She should have resigned or stayed home

Mayor Jennifer Hosterman should not have attend the Mayors for Peace conference at the United Nations—even on her own time and her own nickel. Were it not for the Pleasanton voters, she would not have been invited. And, Pleasanton voters elected her to solve the city’s horrendous traffic problems and decide on dog parks.

Surly, most Pleasanton voters would agree that Dr. Condoleezza Rice is better equipped to deal with peace issues than Ms. Hosterman. She became involved in the Mayors For Peace non-proliferation issue while attending the U.S. Conference of Mayors in January.

Ex-mayor Tom Pico took advantage of a boondoggle trip to the U.S. Conference of Mayors. But like doctors, he observed the tenet, do no harm. While in Washington he exchanged ideas with the mayors of Dublin, Livermore and San Ramon. We opined in 2000 that he should have called a meeting at the Hopyard Road Burger King and saved the taxpayers the cost of the trip and the time he took away from council business—including important budget meetings. But his contact with his Tri-Valley counterparts did little harm.

Ms. Hosterman is so agenda driven that once off the reservation she could not help herself and signed on to the Mayors For Peace efforts. Some see her efforts as an exercise in private conscience. But it is Mayors For Peace and by extension, Pleasantonians for peace, not private citizens for peace. And while Pleasanton voters might condone her efforts she didn’t seek their approval. True to her extremist background she preferred to ask for forgiveness rather than for permission. And that violation of our trust should get her a censure from her colleagues and certainly from the voters next year. Her resignation would have been a true test of her principles.

Ms. Hosterman is the mayor of a one-horse town—a one-horse town of her own making. Her anti development, anti business positions have kept Pleasanton from growing into a suburban powerhouse. We are what we are because of Ms. Hosterman and the no-growthers that preceded her. Conferences in Washington D.C. or New York City will not change that. And while we have a few notables in our one-horse town, Ms. Hosterman is not one of them.

Her giving a speech on non-proliferation is arrogant and condescending. What makes her believe she will bring anything meaningful to the table on world peace? It is simply the “bring it all down, man” mentality that thought that they cornered the market on intellect and compassion.

Simply put, Ms. Hosterman is a socialist. Her embrace of the United Nations and the Mayors For Peace is simply a manifestation of her worldview that only government can solve our problems. And if there are no problems to solve, they will create them. The danger to Pleasanton is that absent people with courage to call her on her wacky, out-of-step ideas, she will continue to forge full-speed ahead to re-make Pleasanton while trying to re-make America in the image of the corrupt U.N.

Her re-make of Pleasanton will certainly include universal health care, gratis senior and child day care, universal pre-school education, living wage ordinances, even more generous government worker retirement benefits, and utopian energy and environmental proposals. Without onerous new taxes these programs are not sustainable.

It was recently reported that Ms. Hosterman is interested in quality of life concerns. In socialist speak, in the context of Pleasanton, that means she wants to help the little people of which there are none. As a result, that leaves all of the governmental help for the elites who were lucky enough to get here before the moat was built.

It is a little naive to believe that Ms. Hosterman’s public persona is any different than he personal persona. Her biography is rich with extremist organizations, fringe ideas, and activism. Her Pleasanton record is also rife with edgy, in-your-face rhetoric and out-of- tune ideas and proposals.

Counselor Steve Brozosky’s lack of outrage is unnerving. Counselor Matt Sullivan’s outright support is scary. “I think it’s very appropriate for her to do this. Local government can play a role in global matters” Sullivan was reported to have said. “Whether it’s traffic or the nonproliferation of nuclear weapons, we’re still doing the outreach in our community.” Other than sending the mayor on a socialist mission, what the devil does that drivel mean?

Pleasanton is not a Peacenik community. Pleasanton is not the socialist outpost for Berkeley or San Francisco. It is not a social engineering laboratory. It is not an incubator for one worldism. Or, at least not now it isn’t.

 

News Opinion

No campaigning on school property. Period

That is what the Pleasanton school board should have established as policy. This is not about campaign buttons alone though. It is about the teacher’s union endorsing candidates and distributing campaign flyers in teacher’s boxes. It is about the union and its sycophants calling the shots on school board elections. There are very few voters on our K-12 campuses so teachers should not feel a burning need to campaign. And without many teachers and administrators who vote against the union, what is all the furor all about? Power and the use of power? Intimidation? Both maybe? What future candidates will butt heads with the union after it is made clear that it is calling the election shots?

The teachers are concerned that the board wants to legislate campaign prohibitions? So what? They work for the board and ultimately for us. We have an obligation to inform them on what is acceptable and unacceptable behavior. And we should trust the teachers to conduct themselves in a professional manner? We did and the teachers failed to act professionally by distributing endorsement flyers to their colleagues during the last election.

This issue is taking up too much time. The board should have heeded board member Kris Weaver who said “…It would help the professional atmosphere to let teachers know what they can and cannot do.” Amen, Ms. Weaver

The General Plan done on time? Not a chance

What they should have told Janice Stern, Pleasanton’s new Principal Planner for Advanced Planning, is that things move a little slowly in Pleasanton. Had city fathers told Ms. Stern that that is Pleasanton’s history, she could have found a position in Dublin or other city’s that are still realistic about development. Or, at the very least, she would have not predicted a General Plan by May 2006.

Even though the votes are in for the new plan it will take hours and hours of meetings to get to the finish line. It doesn’t happen any other way in Pleasanton. The politicians have demanded such a course of action and have insisted that the bureaucracy have the same mindset. Consequently, there will be wasted motion and plenty of wasted money, and no plan by May 2006

Of course, it is assumed that because things go at a snail’s pace that they are done correctly. We are in the fix that we are in because they are not always done correctly. We have a traffic nightmare and we will not meet state housing goals. And do not forget that the golf course is over budget by $20 million. So, things are not always done correctly.

Past councils have elected to let their successors deal with the debris of misguided, agenda-driven development policy. So for the foreseeable future there will be unbearable traffic and no state and federal funds because of our failure to comply with onerous (and frankly unconstitutional) housing “goals” established by social engineers—elected, appointed, and self appointed.

Will Mayor Jennifer Hosterman win her battle with the state on our General Plan’s housing element? She should, she is absolutely correct in opposing governmental and quasi-governmental housing mandates. How we build our city is our business. Pleasanton is still a come one, come all community as long as you come with a million bucks. But where in the constitution is it written that that cannot be a community’s direction. More importantly, affordability—the state’s social engineering bug-a-boo—is relative. So far everyone here is living in affordable housing including those who live in subsidized or inclusionary housing. If our houses and apartments were not affordable we would have a high residential vacancy rate. We do not. And remember that Pleasanton was once the affordable city for those who could not afford Lafayette, Concord, or Walnut Creek.

Ms. Hosterman will not win the battle, however. City Fathers have maneuvered us into a corner financially. We need outside funds to operate. So, look for a lifting of the housing cap of 29,000 housing units and higher apartment densities plus more multi-use commercial developments that have a housing element. Not even Ms. Hosterman can convince an uninformed electorate to pass a parcel tax large enough to operate the city in a fashion she would like to become accustomed. (Not so with the school district. Voters will pass a parcel tax to pay for school issues.)

Not one penny for Kyoto

Judy Symcox is right. Mayor Jennifer Hosterman and Counselor Matt Sullivan are wrong.

Ms. Hosterman supports joining Cities for Climate Protection Campaign (CCPC), which is an organization that was formed to assist local governments in establishing local policies to help reduce so-called global warming. Local efforts are designed to do enact Kyoto Protocol plans that the federal government has deemed economically dangerous. Additionally, limiting pollution that contributes to global warming is the charge of all local governments and we have not needed an association to accomplish what we have so far accomplished.

Ms. Symcox warned, in the council meeting of March 1, that Kyoto was based on flawed scientific data and that it puts onerous restrictions on developed nations. The protocol forces first world countries to meet impossible environmental goals while third world countries, which however are rapidly developing, are given a pass. India and China are given dispensation under the Kyoto Protocol. Right now Canada is buying pollution credits to comply with the treaty. But what does that accomplish? There is no reduction in pollution only money being redistributed.

Objective observers have calculated that the Kyoto treaty would wreak havoc on the U. S. economy.

Ms. Hosterman and her predecessors have already put a world of hurt on Pleasanton business by adopting anti business, anti growth policies. Forcing Pleasanton business owners and homeowners to install solar power on our buildings and homes would place onerous demands on us all. And that is just where Ms. Hosterman and her sycophant-- Counselor Matt Sullivan--want to go.

Joining the CCPC is only a money-wasting, feel good gesture.

Eco extremist mayor goes rogue at council meeting

She is right and that is all there is to it. No other position is valid or will be entertained. Period. End of story.

That is Mayor Jennifer Hosterman.

While she listened patiently to Judy Symcox at the March 1, 2005 council meeting, Ms. Hosterman could not contain her vitriol for Ms. Symcox, Ms. Symcox’s urging to consider alternative environmental research, or Ms. Symcox’s admonition to conduct the city’s business at the council meetings and to pursue environmental activism on personal time.

Ms. Hosterman has for two consecutive meetings displayed rudeness to citizens (she blew her cool when citizen Bob Cordtz asked her a question and expected an answer) who have alternative viewpoints regarding governmental power and eco extremism.

It was particularly amusing in the March 1 meeting because it was just 10 minutes after the mayor admonished speakers to observe the city’s community of character placard when addressing the council.

She still has not smoothed out her personal presentation of the plays out of the eco extremist playbook. In addition to rebuking Ms. Symcox, Ms. Hosterman rudely interrupted Jerry Wagner and threw him off stride in his message during the “meeting open to the public” segment of the meeting—he was about to run over his allotted five minutes. Mr. Wagner was further illustrating how the city is duplicitous in its dealings with the public and in particular the public that disagrees or is disagreeable. Well water tests were being conducted in Happy Valley and the city chose not to include his as well as two other wells that were indicating 50 to 80 parts per million of nitrates--thought to cause birth defects according to Mr. Wagner. Ten parts per million is considered safe according to the Center for Disease Control. You would have thought that the environmental mayor would want to know about potential water pollution.

This was also a pivotal meeting for Ms. Hosterman and her personal style. This night she sailed right around her council colleagues to demand that the staff test Mr. Wagner’s well. Like a deer caught in the headlights, City Manager Nelson Fialho nodded agreement with the mayor’s demand. City Attorney Michael Rousch sat silent choosing not to remind the mayor that administrative decisions are made in Mr. Fialho’s office and that courtesy would have dictated that she consult her council colleagues before issuing orders.

It is past time for someone to inform the mayor that she is just the mayor, one of four.

Quick Opinion

She is a phony

Counselor Steve Brozosky has asked the council to look into the cost of providing paratransit service. The Independent covered the story and quoted Mr. Brozosky and Counselor Cindy McGovern along with Eileen Morley of Pleasanton Senior Services.

The Independent also quoted Mayor Jennifer Hosterman in the last paragraph of the article. They said “ Mayor Jennifer Hosterman stated ‘I see this as a social equity issue.’”

Our question is: what the hell does that mean? (We would also like to know why the Independent did not ask: what the hell does that mean?)

Ms. Hosterman’s quote is pretty similar to her admonition “man needs earth, earth does not need man.”

The mayor speaks in riddles and clichés—most of the time when she wants to look intellectual or when she does not have anything cogent to say.

She is also arrogant

“This body of work is a thing of beauty! I commend all of you for your efforts in crafting such a concise work which encompasses a huge body of energy efficiency policy. I truly believe your work, your very hard work, will well serve the residents and businesses in Pleasanton. Really, this is great. Thank you. Jennifer…”

This is a note forwarded from Mayor Jennifer Hosterman to those associated with or working on the Energy Advisory Group dealing with the “energy element” of the General Plan currently under review and a feasibility study on buying and selling electricity.

We cannot help interpret Ms. Hosterman.

“Body of work” is a bit high falutin’. It was a report. But as a body of work it carries more weight. It implies complexity that only the enlightened will understand. It is not enough to commend the writers of the documents; Ms. Hosterman must commend their efforts. And it would not be as important to commend them for writing a concise energy report so she has to commend their crafting the report. Crafting is more akin to a virtuoso performance. Writing the report is too pedestrian. “Your work, your very hard work” means that the conclusions cannot be attacked--especially by those who feel that energy conservation is important but not important enough to consider making it a permanent part of the city bureaucracy as the mayor has advocated. Attacking hard work is akin to a personal attack. Socialists feel that hard work is a substitute for effective work. “Really, this is great” is Ms. Hosterman’s way of saying that she is surprised that others could produce work she considers good.

They have snuck their environmental pap onto the council’s priority list

In case you have not noticed (and that is the environmental extremist way of introducing its socialist agenda into the mainstream) the City Council has for the first time included environmental awareness to its priority list, which includes addressing residential green building and recycling standards. The goal of this priority is to pursue environmental awareness, health, land use, and preservation issues.

Awareness is not the goal. Health and recycling are not the goals. No road and home building are the goals. That is what preservation and land use mean to the environmental extremists.

We are disappointed that counselors McGovern and Brozosky went along with this gibberish. We would have hoped that a two to two stalemate would have resulted. It is not about the environment for Mayor Jennifer Hosterman or Counselor Matt Sullivan. It is about “social justice” and “social equity.” Translate that socialism.

Mr. Brozosky and Ms. McGovern should not employ “go along to get along” on the environmental agenda of Mr. Sullivan and Ms. Hosterman. Recycling and health is only a touchy feely smokescreen for something less benign and certainly something more expensive such as income redistribution.

Deciding land use is what the council does as a part of its charter. Environmental awareness, health and recycling are already the policy of the council. Preservation is simply a land grab in the hands of the bureaucrats. Ask the private landowners of land that is to be “preserved” if that should be a council priority.

We would have also hoped that Mr. Brozosky and Ms. McGovern would have opposed these goals, at the very least, as redundant.

Pleasanton has affordable housing, only some cannot afford it

Former Mayor Becky Dennis is probably right on the money with her affordable housing statistics, rules, and regulations. She is a bit of a policy wonk. What she refuses to acknowledge is that the state and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG), a quasi-governmental, body should not be calling the shots on Pleasanton housing.

According to Ms. Dennis, Pleasanton has more than its fair share housing for the wealthy and too few units for the less than wealthy. Our City Fathers have made a different determination. They may be wrong, but they have made that determination. As far as Pleasanton’s housing policy goes, that should end it with the state and ABAG.

There are dire consequences for that decision, however. Pleasanton could find itself on the short end of the stick for state and regional funding for various projects. This is the kind of extortion that government entities are running into everyday. But Pleasanton has a history of bootstrap building. Remember that a couple of redevelopment agencies bit the dust but the redevelopment projects proceeded and were funded out of local funds.

Guest Opinion

No Kyoto Protocol in Pleasanton


In addition to the unconscionable boondoggle that is known as Happy Valley Golf Course, I am outraged that our “esteemed” mayor and her trusty sidekick, Matt Sullivan, seem hell-bent on adopting the Kyoto Protocol in Pleasanton. It would seem to me that there are far more pressing and unfinished issues to address before we go throwing good money after bad for the sake of the “feel good” crowd. It is imperative that we take the upcoming special election for city counselor seriously and try to bring some balance to the disorder that has been wrought upon Pleasanton over the past several years.

Janet-Marie Persico

Move ACE Station to Bernal

Robert Flock, a letter writer to the Pleasanton Weekly, says, “Moving the ACE station [to the Bernal Property] would alleviate more problems than it would create.” One of the problems that would be solved would be to provide shared parking for sports fields. Mr. Flock suggests that because the ACE train does not run on Saturdays and Sundays that more parking could be used by sports park players. He is right.

Pleasanton Weekly letter writer Jeff Narum has it right. The city is spending irresponsibly. They have adopted free-spending habits. Mr. Narum did not touch on the largest category of spending that remains under the radar—city pensions. But he is right to be concerned about block parties, studies and re-studies and a special election; they are out there.

 

 

 

-30-