Photo Opinion

www.OpinionPleasanton.com introduces new feature A picture really is worth a thousand words. Consequently, Opinion Pleasanton has begun a new feature entitled Photo Opinion (Photo Op for short) to illustrate some of the shortcomings of government—at all levels. We are pleased to present in our first Photo Op the perfect illustration of our litigious society. Without the above sign, a lawsuit would surely follow a citizen’s venturing off the path and getting hurt on the adjacent Five A Rent-A-Space property located at Foothill Road, Stoneridge Drive, and Pleasant Hill Road. The citizen unable to conclude that Pleasanton’s Moller Park neighborhood park ended when it ran out of concrete path, grass, landscaping, and other park features would, however, be intelligent enough to sue the city, the entity with the deepest pocket. Bureaucrats and lawyers believe that putting up a sign solves the problem because it gives the city a defensible position in court. While that may be true, the warning on the sign itself is incorrect. It should read: “do not leave this city-owned path and expect to sue us if you are injured.” Sign of the times And since we are kicking off our new Photo Opinion feature with a sign, we could not help ourselves with the second one above. We have concluded that: 1) sign proof reader was under the weather that day; 2) sign maker is from out of town and not familiar with Pleasanton road names; 3) installers, who had to be right above the sign with the correct designation, were under the weather that day; or 4) all of the above. In any case, expect a lawsuit from a motorist who was looking for Las Positas Road in Livermore and wasted time and gasoline looking for it at the corner of Pleasanton’s West Las Positas Boulevard and Dorman Road near Lucky and the DMV.

 

 

Pleasanton news just got a little tougher to find

Sam Chapman, publisher of the Pleasanton Weekly’s sister publication Marin’s Pacific Sun, recently wrote an extensive feature article on consolidation in the newspaper business in the Bay Area and around the state. His main point is that consolidation will somehow limit access to the news and thus destroy our democracy that only thrives with a free press. He may be correct.

What he failed to mention, however, was that consolidation did not happen in a vacuum. The Internet has dealt the newspaper business a body blow from which it may never recover. But more importantly, Mr. Chapman failed to mention that newspaper readers canceled their subscriptions when newspapers began writing about things in which subscribers had little or no interest. A November 6, 2007 article in the Tri-Valley Herald reports that a September 2007 study finds that the San Francisco Chronicle has lost 2.3 percent of its circulation and the Contra Costa Times 2.0 percent. The San Mateo Times lost a whopping 9.1 percent. The Tri-Valley Herald itself lost 2.8 percent. The last paid circulation report was even more disastrous. With circulations plummeting, advertisers have begun to re-evaluate their ad budgets. Diminished advertising and circulation has lead directly to consolidation for economies in sales, printing, and staffing.

Along the way, however, media giants and their publishers neglected to look at their own newsrooms for the reason subscribers went elsewhere for their news. Once great newspapers such as the Oakland Tribune and the San Francisco Chronicle have for the last few years written with an urban slant of little interest to suburbanites. In short, stories on big-city race relations, gays, and socialist politics have turned off readers who feel that there is more to life than their being bigots, the GLBTG agenda, and cradle to grave government.

There is little doubt that the Pleasanton Weekly (and the Independent to a certain extent) has profited from the consolidation of the Tri-Valley Herald and Valley Times newsrooms. Pleasanton is now essentially in the hands of The Independent’s Janet Armantrout, and the Weekly’s Jeb Bing with the Herald and the Times’ Meera Pal covering only major stories.

What does this mean for Pleasanton? First, Pleasanton news is now left leaning. The Independent is socialist in attitude--The Weekly slightly less so. And we must gather our news on Thursday and Friday now that the dailies are more interested in covering Tracy, Manteca, Lathrop, and Mountain House along with the rest of the East Bay. This will become even more evident when election season rolls around next year.

Mr. Chapman has another story in the making. With virtually no conservative voices in the newspaper industry, newspapers such as the Pacific Sun and more specifically the Pleasanton Weekly are free to run to the political left. The Weekly treats global warming as a fait accompli, nuclear power evil, developers greedy, and the terrorist war illegitimate just like their big-city counterparts that are dying a slow death. But where can Pleasanton readers turn?

Another John Edmond of the Pleasanton Times will eventually surface to provide a counterpoint to the leftist gruel. It may begin as an Internet daily but it could begin as soy on paper just like the Pleasanton Weekly did a few short years ago.

Staples Ranch is just the beginning of the damage initiative petition circulators have caused and will cause

The damage to Pleasanton over the Staples Ranch plan has already been done—initiative or no initiative. What businessman will trust Pleasanton when Pleasanton could not complete the deals with Hendrick Automotive Group, an affiliate of the San Jose Sharks, and Continuing Life Communities senior living on Staples Ranch?

It will not be long before Hendrick crosses I-580 to build the rest of his dealership outlets and who would blame him. He has been pursuing his Staples Ranch plans for more than two years and thought that Pleasanton’s memo of understanding with Alameda County sealed the deal. Even though the initiative exempts Hendrick, it is not clear what entity will eventually permit Hendrick’s project. Uncertainty and time that will cause Hendrick to move to Dublin to meet his commitments to the automobile manufacturers. His move will cost Pleasanton a cool $1 million in sales tax revenue.

The living in place facility faces the same fate if any more time elapses. Dublin needs senior living as much as Pleasanton and this project is a good one to have handed to you. You can also be sure that Dublin will make it happen if approached by Continuing Life Communities.

The San Jose Sharks ice-skating facility adjacent to a city park will not be viable if the permitting authority changes. Livermore and Dublin are more hostile to joint ventures with business.

And then there are the infill projects that will not be proposed because businessmen will not have confidence in Pleasanton’s ability to complete a negotiation or clout enough to head off nay-saying obstructionists who will no doubt find fault with any proposal as they have in the past. Their mantra of too much traffic has not run its course.

News Opinion

 

Campaign Finance Reform Pleasanton style

What part of freedom of speech and the First Amendment do the solons at City Hall not understand? Sure, campaigns cost too much. It was not an issue, however, until those opposed to obstructionist, eco-extremist policies got the upper hand in fund raising. Now we have to do something. Huuuuum? Weekly and daily reporting, through the city Website, is a far superior idea than limiting funds, and it is Constitutional.

Remodeling vets hall is not supporting the troops or the vets

It is a fantastic stretch to say that the city’s remodeling of the Veterans Memorial Building on Main Street is supporting the vets, the military, or the troops. That building is a cash cow for the city. With the upgrades, it is even more of a cash cow. The fact that the building has Veterans Memorial on it is strictly coincidental.

No matter how many vets were paraded during recent dedication ceremonies, this city is frosty to the military. It is no secret that city, county, and local congressmen are hostile to the military. They threw the military a bone on the remodel itself when vets came out in force to protest remodeling concepts. They needed a way to say that they support the military without having to support the military. The remodel compromise and the dedication ceremonies were perfect ways to look right while staying left.

How much did Pleasanton do to keep the VA hospital in Livermore?

The Veteran’s Affairs Hospital in Livermore is closing and moving to the Central Valley. If memory serves, there were no letters from the council to the VA, no letters from the mayor to the VA.

Had the three local congressmen heard, loud and clear, from the City of Pleasanton and others, they might have felt enough heat to be more persuasive with VA administrators charged with reigning in budgets.

Laughable is Congressman Jerry McNerney’s comment to the Independent that the Bush Administration “is determined to cut veteran’s services at a time when they should be expanded…” Mr. McNerney knows that the service will be expanded at the new facilities. They just will not be as convenient to those who live in the Tri-Valley.

Former Congressman Richard Pombo had much greater luck in keeping the VA in check. In a game of Machiavellian politics, the VA probably looked at the three Tri-Valley congressional delegation and concluded that district was loaded with peaceniks who could not care less about the military. Congressman Ellen Tauscher and Congressman Pete Stark round out the three who “fought hard” for the hospital.


Just stop it already with the initiatives

Oh Kay, you are so special. However, we have too many initiative petitions circulating in town. Yours adds to the clutter and confusion. Moreover, it is simply wrongheaded.

Want a view? Pay for it. People have been paying for nice views for centuries. Until recently, no one has asked the community to pay for their nice views. But we are so special in Pleasanton; we cannot have anything interfere with our “view shed.”

Then when you buy your view, be careful that a neighbor cannot destroy it. But, that is his prerogative.

 

Guest Opinion

 

Mayor’s hawk continuance causes a firestorm of protest

Mayor Jennifer Hosterman is nursing a hawk back to health in her back yard. She did not realize that she would need a permit to do so. Her permit application has not been heard because of continuances in the Pleasanton Planning Commission. End of story?

Not on your life.

The story should end when the continued hearings come to a conclusion. In the meantime, it is that pesky word continue that is getting in the way of other business, both at City Hall and at the Pleasanton Weekly.

Pleasanton Weekly letter writer Greg O’Connor (also Planning Commission alternate member) accuses the Weekly of ignoring facts about the continuances and suggests that we deserve better. Mr. O’Connor, the matter has been continued. No one was poking at the commission. Get on with it.

Planning Commission Chairman Anne Fox also chimes in with the staff or applicant has asked that the mayor’s hawk matter be continued. Sure. So what? It is done this way all of the time. Who is a little too touchy on the commission? They waste developer money with their conditions of approval on top of continuance after continuance. Ask the folks at Home Depot if continuances are killing them.

Not to be outdone, In a Pleasanton Weekly guest editorial, Phil Blank, Pleasanton Planning Commissioner, has an even more preposterous proposition that the Weekly reports in absentia and that is never done by newsgathering organizations. Mr. Blank, you are simply wrong. More often than not, the news is reported from viewing tapes and review meeting notes and minutes. Mr. Blank also suggests that the Weekly should not be “allowed” to report in this fashion. Sieg heil.

He is not whistling Dixie

Fred Brown gets off the best line when he says in the Valley Times that $2 million for silencing train whistles is a little over the top. Says Brown, “It is time that funding for these feel-good projects be put into perspective.” You think?

 

 

 

-30-