just re-read the post by Matt Sullivan, and did not say the word "stupid" or "ignorant". Please do not put words in his - or anyone's - mouth.


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

Email:


To post your comment, please login or register at the top of the page. This topic is only for those who have signed up to participate by providing their email address and establishing a screen name.

Assemblyman proposes driving up housing costs to delight unions
By Tim Hunt | 3 comments | 2,236 views

“Give Me Liberty AND Give Me Death”?
By Tom Cushing | 7 comments | 587 views

My New Letter to President Trump
By Roz Rogoff | 6 comments | 519 views

Scholarships help us honor, remember Ryan Comer
By Jeb Bing | 0 comments | 176 views

 

2017 guide to summer camps

Looking for something for the kids to do this summer, learn something new and have fun? The 2017 Summer Camp Guide features local camps for all ages and interests.

Find Camps Here