General Plan update

It is scary at City Hall and wherever the bureaucrats meet to discuss amending the city’s General Plan. Bureacratese mixed with political shorthand tips off the discerning observer that City Hall is sending Pleasanton, lemming-like, over the edge of political obeisance to the quasi-governmental regional agencies and socialist goal setters in Sacramento.

It is curious that the city that forms a commission, committee, or panel at the drop of the hat, decides to do the General Plan review with the city’s professional staff and standing commissions. Moreover, city fathers decided to inform the public about their progress by holding informational meetings in the neighborhoods. Whoever devised the plan to take the review into the neighborhoods was skillful if the intent was to stir up trouble—and this plan walks like a duck.

Each neighborhood has produced the anticipated complaints associated with those neighborhoods. Highland Oaks and Oak Hill have turned out to gripe about the West Las Positas over crossing. Those neighborhoods off Stoneridge Drive east of Santa Rita Road have turned out to groan about the long-planned extension of Stoneridge to El Charro Road.

The Stoneridge and Val Vista neighborhoods have gathered to gripe about the possibility of widening Stoneridge Drive from Foothill Road to Hopyard Road and improving the
I-680 over crossing at Stoneridge.

That accomplished, the city staff compiled those gripes (along with e-mail) and loaded them into the 106-page, spiral bound document entitled General Plan Update--Community Meetings Summary Report published January 7, 2004.

However, the 106 pages lack substance. The most substantive and revealing pages are the sign-in sheets for the various neighborhood meetings. The same people (usually a small group of Pleasanton’s who’s who) attended all or most of the meetings. The rest of the attendees, as was expected, were from the individual neighborhoods turning out to gripe about neighborhood issues. Almost no one, including city representatives, looked at the city as a whole. To do that would, of course, defeat the divide and conquer plan to amend the General Plan to suit the no-growth, anti-business agenda.

In short, it is a good thing that taxpayers do not pay the bureaucrats by the page. It might be a better thing to offer them bonuses for brevity and for saving paper.

News Opinion

Slip, slidin’ away

Simon and Garfunkle could not have said it better. Slip, slidin’ away is Pleasanton’s representative democracy and in its place is coming direct democracy.

In Pleasanton, we do things just a little differently. Only what we do is a little more expensive and does not happen very quickly. However, if you think that is bad just wait for direct democracy. It is cumbersome and expensive and things will move that much more slowly when we begin to vote on everything.

If we are to vote on everything, why have a City Council? Our first vote should be for a new city administrator to replace the retiring Deborah Acosta McKeehan to carry out the will of the people and forego the endless meetings and endless politics at City Hall.

The next item for a vote is the budget. After several budget hearings, we can put the consensus figures to the people. Of course, there are understandable deviations from the budget so subsequent reconciliation votes must be taken during the year—maybe quarterly. Obviously, it is hoped that each building project subject to a vote can be put on the same ballot as the budget to save money—elections are expensive. Next on the ballot is Bernal. It is a sure thing that some people will want housing on the 40 acres of property that was originally scheduled for eight office structures. The vote would have to overturn the no additional housing mandate from the last Bernal vote. Maybe the live-work loft idea for workforce housing could be the alternative on that same ballot. Naturally, the new civic center (the downtown version) would be up for a vote. It is hoped, for expense sake, that that vote could coincide with the Bernal vote or maybe a budget vote. Since there is some talk about a new civic center on Bernal, maybe the two projects could be voted on simultaneously.

Voting for a neighbor’s second story addition or a dog park is the sublime to the budget ridiculous.

The water slide issue is one more example of 60s boomers looking to “bring it all down man.” So vocal were these people that their pre-protest protest intimidated and stifled discussion. (The council would have to have gone through a convoluted process to get the water slides on the ballot so they voted 3-2 for a scaled down expansion.) This same mentality is poised to strike if the approved Stoneridge Drive extension to El Charro Road is reaffirmed or if the West Las Positas over crossing is not removed from the General Plan. (At a recently held General Plan meeting forces opposed to the Stoneridge extension showed up in force in protest-red shirts to protest even before any decisions are forwarded to the council for approval. It was their goal to intimidate the council into voting their way. At the very least, they hope to intimidate others in the audience with opposing viewpoints. They rudely greeted those who took positions different from their own. So loud were they, that Mayor Tom Pico had to gavel the meeting to a close to restore order and decorum (and this is a community of character?). Mr. Pico, a natural ally who has signaled that a ballot measure on Stoneridge would be needed to settle the issue, was uncharacteristically dissed because of their take-it-to-the-street attitude). Oh, is not direct democracy grand?

Blogg, blogg. Blogg, blogg. Blogg

The Annenberg School of Communications at the University of Southern California has tackled the issue of participatory journalism in their Online Journalism Review. J. D. Lasica, the OJR Senior Editor, claims “the line between journalism and personal publishing is a blurry one, thanks to new ubiquitous tools that make it possible for anyone to publish and report news.”

Personal publishers or bloggers do not qualify as journalists if they do not employ an editorial filter of an editor between writer and reader says Joan Connell an executive editor of MSNBC.com. Yet “when small independent online publications and collaborative news sites with an amateur staff perform original reporting on community affairs, few would contest that they’re engaged in journalism,” says Lasica.

This is why when Lasica says that participatory journalism is a slippery creature, he is correct.

OpinionPleasanton, prominently mentioned in the Annenberg report, is not participatory journalism. It is researched, written, and edited by professionals. It is also written as opinion. Though for many it contains community news not seen in the traditional media, it is commentary written to influence. While OpinionPleasanton would welcome more reader participation (letters and opinion poll respondents), it does not survive based upon readership, advertising or reader participation.

Weblogs or bloggs cover a varied range of subjects and the effort is more often than not amateurish. Blogging can be traced to the notion that computing equipment with publishing programs makes anyone a “desktop publisher.” Corporate America fostered that notion. MS Word and Publisher gave corporate managers the idea that anyone could write and publish newsletters or company brochures. Never mind that brochures and newsletters, prior to desktop computers, were written by or outsourced to trained professionals. When computers (PC’s) and programs became affordable for everyone, desktop publishing took a definite turn for the worse.

Internet technology has put professionals back into the communications process. However, it is still not a complete package because many in Internet technology (IT) are techies not writers or editors. The results, however, are much improved. Techies are more likely than not to be educated. The original desktop publishers were less-educated secretaries and clerks recruited from the typing pool to do the company newsletter.

Quick Opinion

Gateway signs fit into Pleasanton’s elite image

And speaking of gateways, how about a sign at the intersection of I-580 and I-680 that says, “Pleasanton, The City of Planned P…p.” That gateway fronts the Dublin San Ramon Services District (DSRSD) sewage treatment plant. It does not matter that the newly approved gateway sign is projected to cost $9,000, it is still a sewer treatment plant and it is still ugly.

What is certain is that not all gateways can resemble the bucolic Pleasanton Main Street and the famous sign that spans the street. Likewise, no gateway can be worse than the sewer treatment plant. As for the rest, there must be a compromise between the two extremes and it should not be that difficult to achieve. Lest you think this is a tempest in a teapot, remember that Stanley Boulevard at Bernal Avenue is still being developed. Stoneridge Drive at El Charro Road will be improved soon.

Guest Opinion

Naiveté or NIMBYism

Shareef Mahdavi, in a letter to the editor of the Pleasanton Weekly, demonstrates his complete lack of understanding of the United States Constitution’s Fifth Amendment that forbids the taking of private property for public use without just cause and compensation. He is not alone and that makes keeping our private property rights that much more difficult. Unlike gay marriage, abortion, and universal health care, property rights are specified in the constitution.

The Lund Ranch and Kottinger Hills developments fit into Pleasanton’s plans just as Al Sportorno’s Callippe Preserve development fits into Pleasanton’s development plans. If those two plans do not fit into Pleasanton’s plans, then $1 million an acre should be offered to the owners to go away. Mr. Mahdavi’s contends that the citizens have the right to determine the suitability for development there and he is right. What has escaped him is that we have already deemed the proposals suitable or the builders would not be kissing butt and dancing the light fantastic down at City Hall.

Pristine views and open space cost money. Put up or shut up is the phrase that comes to mind when talking city-developer dealings on land that might be considered for open space. Being at the intersection of I-580 and I-680 makes it difficult to afford all of the open space that we covet. Unless Mr. Mahdavi wishes to advance funds to for Lund and Kottinger to be taken off the market, he must get used to the idea that utopia will not begin here in Pleasanton.

Mr. Mahdavi also contends that these two developments “will further strain resources without significant addition to tax revenue.” Not the case in Pleasanton. Property taxes make up 42% of the city’s revenue—one percent on a million dollar home is $100,000 per home, and that is all that we are building these days. That kind of revenue is one reason why the state’s money grab has far less impact on Pleasanton. Moreover, since we demand that builders provide roads and the sewer and water lines needed for their developments, the city’s out-of-pocket is zip. Since we also extort amenities such a parks and “mitigations” such as “habitat” elsewhere (usually near other parks--EBRPD), the city will actually be a net loser if the developments do not proceed. (Our spending $1 million per acre will surely preclude having funds for building parks).

Mr. Mahdavi’s “it’s for the children” explanation is way out in left field. People who buy million dollar homes are usually older and do not usually have small children to tax our schools. In addition, we kill homebuilders and eventually homebuyers with fees, including school fees. (Fees are such that builder’s $1 million homes could be offered for only $900,000 if the fees were removed.)

Berlin Wall

I am an East Pleasanton resident suffering from gridlock at the Bernal-Valley-Nevada Bridge intersection: Modern GPS [global positioning satellite] map systems are informing 580/680 drivers of the cut-through roads through Pleasanton resulting in a metal/car Berlin Wall keeping my family out of Pleasanton city.

Due to the gridlock, it is now easier to drive to Livermore Safeway, Livermore Post Office, Livermore Cosmo’s haircut, Livermore Hoppy’s Pub vs. Pleasanton’s Union Jack Pub. I now drive to Livermore Park on 84 instead of Pleasanton Sports Park. (What happened to park planned for PGS’s abandoned Vineyard Road dumpsite?) It is easier to drive to Livermore’s ValleyCare instead of Pleasanton’s ValleyCare. We love Livermore but we bought a home in Pleasanton and traffic keeps us away.

Sad we have to leave Pleasanton’s St. Elizabeth Seton because it is easier to get to Livermore’s Saint Michel’s for Saturday night mass. Our kids don’t know the same kids in the teen groups etc. I never see old friends in line at Pleasanton stores or sitting next to us at the Pleasanton restaurants since we now find ourselves doing all that stuff in Livermore. It is too trafficy to drive to Dublin theater so we go to the small quaint Livermore theater.

Traffic is blocking us in on all sides now that the State of California rerouted Highway 84 to Isabel, thus we are being locked in by larger 84 traffic on Isabel Road. So Tracy/Stockton/Brentwood commuter traffic is now beginning to keep us from Livermore too. Pleasanton’s narrow bridge at Vineyard and Bernal blocks us from Pleasanton. New car GPS will cram more traffic down 84/Isabel then through Vineyard/Bernal.
There is a six-lane road at Stanley/Bernal but it dramatically narrows to a one-lane both way bridge at Bernal/Vineyard. This is our path to the Sports Park/Harvest Park/ValleyCare/St. Elizabeth Seton etc. Bob Kind, owner of Diablo Auto Body, tells us his customers cannot get through to even pick up their cars after work.

Basically, we chose to live in Pleasanton these past nine years but we are being pushed out. This is a bummer. The lack of Neal School being built doesn’t help the problem with no neighborhood school binding kids together in East-Pleasanton either. Private jet pilots inform me of a newer bigger Livermore Airport being planned for them. As I have done, anyone can fly on a private jet out of Livermore by booking a seat with www.charterauction.com. I hope Pleasanton gets in front of the curve and stop anymore Livermore Airport expansion. BART canceled the direct no-transfer to SFO airport just last month. Pleasanton City Council and the Pleasanton Chamber of Commerce never used their “political pull” to ask BART to keep the non-stop Pleasanton to the S.F. airport route alive. Easily, Danville, San Ramon, Dublin, Livermore, and Pleasanton could have organized to ask BART to keep the non-transfer SFO airport to Pleasanton BART route a reality. It only ran for three months not even enough time to get the word out.

Pleasanton traffic engineers are trying to stop cut-through traffic but this traffic control effort is creating a Berlin Wall for us in East Pleasanton as we get in line with the cut-through commuters. How about a diamond lane for Pleasanton residents? [What about] our own resident car bridge across the gravel pits? One can dream.

In the past, Becky Dennis or Sharrell Michelotti would respond directly back in agreement or disagreement to citizen inquiries and input to discuss ways to improve efficiency of city services. I don’t know any of the new council members anymore. They never return my letters or calls. We now have cut our volunteer hours dramatically. In fact, after my two-year term, I chose not to renew another term as a volunteer CEO of Hope Hospice with its monthly meetings across town.

So many of us in East Pleasanton are sad and depressed over being cut off from Pleasanton in the daily procession of jammed-up cars. Since my wife and I enjoy retirement, I guess we don’t have to live in Pleasanton or California at all. Maybe it is time to move out of this gridlocked 580/680-crossroad city (called Pleasanton.) that used to be a nice town. Pleasanton is fast becoming mass of humanity ridiculously encapsulated in automobile metal boxes with glass and wheels.

Steve & Pam Behm

-30-