Town Square

Post a New Topic

Recall Jennifer Hosterman?

Original post made by Jimmy, Country Fair, on Jun 20, 2008

Is there a campaign to recall Mayor Jennifer Hosterman? I ran across a website called recall jenniferhosterman dot com (Web Link).

I know a lot of my friends are real angry with her since she was once a slow-growth environmentalist and now she has flipped-flopped and is approving these developments that are cutting our hills down. She seems to be working real closely with Tom Pico, once a slow-growth official and now a consultant to the developers. One of my friends think they work together as a team as she is now the insider. So far she is two for two in approving Mr. Pico's developments that cut down hills and cut down many oak trees.



Comments (33)

 +   Like this comment
Posted by Wish I would have voted for Ayala
a resident of Bridle Creek
on Jun 21, 2008 at 10:23 pm

There should be. She has lost her way. Home Depot in the middle of town? A SECOND Home Depot? She is seriously a tool of the big money developers and Thorne and Cook-Callio should be recalled with her.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by How Strange
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 22, 2008 at 9:44 pm

Interesting that there were some good posts on this, and some other topics, but the weekly staff did not agree with the comments so they were deleted. None of the posts I saw seemed inappropriate. Unless inappropriate means "contrary to the views of the weekly."


 +   Like this comment
Posted by iwastheretoo
a resident of Amador Estates
on Jun 23, 2008 at 9:30 am

It is the same reason that this blog does not appear on the home page. If you think Jennifer Hosterman is in the pocket of the developers, try the weekly.

It was great to see Jennifer opposed the petitition because it does not protect the southeast hills. I see...and putting million dollars homes up there does? Politics...gotta love 'em.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by iwastheretoo
a resident of Amador Estates
on Jun 23, 2008 at 11:05 am

Typical weekly...not on the home page...until you complain...let's see how long this lasts.

The council has clearly drifted pro growth. With Cheryl, Jerry and surprisingly Jennifer. Why is it a surprise? In her first campaign, she ran as the slow growth candidate and condemmed Kay for her vote on the waterslides. But now, with her ambition for higher office being fueled by developer money, she has little choice.

We need to balance out the council. Not necessarily a 'no growth' person but a moderate or slow growth person. Rumors abound that the COC will be sponsoring a candidate to take on Matt. No one wants to challenge Cindy but who will challenge Jennifer if she doesn't get recalled first? Should be a very interesting campaign season.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by How Strange
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 23, 2008 at 4:35 pm

I see that all the posts about Angela Ramirez being Jennifer's Campaign Consultant, and Cheryl Cook-Kallio's Campaign Manager, and Jim Tong's Consultant have been removed. When a paid political consultant works for two elected officials and a major hilltop developer in town, you know something is up. Being that Jerry Thorne is heavily involved in the Chamber of Commerce pro-development camp, we should assume that he is pro-development also.

Did the Weekly remove the posts about Angela because possibly Angela has a financial connection for the Weekly also?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gina Channell-Allen
president of the Pleasanton Weekly
on Jun 23, 2008 at 4:47 pm

Gina Channell-Allen is a registered user.

No posts have been removed from this thread.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Dorothy
a resident of Mohr Park
on Jun 23, 2008 at 6:31 pm

Angela Ramirez's involvement in anyone's campaign would be enough reason to vote against that candidate; she is manipulative and underhanded. How ironic that she was a Government teacher at Dublin High School until her disruptive behaivor and unfair treatment of "selected" students caused the Administration to release her and not renew her contract for the following year. I am truly surprised that any candidate would want her negative energy on their team!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by frank
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Jun 23, 2008 at 8:40 pm

Read this above thread and tell me if I'm wrong.

All this Ayala group does is attack everybody and denigrate them. Even the PW must defend itself from time to time, like above.

These folks must be graduates of Republican attack machine school. Spread all kinds of accusations about certain people and demonfy them at every opportunity. Repeat this often enough and people come to believe. After all, they will say to themselves, "where there is smoke, there must be fire".

I see this going on as clear as day. Since Hillary bowed out and Barack became the fixed target, all I get is these "attack machine" emails that my naive friends and relatives forward to me believing the content describing how Barack is a Muslim and is ready to do nasty to America if elected. It reminds me of Ayala's group!

It's so laughable to read how straight shooting Jerry Thorne and teacher mom Cook-Callio are now sinister politicians, as well as the evil Hostermann with the evil Ramirez actually being the "(wo)man behind the curtain". Wow!

(I am the real frank of Pleasanton Heights. To confirm go to Web Link and there you will see a copy of this post. This IP address is mine. Any other IP address is a counterfeit.)


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Gwen
a resident of Kottinger Ranch
on Jun 23, 2008 at 9:45 pm

Frank, you are just as guilty of attacking people. You, and the Weekly, call the Save Pleasanton Hills Initiative the "Ayala Initiative". It is not the Ayala Initiative. There are several people who are proponents of the initiative, many people collected signatures, and 5,000 people signed it. You, and the Weekly, go ahead and attack a single person trying to discredit her. It is the "if you cannot find a better message, attack the messenger."

When Jerry Thorne worked on a sport field initiative, it was not called "The Thorne Initiative". When Brozosky and Arkin worked on the bernal park initiative, it was not called "The Brozosky and/or Arkin Initiative". Why now is the Save Pleasanton Hills Initiative called the "Ayala Initiative"? You are are guilty of attacking and trying to discredit an individual. Your first line of your post shows this.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jack
a resident of Downtown
on Jun 25, 2008 at 5:58 am

Recall Jennifer Hosterman? Why don't we just hold an election for mayor in November?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Betty
a resident of Canyon Meadows
on Jun 26, 2008 at 10:02 am


Frank you have been spanked....Gwen is right on this.

I like most of your posts but to attack others for attacking is disingenuous when you often attack others.
Sorry I did not mean to attack you, please don't attack me.









 +   Like this comment
Posted by frank
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Jun 26, 2008 at 10:49 pm

Betty and Gwen:

I just checked in and found that you say things about me that I suppose you cannot support. Show me wrong.

Where did I say:

"You, and the Weekly, call the Save Pleasanton Hills Initiative the "Ayala Initiative"."

I talked about the "Ayala group". That's my only reference in my blog.

Please explain your accusations that I am attacking someone. Explain why you say what you say. Simply because I don't agree with your viewpoint does not mean I am attacking anyone personally. Is Ayala not supported by a group of supporters?

Yet the earlier posts specifically accuse Hostermann, Kallio, Thorne, and Ramirez of consorting with your enemies, by innuendo or otherwise direct reference. And the PW corrected untrue statements that were made about removing posts. All of these accusations are unsubstantiated and are slanderous and potentially libelous. But, they are normally protected under free speech rights, so these people get away with it.

On the other hand I mentioned Ayala's name. And then I am attacked by you. Please quote something I wrote that is equivalent to the items I pointed out.

I am open to accepting apologizes, but don't accept BS about unsubstantiated accusations.

(I am the real frank of Pleasanton Heights. To confirm go to Web Link and there you will see a copy of this post. This IP address is mine. Any other IP address is a counterfeit.)


 +   Like this comment
Posted by frank
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Jun 26, 2008 at 10:54 pm

web link is

Web Link

Unwieldy web site to prove who you are.............

and you can be anything.... even the neighbor's dog with a paw on the keyboard...


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 26, 2008 at 11:02 pm

Gwen is right. It isn't the Ayala initiative. It's the Ayala, Resnick, and Brown initiative.

*duck*


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Timothy T
a resident of Downtown
on Jun 28, 2008 at 9:47 am

Why would you ever do a recall for Mayor in this town when we vote for a new one every 2 years? Which is about how long a recall takes to organize.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Disgusted Pleasantonian
a resident of Kottinger Ranch
on Jun 28, 2008 at 11:53 am

The actions of Jennifer, Jerry and Cheryl are so transparently on the side of deep-pocketed developers who make big campaign donations, it is unbelieveable. How can they think we all can't see this. All three need to be be voted out of office. They show total contempt for the efforts of the citizens. An initiative with the support of over 5000 voters was undermined by the vote of 3 council members. Our City Manager suggested they leave the initiaive on the ballet with no further action, but these three trump up lame excuses to put a competing ballot on the measure.

The intitiative's ordinance was simple and to the point. No need to allow the developer's to weaken a alternative measure that will not give the same protection to our few remaining pristine ridgelines.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Greg
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jun 28, 2008 at 2:44 pm

Disgusted Pleasantonian,
Have you forgotten that the largest single checks to ever be accepted from a developer were accepted by Brian Arkin and Steve Brozosky? In fact, Brian accepted a $10,000 check from someone who had a project before the Planning Commission. Interesting that he resigned from the Planning Commission shortly after.
And let's not forget that Steve raised more money from developers that anyone else has ever raised. He raised $80,000 mostly from the business community and developers.
If you oppose the Initiative that the Council puts on the ballot, campaign against it on the merits and stop this Karl Rove style of character assasination politics. It can backfire on you.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Patriot
a resident of Oak Hill
on Jun 28, 2008 at 2:57 pm

I hope for our sakes that there is a recall. She needs to do Pleasanton business and not promote her liberal agenda. Remember her sanctuary city idea for illegals; now the latest anti american policies and short sighted energy plan and her signing on to the liberal agenda at the Mayors conference. She believes she is above the laws; what about her bird of prey in city limits?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 28, 2008 at 4:51 pm

The proponents of the initiative would have everyone believe that their opponents are all pro-growth and pro-developer, but when one looks closely, the people involved on both sides are all slow-growth to no-growth people. Is it expected of everyone to honestly believe that Dolores Bengston is suddenly a pro-growth, pro-developer person because she publicly stated that she is against this initiative? It is amazing how people who have the same goal are so unwilling to work together. I think Thorne put it best during the Council meeting on Thursday when he said this issue is only as divisive as people want to make it. One of the proponents invoked the "you're either with us or against us" meme at the Council meeting. It seems to me like the initiative proponents want to be as divisive as possible!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 28, 2008 at 5:03 pm

The proponents of the initiative show total contempt for the spirit of the US Constitution. They want to use the power of the fourth branch of government in order to create laws that impose upon the rights of property owners. The Save Pleasanton Hills and Housing Cap Initiative is nothing short of a thinly disguised attempt to prevent development in Oak Grove. Protecting the ridgelines and tightening up the housing unit definition was always secondary to the primary goal of the Save Pleasanton Hills group. Trying to take away the Lins' land through legislation without just compensation is called Communism. It is unbelievable how the proponents think we can't all see this.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by City of Planned Progress is supposed to mean something
a resident of Jensen Tract
on Jun 28, 2008 at 6:52 pm

How can the nearly successful attempt to put a SECOND Home Depot in the center of town be seen as anything but pro developer? Thank goodness we have citizens like Nancy Allen and Kay Ayala watching this bunch and holding their feet to the fire. There are also many others who have selflessly supported the efforts of Allen and Alaya whom I thank. I can understand Thorne but how Hosterman and Pico turned so shamelessly pro-developer I will never understand. Actually, I understand it - money talks.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 28, 2008 at 7:32 pm

The Stop Pleasanton Gridlock group was highly successful in doing the research to find the facts that showed that the Home Depot project was NOT beneficial to Pleasanton. Additionally, all that was done WITHOUT clipboard politics nor with false accusations and character assassination.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by City of Planned Progress is supposed to mean something
a resident of Jensen Tract
on Jun 28, 2008 at 8:01 pm

What you call "clipboard politics" is acually called the referendum process, a legal and necessary part of our democracy and State Constitution. I can't believe anyone could be against this most basic form of democracy just because you disagree with the subject matter. You and frank from Pleasanton Heights can just vote against it. As far as character assasantion, Hosterman and Pico have taken care of that themselves with their own shamelessly pro-developer actions which are part of the public record for anyone to see.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jun 28, 2008 at 8:15 pm

To City of Planned Progress is supposed to mean something,

The character assassination comment wasn't directed at you.

Also, I'm not against the process because I disagree with the subject matter. I'm against the process because it is a form of "tyranny of the majority". The Founding Fathers were highly concerned with "majority rules" considering that all Greek democracies failed because of it.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mary
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 1, 2008 at 8:38 pm

Stacey, Dolores Bengston has actually been pretty consistantly in the pro-growth side of things in Pleasanton. I remember her campaigning strongly against the initiative that would not allow houses in the Bernal Park and she has sided on the pro-growth side of Oak Grove and the Initiative.

As somebody who talked with the Stop Pleasanton Gridlock team, the only reason the Council did not approve the second Home Depot (Actually they approved it but put off the vote of the required second reading) was the people against Home Depot already had a referendum drawn up and were going to circulate that. This was during the time that this initiative and the Oak Grove referendum was being circulated so the Council decided to not vote on Home Depot since they did not want yet another referendum out there. Two referendums at the same time would surely be seen as a referendum on the Council.

I can't wait to be able to see all the campaign contributions online. I picked up a copy of the 2004 Election financing documens when Hosterman ran against Ayala and was surprised to see that Hosterman had half of her donations from developers. I guess this is the price we pay. Elections cost a lot of money now. The biggest special interest we have in Pleasanton now is the Chamber of Commerce PAC. Their donations are a who's who of developers. A developer donating to the Chamber PAC gets a double-benefit. They can somewhat hide that they gave to a candidate (even if the Chamber gives money to a candidate), plus that donation entitles them to have the Chamber lobby for their projects. So they have the candidate in their bag and the Chamber. Both entities want more money and would not want to tick off a major campaign contributor.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Nicole
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 1, 2008 at 9:19 pm

Did anyone check to see where Brozosky got his money? Also check to see how many people gave to all the candidates running for office. That is very typical because all contributors want access.

One council candidate last time (Arkin) received $10,000 from ONE developer and then resigned from the planning commission so that there would be NO CONFLICT if he happened to be elected to the City Council when the project was advanced. Oh yes, he was the one talking about council members taking developer contributions during the last council meeting.

Does anyone really think that people can be bought that cheaply, that people would put themselves through this kind of scrutiny for what? Power? Greed? Really?

Maybe there are people out there who want to serve. Wouldn't we be lucky if that was the case?


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Stacey
a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Jul 1, 2008 at 10:18 pm

I highly doubt that the threat of referendum is the sole reason why the Council turned down the Home Depot project! After City staff came back with better data, any citizen with remedial math skills could figure out that the project was bad for the City!


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Nancy
a resident of Downtown
on Jul 1, 2008 at 11:47 pm

FYI: Jennifer Hosterman has never been endorsed by the Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce PAC and they have never given her money. Maybe this election?

Mary: Why did you skip the 2006 Mayoral Election of Hosterman vs. Brozosky? Inconvenient? Proof that in fact most developer money went to Brozosky...a campaign of $80,000.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Mr. Wilson
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 2, 2008 at 7:46 am

Based on the critical thinking patterns of our Mayor, the lack of experience,communication and perhaps just not knowing or trusting persons with information that might lead to better solutions/outcomes for our City is lacking. There was not critical thinking associated with the Home Depot process. Only those persons, outside City government, cultivated a thought process worth pursuing. Kottinger Park wasn't as bad but the lack of critical thinking was present. Catching deer in my headlights driving down Kottinger Ave. leads me to believe that we may get more than we bargained for somewhere down the road. How many student classes participated in understanding how and why Kottinger was being transformed?
Stacey, what original data was used to receive a 4-1 vote approval on the Home Depot project? The City and the Council lacked any critical thinking prior to citizen group. Like the Mayor said, It looks good!
I need to find Dennis, always getting in trouble. Later


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Peter
a resident of Ruby Hill
on Jul 2, 2008 at 8:56 am

Mary,
When Steve Brozosky raised $80,000 mostly from developers, not one dime came from the Chamber of Commerce. Your theory does not hold water.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by James
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 2, 2008 at 11:18 am

If Jennifer Hosterman and Cheryl Cook-Kallio should be recalled for being influenced by Angela(whoever she is) then
how about Cindy McGovern who gets her marching orders from Ayala/Brozosky, et al.


 +   Like this comment
Posted by duh!
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Jul 2, 2008 at 10:40 pm

If the proponents of the initiative really wanted to protect the hills they would do what Cook-Kallio suggested at the meeting, join in a council sponsored measure that would make clear the protection, not create more problems than it solved with this unclear initiative language. That is, if their intention is to really protect the hills.

Why be defensive if the goal is the same? Thorne was right on, too.
Really if community is what we are about then all should be moving in the same direction.

However, if the motivation is something different. . .?????


 +   Like this comment
Posted by Jeb Bing
editor of the Pleasanton Weekly
on Jul 6, 2008 at 11:27 am

Jeb Bing is a registered user.

These comments have run their course. Thanks for posting.


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

Email:


Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Not Endorsements
By Roz Rogoff | 7 comments | 1,185 views

A second half of life exceptionally well lived
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 615 views