Volume One, Number 8                                               What ElseYou Need To Know                                         January 29, 2002

 

Hosterman is scolded and she likes it.

Bernal Property Task Force cochairman Jennifer Hosterman says that planning the Bernal project is a “work in progress” and that being sent to the woodshed by Mayor Tom Pico and the council does not change things for her committee.

Were not Ms. Hosterman a possible DreamTeam candidate for Pleasanton City Council, OpinionPleasanton suspects that she and most of the hardworking committee members would have submitted resignations to the mayor. A small contingent of show park demonstrators has given both the mayor and Ms. Hosterman plausible deniability. In other words, the “people” are demanding a park. Should she throw her hat in the ring for this November’s City Council election, Ms. Hosterman can take cover behind the mayor and, of course, the people.

The facts do not support such a contention. Only now is the Bernal project a work in progress. Before being chastised, Ms. Hosterman and her committee were clearly exploring ways to add civic amenities to the community park that is already planned. The mayor and the council established two separate committees to review Bernal. (Mr. Pico has admitted that the two-committee arrangement was a political blunder because ground zero for him was open space or a park at the very least.)

The community park task force was to design a park with lighted sports fields. Since its inception, the second committee, with specific direction from the mayor and the council, was to review land uses, other than a park. More importantly, the citizens, the mayor, and the council supplied an extensive list of possible projects. The task force spent one year winnowing down that list from hundreds of uses to just 20 that they presented to the council at a recent town meeting.

Finally, the “people” are not demanding anything. A small but vocal special interest group simply made a suggestion and Mr. Pico and a whipped council bought into it. The Bernal Property Task Force was onto a plan that would solve many community-wide problems. Pleasanton needs the ACE train station they promised the county and to ACE. Pleasanton needs subsidized housing for the elderly and single working mothers. Pleasanton needs performing arts and meeting facilities. Pleasanton needs a new civic center and not the hodgepodge “campus” proposal for our collection of outdated buildings near downtown.

Those priorities are best met on Bernal. Only Counselor Becky Dennis has a clear vision of what Bernal represents. Bernal is $300 million of equity. That kind of financial power enables Pleasanton to facilitate the design, financing, and building of the needed projects.
To build a park alone on land that valuable is to squander our windfall and to increase our indebtedness vis-à-vis park bonds.

The good news is that there are alternatives. The bad news is that the Mr. Pico will step up the timetable on Bernal to make the November 2002 election. (Until Mr. Pico got his opening, he was perfectly content to let the task force take as much time as was needed. Studying ideas to death in one of Mr. Pico’s modus operandi.) Now that the mayor has the council, committees and staff thinking park, park, park, he will want to complete the job of switching the discussion with council action.

One alternative is to do both projects-a show park in and around a mass transit hub, train station and new City Hall with arts and meeting facilities. The two are not mutually exclusive. A trip to the San Francisco Golden Gateway clearly illustrates how parks and buildings coexist.

However, the other viable alternatives require immediate action. A second plan must be submitted to the council. If that fails to move the council, a referendum petition must be circulated to place the alternative plan on the same ballot as the council plan.

Time’s a wastin’. Will a business leader, a Chamber of Commerce leader, or a community leader please step forward to help Ms. Dennis accomplish great things on the windfall land that can easily be frittered away by good intentions and ideology politics?

The OpinionPleasanton assignment editor is working on…Mystery of the next mayor’s race. Who will challenge Mayor Pico? Those pesky consultants just keep on draining the city coffers…Following up on how many trees the consultants have counted since they hired on…More advice for the announced council candidates.

Politically, Mayor Tom Pico fumbles the ball--big time. Council lets him off the hook. Things are already back to normal-and it is costing us plenty.

By splitting the Bernal project into two study committees, Mayor Tom Pico left himself open to discussing projects in terms of a lighted sports park and other “civic” projects. Mr. Pico, who likes to remain under the radar, has had to briefly surface to bring the Bernal project back in line with his political agenda. Mr. Pico, not shy about promoting his political agenda, stated at the last council meeting that he wants the Bernal Property Task Force to go back to the drawing board to recommend uses for the donated land that more closely match his vision of the land---in his words, “parks, parks, parks, open space, open space, open space, arts, arts, arts.”

Mr. Pico let the committee get out of hand. Committee members actually thought that the mayor wanted them to work on something other than “parks, parks, parks,” or why have two committees? Because the committee could not second-guess the mayor we have wasted one year, sent expensive consultants off in the wrong direction and squandered many hours of staff time (at what cost?)

Asked by the mayor and council to offer suggestions for “civic” uses, citizens responded with a long list of uses whittled down by the task force to 40 projects. The council even offered its own wish list. The task force took that 40-item list and, after many hours of work and many meetings, came back to the council with 20 that they have concluded would match the needs of the community at large.

The rub is that “the process” worked too well. The people want uses other than the park. Mr. Pico had a choice: let the task force continue to spin its wheels and waste time or grab the opportunity that show park proponents offered him. Without a blink, he took the latter when it is the former that he usually prefers when trying to stall or sabotage a project. The council, without much thought, signed on to the Pico park, park, park reprimand of the task force. He can claim a complete victory only if the community at large stays asleep, council candidates remain mum for fear that they will alienate this or that special interest group, and our professional staff continues to march to Mr. Pico’s tune. He got a big boost from the Pleasanton Weekly when they editorialized positively about a show park. Positive press clippings will only embolden Mr. Pico.

Mr. Pico’s new direction means that unless business leaders or people, who usually remain silent on civic issues, come forward to confront the mayor for his political blunder and challenge his new Bernal focus, there will be no promised ACE station. What’s more, there will be no mass transit hub, which every environmentally responsible city government, it studying or pursuing. There will be no subsidized housing for those who need it most. There will be no new civic center and we will continue to cobble together a bunch of aging disparate buildings into a civic center “campus.” There will be no arts center and conference facilities that could mean a more prominent position in the Tri-Valley and East Bay business and arts communities.

News Opinion

Thorne and Wright throw hats into the ring

Two puffs of white smoke curled from the chimney of former Mayor Ken Mercer only a day before the January 17 newspaper announcement that Robert Wright, former Planning Commissioner, and Jerry Thorne, Parks and Recreation Commissioner, would challenge in next November’s City Council election. Bernal Property Task Force cochairman and former council candidate Jennifer Hosterman and Planning Commissioner Matt Sullivan are speculated to have an interest in the race.

No one has yet stepped forward to challenge Mayor Tom Pico who recently declared for reelection. Counselor Sharrell Michelotti has not pulled herself out of the race or a race for reelection to the council. Since she has mentioned Thorne and Wright as possible council candidates, it is unlikely that she will stand for reelection to her council seat. Counselor Becky Dennis has announced that she will retire from the council choosing to adhere to the spirit of the term-limit law that excludes her from being term limited.

Mr. Wright was appointed to the Planning Commission in 1989 by then-mayor Mercer and was appointed to the Bernal Property Task Force in 2000 by Ms. Michelotti. He resigned in March of 2001. Mr. Thorne, a Parks and Recreation Commissioner, is also chair of the Bernal Community Park Master Plan Task Force.

Based upon newspaper articles announcing the candidacies of Mr. Thorne and Mr. Wright, the race shapes up to be ho-hum when a donnybrook is what the city needs.

Rather than cite the failures of the council under Mr. Pico, the first-time candidates cited retirement and more time to serve as their reason for jumping into the fray. This fervorless explanation does not even square with the fact that they both have served many years on time-consuming city commissions, committees and task forces. They appear to be in the mold of Ms. Dennis who lost a bid in 2000 to replace former Ben Tarver. Ms. Dennis’ lackluster campaign theme was building consensus. “Building bridges, not walls” is Mr. Thorne’s sound-alike theme. Even if the theme were understandable, it also sounds lackluster and boring. Mr. Pico’s theme in his race against Ms. Dennis was protecting the neighborhoods. No one really understood what that means but it had enough sizzle for voters who were looking for a strong leader and cared little about the fact that many neighborhoods needed protection-including those in Pleasanton’s flood zone--and didn’t get it from Mr. Pico.

With a plethora of unfinished council business (unfinished for many years) it was expected that candidates with or without the Mercer imprimatur would attack Mr. Pico and Counselor Kay Ayala for being profligate, anti-business, do-nothing obstructionists. Mr. Pico, and possibly Ms. Hosterman and Mr. Sullivan, are expected to attack Mr. Wright and Mr. Thorne, and possibly Ms. Michelotti, as anti environment and pro developer. Ms. Michelotti still wears that mantel, hung on her during her campaign to unseat Mr. Tarver in 1998. Mr. Tarver prevailed by a wide margin.

During her race, Ms. Dennis, a former protégé and supporter of Mr. Pico, tried to make nice with the more politically astute Pico. Her campaign was even more dull and lifeless than Mr. Pico’s. She spunked up when the Tarver-Pico hit piece arrived in the mail. Ultimately, she displayed more energy when she aligned herself with them. They called themselves the DreamTeam. Then she knew that you could not bring a knife to a gunfight. Ms. Dennis’ advisors obviously wished for her to appear as a conciliator juxtaposed to Mr. Pico’s stridency. In the war against terrorism, President Bush said that you are either with us or against us. Mr. Pico and Mr. Tarver made the same pronouncement when Ms. Dennis strayed too far off the eco-extremist reservation. Uncomfortable with being pushed into the pro-developer camp, Ms. Dennis was a tentative campaigner. On the council, she ended up being the third vote for one side or the other but, at times, looked anguished making votes against the Tarver-Pico position.

To connect with the voters, Mr. Wright and Mr. Thorne should abandon the Dennis-style campaign. They should simply layout the facts about the Tarver-Pico years that have placed Pleasanton behind the curve in the areas of traffic mitigation, mass transit, flood control, city build out, and a comprehensive plan for a new civic center with arts facilities. The candidates should campaign in the get-it-done style that Mr. Mercer used to great effect.

Quick Opinion

 

The tale of two editorials

Here is how quickly public opinion can change. On January 17, 2002, a local newspaper opined that Pleasanton citizen participation in the land use decisions for the Bernal property was a good thing-one of the strengths of Pleasanton as a community. The land uses under study by the Bernal Property Task Force were even enumerated to illustrate the efficacy of the committee mission. On January 25, 2002, the same newspaper opined that citizen input and a year’s worth of study should be discarded in favor of a council mandate on the property’s use. Hem?

Guest Opinion

 

Hovingh to OpinionPleasanton

[I] was not a Planning Commissioner when [I] ran for mayor…[I] had previously served for almost eight years as a Planning Commissioner, donated [my] stipend from the city to local non-profits and charities and did not collect reimbursements for expenses incurred as a Planning Commissioner.

Observations from Hovingh

Mayor [Tom] Pico was the leading proponent of term limits for city council members and the mayor of Pleasanton. At the time, several citizens noted that the term limits concept was written in a way that…[it] was subject to abuse (see ballot arguments against term limits). Then council person Pico suggested at that time that the arguments were a “red herring,” but then abused them…to ensure that he would continue to build up his taxpayer paid retirement benefits and taxpayer paid medical insurance that continues beyond his term of office for the rest of his life. A person of integrity who uses the term limit loophole (note the oxymoron) would cease to collect benefits including, but not limited to salary, expenses, retirement, and insurance.

Members of the city boards and commissions who chose to run for the City Council or mayor should resign from their city-appointed position when they declare their candidacy… The function of the members of city boards and commissions is to give… recommendations on various issues, without regard to their political consequences when making a decision. No person of integrity that is a member of a city board or commission will sully the process by making recommendations that are politically motivated to the City Council, or by making recommendations as a board or commission member while a candidate for an elected position.

Candidates for elected city positions should demonstrate intelligence, thoughtfulness, courage, and integrity…with a passion for doing what they think is best for the city…without regard to the political consequences.

City Response

OpinionPleasanton was curious about current salary, expenses, medical insurance, and retirement benefits for the City Council and queried Deputy City Manager Nelson Fialho. Here is his response to the query.

This message is…a follow-up to our meeting on January 7, 2002 regarding your request for information on Mayor and Councilmember pay and benefits…The pay for council is $500.00 per month. Compensation for the Office of Mayor is $600.00 per month. Both amounts are set by ordinance and the procedures for modifying monthly pay is governed by Section 36516 if the California Government Code.
The benefits for Mayor and council are as follows:

        1. Mayor and council and their dependents are eligible for enrollment in any of our city offered health
            plans. The city will pay the total monthly premium up to $600.00. As of the date of this memo, the
            city offers a choice of three health  plans, Kaiser S-1, Healthnet HMO, and Healthnet POS.

        2. Mayor and council and their dependents are eligible for enrollment in the city’s dental plan.

        3. The mayor and council are eligible to receive life and accidental death and dismemberment insurance
            in the amount of  $10,000.00. The amount is set by Council Resolution No. 89-493 and coverage is
            currently provided by MetLife.

        4. The mayor and council are eligible to participate in the city’s Employee Assistance Program.

        5. The mayor and council are eligible to participate in the city’s 457 Deferred Compensation Program
            (a 457 is like a 401k) on voluntary basis. No contributions are made by the city.

        6. The mayor and council are eligible to participate in California Public Employees Retirement System
            (CALPERS) on a voluntary basis. To be eligible for retirement benefits, elected officials must be at
             least 50 and have five years of vested service within the CALPERS system.

        7. The mayor and council are eligible for membership in the city’s credit union.

        8. The mayor and council are eligible for retiree medical benefits upon leaving office. For each year of
            service, the city pays 4% of the two-party monthly premium of the city’s current Kaiser S-1 Health
            Plan Coverage. For example, an elected official who retires with eight years of service would be
            elilgible to receive 32% of the Kaiser S-1 two-party premium (formula: eight years x monthly premium
            (formula: four years x 4% =16%).

An exception to the above is when an elected official retires from the city
with at least 10 years of service. In this case, the premium paid is based
upon the elected official’s years of service, as follows:

                     Years of Service          City’s contribution
                       10                                75%
                       15                                80%
                       20                                90%
                        25                               100%

Upon qualifying for and receiving parts A and B of Medicare, the city is not obligated to contribute a monthly amount in excess for the monthly two-party premium for the Kaiser S-1 “Medicare Supplemental” coverage.

In the case where the eligible elected official is deceased, the amount the city is obligated to pay is reduced by ½ (one half). If the spouse remarries, the obligation by the city is terminated.

If you wish additional detail or clarification on any of the information described in this memo, I will be happy to provide it.

Regards,

Nelson Fialho
Deputy City Manager.

Copyright © Opinion Pleasanton 2002