News


Meet the candidates tonight at Pleasanton Weekly candidates forum

2 mayoral candidates, 3 for City Council will share views, answer questions

Candidates for Pleasanton mayor and the City Council will face off tonight at a community forum being hosted by the Pleasanton Weekly. The forum comes none too soon. The Alameda County Registrar of Voters' Office will mail sample ballots to voters on Oct. 10. Voters who have registered to vote by mail can cast their ballots immediately.

Doors will open at 6 p.m. Monday for the two-hour forum, which will be held in the City Council chamber in the Pleasanton Civic Center, 200 Old Bernal Ave. The two candidates for mayor will lead off at 6:30 p.m., with the three council candidates following at 7:30 p.m.

Those attending the forum will be given cards as they enter, which they can use to write out their questions for the candidates. The moderators of the forum, Pleasanton Weekly Publisher Gina Channell and Editor Jeb Bing, will ask the candidates to answer as many of those questions, along with others as time permits. The candidates will have time for brief opening and closing remarks, but they will not see any questions in advance.

The candidates are Mayor Jerry Thorne, who is seeking re-election to a third two-year term, and challenger Julie Testa. The three candidates seeking the two available seats on the council are incumbents Karla Brown and Jerry Pentin and challenger Herb Ritter, who is chairman of the city's Planning Commission.

Voters will have the opportunity to hear each candidate first-hand. They will face questions about community priorities, including traffic, transportation, water, workforce housing, the proposed construction of a new civic center and library and what they envision in a new downtown specific plan.

They will also be asked to give their views on Measure MM, the initiative on the Nov. 8 ballot that would restrict commercial zoning on a section of Johnson Drive to retail stores no larger than 50,000 square feet. If approved, the measure would block an expected future bid by Costco to build a 140,000 square foot store.

Each of these candidates also will be profiled in the Pleasanton Weekly and online at www.pleasantonweekly.com on Oct. 7. We will make our endorsements of city candidates on Oct. 14, with endorsements of Pleasanton school board candidates to follow on Oct. 21.

Comments

12 people like this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 19, 2016 at 10:09 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

I moved to this town in 1992 after watching a news story about 'this town building a school before the students needed it.

1991 Pleasanton Middle school opened before we had students to fill it. It was done because the city council at the time saw the need. Not only was that school quickly filled we built a third middle school in 2001 Hart middle school.

Our previous city leaders had foresight to see the needs and the community supported that. Now they manipulate our votes in scare tactics based on THEIR oversights! The tennis park for example! We need Costco for funding for the tennis park? Really? Maybe if you didn't squander the money we voted to GIVE you for these things you wouldn't have a budget shortfall? Maybe STOP giving incentives to developers who don't give anything back and you wouldn't have these shortfalls!?!

Now our schools over crowded and we had to hold fund raisers to keep the class sizes down. That CLEARLY states what the community priority is. Not lining the personal pockets of city leaders. Bring BACK school busses that take 50 kids to school instead of 50 cars dropping off their kids. Connect iron horse trail so people like me could safely ride a bike to work. Stop focusing on urban sprawl that pollutes our town.

Traffic is horrible. I have a 2.4 mile mile commute and have to leave my house at 7:25 in order to get to work at 7:45, if I leave at 7:35 I would get there at 8:15. (Have to start at 8 so obviously 7:35 isn't an option) Seriously that is 20 minutes to drive 2.4 miles? And 40 minutes if I leave 10 minutes later.

Don't even get me started about the Stoneridge cut through!

We need to invest the 5 million our CURRENT business owners have spent on "traffic mitigation" to actually DEAL with our CURRENT traffic issues BEFORE we even think about adding to them.

Why PAY money to make traffic WORSE courting a business that takes from our community rather than gives back. We should be using the money OUR current loyal business owners have INVESTED in keeping things flowing smoothly here. They have invested that money trusting our leaders to use it appropriately, obviously that trust was misguided.

Sorry for my long winded post but very frustrated with our city leaders right now. They are more interested in their own special interests than that of the good of the city. I have been reading quietly but attending city meetings obviously attending meetings and speaking isn't making our leaders listen maybe typing here will. (Yes I am register with my legal name and my physical address)

Yes on MM, yes on Karla Brown and yes in anyone who asking fiscally responsible questions!


5 people like this
Posted by Time for a Change
a resident of Mission Park
on Sep 19, 2016 at 11:16 pm

Time for a Change is a registered user.

@ Kris Thompson - you are totally confused

You do know that the city and the school district are separate entities, right? So the city council cannot make a new school.. or even decide to build a new school.. that rests entirely with the school district.

So if anyone on the city council promises new schools, they are selling something they cannot deliver. Only the school district can give you that. So if you are upset about class sizes or school crowding, you do know to contact the school district - right?

I'm not sure why or how you think Costco and the tennis park have any intersection. I feel like you took all the headlines for the past 6 months and jumbled them all up in one long comment, without any logical connection.

It seems fitting you are voting for Karla Brown. She does that a lot too.



2 people like this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:01 am

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

@time for a change I was referencing the argument against MM and the saying they need the funding for the tennis parks


2 people like this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:03 am

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

Not confused at all... just like Karla Brown voters. Just stating facts...


1 person likes this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:08 am

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

According to the CITY council claims they need the funding from
Costco to fund projects they have already committed to. Under the assumption they hadn't already committed to costco yet their arguments FOR say they have... just saying....


2 people like this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:11 am

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

Just quoting the city's argument FOR Costco... they need the money to complete projects they claimed to have money to compete prior to Costco.


5 people like this
Posted by John
a resident of Las Positas
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:23 am

quote from the September 2015 Supplemental Environmental Impact Report, regarding the Costco Option in the Johnson Drive Economic Development Zone.

Item C: Issues For Concern

The analysis in this SEIR indicates that development facilitated by the EDZ would generate air emissions that would result in a net increase of pollutants which would conflict with implementation of the applicable air quality plan AND increased traffic which would affect levels of service for freeway ramps at merge/ diverge areas within I- 680.

These impacts would be significant and unavoidable, even after incorporation of mitigation measures. As a result, issues related to air quality and transportation and traffic impacts are potential areas of controversy.
Impacts significant and unavoidable to traffic and air quality. Are these what we want for our city?


9 people like this
Posted by LongTimer
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Sep 20, 2016 at 7:01 am

I attended the forum last night - my first time at one of these. A couple of thoughts:

1. Testa should be running for school board, not for Mayor. Her entire platform seems to focus on school overcrowding.
2. None of the city council candidates are for runaway growth, but Pentin and Ritter understand the need to plan for the future and look at all options, while Brown would rather not plan at all.
3. Pentin and Ritter both stressed that whatever is brought to city council will be reviewed with the goal of what would benefit the majority of Pleasanton.
4. Interesting about the 2 tennis courts and the lessons learned about how to get more community input on projects. I hope all mayoral and city council candidates take note. It is important to get input from all residents.

After hearing from all candidates, my vote is for Thorne, Pentin and Ritter. I like Ritter's community and professional experience and Pentin's knowledgeable analysis of the issues.


4 people like this
Posted by huh?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 7:26 am

Could someone please post the argument against MM where it says money is needed for tennis courts? I had understood the tennis courts had full funding, including a contract was signed, but now its just a question where they get located in the park.

I agree Julie Testa sounded like she was running for the school board. At one point when she was answering a question, there was a noticeable comment through the audience that this wasn't about the election for school board. Her answers generally lacked substance (lack of knowledge) so all she could talk about is schools.


5 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 8:24 am

BobB is a registered user.

@huh,

MM and the tennis court issue aren't tied together at all. This was confused by Kris Thompson above. The tennis court issue was not about funding it was what to do with part of the tennis park. Some residents wanted to keep using it as open space rather than tennis.


9 people like this
Posted by local
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Sep 20, 2016 at 8:28 am

While the city cannot force the building of a school, the maximum size of the schools are defined in the general plan and the city can deny applications or halt permits if the minimum requirements of the general plan are not in place. In fact the city has done this before. Maybe in the 90's they would not issue new permits until the next school was complete as they knew there was no place for those new students to go.

I for one am for Karla. I do not like Pentin or Ritter wanting to plan residential units in the east side. We had a major building spree recently with this council/planning commission and we should let things settle down for a bit so we see the actual impacts. The east side is currently zoned for recreation, open space, and institutional. I see no reason to change the zoning. The previous city planners have already planned this area and I don't see people in the city saying "you know, we need a lot more housing in Pleasanton as the streets are underutilized and the schools have plenty of room." The previous city leaders knew that if the population of Pleasanton got over 70,000 that the infrastructure planned for could not handle it all. Before the housing cap the city leaders want to limit population in Pleasanton so the infrastructure could handle the population and give us a certain quality of life but they were told you cannot limit population but you can put in a housing cap. That is why we had the housing cap. I understand that the State is forcing us to go over what we planned for but that does not mean we should exceed what the state is demanding by converting our open space/recreational land to more housing. By planning for housing in the east side, like Ridder & Pentin are advocating for, that gives certain additional rights to the property owners there which we do not need.

If you really want to see which candidates want more housing you only need to see who is being endorsed by the chamber of commerce. The chamber has been consistent in ONLY supporting candidates who advocate for more housing in Pleasanton and in fact the chamber worked with the groups to get rid of our housing cap.

If you want a lot more housing and congestion in Pleasanton, vote for Ridder and Pentin. If not, vote for Karla Brown.


8 people like this
Posted by negligence
a resident of Amador Estates
on Sep 20, 2016 at 9:04 am

Section 19.36 of the Pleasanton Municipal Code concerns school facilities for subdivisions. For every 600 familites an elementary school of 10 acres with adjacent park facilities will be constructed. The city officials have not constructed an elementary school in about 20 years. The city officials have not constructed a neighborhood park with a subdivision in about 20 years. The last I remember was the Bernal Property with the Greenbriar subdivision that was approved in the mid 1990s. Instead the school district has let the developers off the hook, sold all school designated property to developers or intends to sell it to developers, makes promises to build schools like Neal that they fail to build, all the while squandering school,impact fees and paying their enormous legal fees.

Meanwhile they have these reports called Demographer Reports that are used as a mechanism to insist the schools aren't overcrowded at all, while using them to refinance their existing loans to increase the debt that is needed to be paid off, and at the same time refusing to do even minimum maintenance on school facilities. They don't have the classroom Facilities to have 20 students per class in grades k through 3 and lie that CSR is too expensive to implement but in reality they have run out of space.

Meanwhile like in PAUSD, PUSD is in declining enrollment because parents have chosen to pull their kids out of the overcrowded and atrocious schools and send them to school somewhere else.

And e high school situation is another can of worms. The city sold off the property for a third high school with the school district both on the Sycamore and Busch property. Now housing lines the streets where schools were supposed to go.


10 people like this
Posted by Julie
a resident of Birdland
on Sep 20, 2016 at 9:28 am

[Removed] Check the map. Most of that land is COUNTY land. And guess what. It's zoned residential. And there's a county general plan. The county would have allowed its annexation with the East Side plan but all you fools who listen to Karla believed that it would stay parks if the task force fell apart. And so it did. If you think the developer is going to lay low just because Karla said he would , I have a bridge to sell you.

Karla is full of lies and half truths and will say anything to get you to vote for her. The east side debacle is just one example.


5 people like this
Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 10:01 am

BobB is a registered user.

@negligance,

"PUSD is in declining enrollment because parents have chosen to pull their kids out of the overcrowded and atrocious schools and send them to school somewhere else."

Wouldn't declining enrollment lead to less crowded schools?


11 people like this
Posted by "Repurposing"
a resident of Canyon Creek
on Sep 20, 2016 at 10:43 am

The push by Real Estate developers is larger class sizes so that school sites can be closed with kids packed into remaining sites like sardines and so called "surplus" sites can be sold for more housing. See this testimonial video from this real estate firm. Web Link

The other strategy is for school districts to offload property and property costs to the city government so that your tax dollars allocated to city governments in fact are diverted to school districts Ina shell game. The school districts then lease the property from another government entity, increase class sizes, spend more money on District bureaucrats and consultants, or take out debt called Certificates of Participation.

Then although there is supposed to be no more housing outside the urban growth boundary that Pleasanton voters enacted in 1996 and Alameda County voters adopted in 2000, bureaucrats like Nelson Fiahlo push forward to build more houses outside of the urban growth boundary and the developer-ruled Pro Growth city council and mayor fall into line.

Meanwhile the schools decline and the community declines. Pretty soon, Pleasanton will resemble Hayward or San Leandro and people will get fed up and leave.


10 people like this
Posted by Nan
a resident of Rosewood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 12:13 pm

Nan is a registered user.

Lots of talk about lots of subjects.

I want Karla! We don't need another Council member voting with the developers and Chamber! Four is enough!


5 people like this
Posted by huh?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 1:35 pm

I still haven't seen Kris Thompson post any link where Costco is needed to provide funding for tennis courts. I believe the reference was actually to major projects such as the library.

There was a new park created with the subdivision just west of 680 on the Bernal Park in the early 2000's. There is also a small new park with the apartments built across from the Hacienda Bart station. And then there is Phase II of the Bernal property plus the new dog park.

If you check voting records, I think you will find that Councilwoman Brown actually voted for more housing that Councilman Pentin. Councilwoman Brown voted no for the 25 houses on the church property with Councilman Pentin voting yes. Councilwoman Brown voted yes for the 177 apartments on West Las Positas with Councilman Pentin voting no. Councilwoman Brown voted no on the 43 homes in Lund Ranch. Councilman Pentin had to recuse himself on Lund Ranch. (It should be noted that citizens reaffimed Council's approval of the 43 homes at Lund Ranch via measure K.) All other votes by both of them were in the affirmative. So net Councilwoman Brown voted for 177 apartments - 25 homes or for a total of 152 homes. Councilman Pentin voted for 25 homes - 177 apartments or 152 homes fewer than Councilwoman Brown. So anyone say she is the slow growth candidate is actually not correct--that label should go to Councilman Pentin.

My point here is the spin being put out by Brown's supporter's is not borne out by the facts.


5 people like this
Posted by local
a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Sep 20, 2016 at 2:06 pm

If Pentin was really the slow growth candidate, then the chamber of development would not be supporting him.


7 people like this
Posted by Nan
a resident of Rosewood
on Sep 20, 2016 at 8:35 pm

Nan is a registered user.

No way I'm voting for Ritter. One week he says Costco saves 4,000,000 miles. The next week it's 5,000,000. Did he study the Traffic reports done by the city? These numbers aren't correct! Made up.

Then he says no one interested in Johnson Drive property except Costco. He must think we are not very bright.

Chamber candidate!


9 people like this
Posted by Allen B.
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Sep 20, 2016 at 10:54 pm

Allen B. is a registered user.

Herb Ritter said he wants to be the voice of the people. This is interesting because every time he opens his mouth, all you hear are Jerry Thorne and Nelson Fialho talking. Another hand picked crony espousing “smart growth,” which is code for take every sales tax, property tax and developer dollar they can get. When asked about moving the library and city offices to the Bernal property, he said we have to be smart and consider all the facts, including how selling the downtown city complex land for high density housing would generate $22 Million vs. $7 Million for other uses.

No new or original ideas here. When asked to describe a time when he took a position against strong opposition, he talked about times when he was convinced to change his mind and join others. No doubt, if elected, he will join his buddies, the Mayor and three Council Members that have endorsed him, on every issue.


1 person likes this
Posted by MsVic
a resident of Mission Park
on Sep 21, 2016 at 7:40 pm

MsVic is a registered user.

I was at the forum Monday night. IMHO - Julie said nothing other than we don't need 2000 houses (which are already done and had to be done) and school issues. No other ideas came from her. Gues what schools fall under school board and state not city council - nice try Julie. Sorry she is not Mayor material again IMHO.

Karla again said things that she thinks voters want to hear - not always things that must be done. Sorry Karla you actually approved more homes be developed in this city than Jerry Pentin. Karla won't get my vote.

Who will - those that choose to plan for the future rather than leave the future to chance.

Vote for Pentin, Ritter and Thorne.


2 people like this
Posted by Nan
a resident of Rosewood
on Sep 22, 2016 at 5:07 pm

@ MsVic

So you want all 5 council members controlled by the Chamber.

Not me! I will vote for Karla.


Like this comment
Posted by MsVic
a resident of Mission Park
on Sep 22, 2016 at 6:12 pm

MsVic is a registered user.

Nan in my opinion Pentin, Ritter and Thorne have more planning sense than Brown and Testa. Not one of them is controlled as you say by the Chamber. They had good solid statements and good points at the forum. Brown and Testa in my opinion did not. Simple as that.


Like this comment
Posted by MsVic
a resident of Mission Park
on Sep 22, 2016 at 6:40 pm

MsVic is a registered user.

@local - did you know that Karla Brown actually approved more housing units to be built than Jerry Pentin? Look it up - it's public record.

Something else to consider - 3 candidates all said at the forum, we have to plan for the future. We cannot let the state dictate to us again what happens in PTown. Smart planning is what is needed.

I think if planning doesn't happen then that is like being an ostrich and putting ones head in the sand!


1 person likes this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 22, 2016 at 10:19 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

@Bob B
"Sales tax revenue plays a major role in helping the city pay for services to our community. As a community we have so many needs we've already identified -- a new library, downtown improvements for parking and parks, and the completion of Bernal Community Park -- and they're long-term community benefits that currently lack funding.
From the article on arguments for and against. That is in the argument against MM. Why would fiscally responsible city council members approve something they didn't think they had funding for. Why now do we need Costco to fund it?


Like this comment
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 22, 2016 at 10:51 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

@huh
""Sales tax revenue plays a major role in helping the city pay for services to our community. As a community we have so many needs we've already identified -- a new library, downtown improvements for parking and parks, and the completion of Bernal Community Park -- and they're long-term community benefits that currently lack funding."
This is from the argument against MM. They claim projects currently underway have no funding without Costco.
I have a problem with city officials committing to a project with funding for completion based on something they say wasn't committed to yet they committed to these things in 2014 when the Costco project originated in 2014. I have an issue with the transparency of this. Why NOW do we not have funding for something that they said we did in 2014? It is an issue of transparency and committing our tax dollars to something we had no idea was happening. It is about fiscally responsible answers.


1 person likes this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 22, 2016 at 11:29 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

I have lived here a LONG Time and "chain" type stores don't last here. We would be better off with a Santana Row type thing going in there. Costco isn't like Starbucks, we don't need one on every corner. We have one currently within 5 miles from either side of Ptown. I just think we should make better decisions for that location. Costco won't last there. And We Will STILL have the long term debt.


1 person likes this
Posted by res1
a resident of Birdland
on Sep 23, 2016 at 12:57 pm

res1 is a registered user.

@huh?, you state "Councilman Pentin had to recuse himself on Lund Ranch.". However, if you go to the FPPC website at: Web Link you will see that Pentin did not have to recuse himself. That seems rather odd that a council member states they have recuse themselves from a decision although they were given no such opinion from the FPPC. Perhaps there were other personal issues where he did not want to get involved.


Like this comment
Posted by huh?
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Sep 23, 2016 at 1:10 pm

KT, contrary to what you posted the 2 new tennis courts are fully funded and have NO connection to Costco sales tax revenue. let's stick to the facts. Please show where the City has committed to projects such as a libray, downtown parking, etc. They are talking about it as residents are asking for it. It does take funding to pay for things and Costco could be a source to contribute but I have not seen any commitment/decision to those projects. Again, please provide links or stick to the facts.

res1, yes Jerry Pentin delayed the Lund Ranch hearing to get a ruling from the FPPC which was he did not have a conflict. Residents from the Sycamore Heights neighborhood then publicly attacked him that he did have a conflict questioning his integrity, etc. So as not to be a distraction, I assume that was the reason he recused himself from the deliberations but you really not to ask him why he did that.


2 people like this
Posted by Mike W.
a resident of Stoneridge
on Sep 23, 2016 at 1:15 pm

Mike W. is a registered user.

@Kris Thompson

Agree! Agree! Agree!

Agree: no funding for Costco. City wants to borrow $6 million and raid $5 million of our "rainy day reserve" ($11 million total)
Agree: lack of transparency. Total giveaways not released yet.
Agree: Costco won't last there. They will move on and leave us with debt. "Bye, Bye fools!"


Like this comment
Posted by Curious Voter
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Sep 23, 2016 at 4:48 pm

I just read Karla Brown's ad in today's edition of the Pleasanton Weekly. Point #4 in this ad stats:

4) Protect OPEN SPACE & RIDGELINES. Scenic hills and open space should be preserved for all to enjoy, not just a few.

Is this the same Karla Brown that lives in (removed), an "exclusive, hillside community" that has parks that are private and not available for all Pleasanton residents to enjoy?

Is this the same Karl Brown who opposed the Lin family development that would have given us 300 acres of hillside open space at the cost of a couple of dozen homes? Homes that were higher and more exclusive than her own home? This would have been a great opportunity to meet her Goal of "Scenic hills and open space should be preserved for all to enjoy, not just a few".

Is this the Karla Brown who has not publicly voice her opposition to the hillside on old Vineyard Ave that has been removed for a couple of very visible, ugly mansions? For that matter, where are all the No On K people on this very obvious and visible destruction of a hillside? Perhaps they are not concerned because their stance on measure K was not about hillsides, just about traffic and keeping their faux rural environment?

Can anyone who supports Karla Brown explain to me why this should not be considered hypocritical? Or maybe Karla Brown can explain, maybe in a letter to the editor?


3 people like this
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Sep 23, 2016 at 4:59 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

Curious Voter:

You should write a letter to the editor and state your questions as above, maybe Karla would respond.

The thing is, you must identify yourself in a letter to the editor.


1 person likes this
Posted by Curious Voter
a resident of Pleasanton Valley
on Sep 23, 2016 at 5:07 pm

Michael - My name and phone number are still in the phone book. There is no way I going to expose myself to all of the angry people that are part of this town's political environment. Many other contributors have made the same comment many times, and have been attacked for it.

I have written letters to the editor in the past and have been attacked in this blog.

I don't think my questions are rude or disrespectful. I'd just like to understand what others think.


Like this comment
Posted by MsVic
a resident of Mission Park
on Sep 23, 2016 at 6:16 pm

MsVic is a registered user.

@curious voted - I 100% agree with you. Her positions on hillsides are hypocritical at best.


Like this comment
Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Sep 23, 2016 at 6:45 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

Nothing wrong or disrespectful with your questions.
You have a responsibility to be credible.
I you want anonymity do not post comment.


1 person likes this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 24, 2016 at 10:30 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

Just saying... the campaign against MM is clearly funded by Costco? They obviously DON'T have our best interest in mind. They are out for themselves. Look at their FB page. Clearly states fundied primarily by COSTCO I am all for PTOWN. Too bad our city leaders aren't....how can we not SEE this?


Like this comment
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 24, 2016 at 10:44 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

@mike W exactly!! Doesn't anyone understand HOW hard it was to save up that rainy day fund? Like 5 million is pocket change! Our CURRENT business owners saved that! I am sorry but I flat refuse to just toss it away! We have VOTED for that rainy day fund! Because we DO have long term views for this town. We can't just toss it away AND agree to a 20 million dollar debt! I voted for council members I THOUGHT were fiscally responsible!


Like this comment
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 24, 2016 at 10:56 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

@curious voter if this is all true I am very disappointed!! Thank you for asking these questions!!! Karla I am a supporter but have to ask is this true?


Like this comment
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 24, 2016 at 11:20 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

@micheal Austin what is your issue with registered users? Yes I AM registered? why do you keep going in circles over this? Lots of people want to weigh in on these serious issues without repercussions at work. Love your contributions! Just asking why others need to put them selves on the chopping block to contribute?


2 people like this
Posted by Kris Thompson
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Sep 24, 2016 at 11:32 pm

Kris Thompson is a registered user.

Honestly I don't want Costco in Dublin Either! Costco isn't Starbucks we Don't need one on every corner!


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

Battle over downtown Livermore plan heats up
By Tim Hunt | 4 comments | 1,216 views

Couples: Sex and Connection (Chicken or Egg?)
By Chandrama Anderson | 0 comments | 685 views