Volume Eight, Number 1                                   What ElseYou Need To Know                           May 6 , 2010

 

Don't Mess With Our Ridges!

Don't mess with our ridges? What arrogance. What chutzpah. What gall.

No, folks, it belongs to Frederic and Jennifer Lin. While they do want to give away nearly 500 acres for a park and open space in exchange for building 51 homes, they have not done it yet. Therefore, the ridge still belongs to them. At no time during the last 15 years have the elitists who want to commit thievery of the Lin's property ever mentioned putting up the dollars to truly make it our ridge. Why would they? The NIMBYs, eco-extremists, and elitists think private property is no longer private and only they know what is best for the city—no the world. The Lins and any others (LeMoines, Merritts come to mind) can just go to hell or go broke pursuing their private property development rights. In addition--whisper, whisper--they will run out of money, resolve, and just go away. Sadly, the city is run by bureaucrats who also subscribe to this theory of property and development. A ll they have to do is drag out the application process (nightmare really) and the projects will fade into the sunset (Miracle Auto Painting's 18-month application for a Stanley Business Park body and paint shop was approved but the 50 conditions of approval made a $1.2 million project a $2.4 project once the bureaucrats and commission extremists weighed in and it was almost instantly unaffordable.) In the case of Oak Grove, however, those awful foreigners have plenty of money and much patience.

Don't Mess with our Ridges is the battle cry of the No on Measure D elitists. During a recent visit to the Pleasanton Farmer's Market, a No on Measure D representative agreed that if he owned the property he would want to develop it too. What hypocrisy! But, in Pleasanton, it is all too easy to pick up a placard and head for a popular street corner to whip the sheep into a stampede. In addition, when confronted with the facts, this representative was only able to petulantly proclaim that the Lins bought the property that was designated agricultural. That is weak and lame. The Stoneridge Mall stands on grazing land. Hacienda Business Park was once flooded for duck hunting. Cities that develop—as Pleasanton has—simply evolve and agricultural land becomes a shopping center, Business Park, or a golf course (Callippe Preserve). Bottom line is that they do not want their view interrupted. The rest of the arguments are irrelevant.

All of the same suspects are running the elitist playbook. Letter writers have blanketed the newspapers with their drivel. Kay Ayala “mis-spoke” during her signature gathering. She pointed to the Pleasanton Ridge when cajoling voters into signing her petitions (she did not have any of the appropriate documents with her at Lucky) and asked if we wanted our ridge developed. She knew that the people had decisively spoken on Pleasanton Ridge and the Hayward Hotel and that it would frighten Lucky neighbors into thinking that was the ridge under consideration. When asked about this apparent “mistake” she proclaimed that the Oak Grove development was the same. Kay, you cannot see Oak Grove from Lucky. When asked about the cost, Kay proudly proclaimed that the taking of the Lin's property would not cost anything. She was dumbfounded when she was confronted with putting a price tag on the property and asking voters to pony up if the ridge the Lins own is important to Pleasanton.

Also, how arrogant is it to demonize people who want and can afford to build large custom homes? It is only eletists who can do it with impunity. See, they already have their custom homes in Grey Eagle and Kottinger Hills. They have their flocks of followers to lend a helping hand to keep their viewshed. Calling the homes that could be built in Oak Grove Macmansions is shallow, elitist, and disingenuous. It tries to shift the argument away from the Lin's right to develop and the benefits the project has for Pleasanton (park, open space, and much needed development fees). One can only hope that the people will have caught on to these people and their take-no-prisoners tactics.

Copyright © 2010 Opinion Pleasanton. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Legal
All images on this site are copyrighted by Opinion Pleasanton, with the exception of some altered public domain graphics and varous business logos belonging to local businesses who support Opinion Pleasanton. No graphic located on this site may be altered, sold, or put into any collection without written confirmation from Opinion Pleasanton. No article, poll, or visitor comment may be altered or reprinted on another website or news article without the express written permission of the Opinion Pleasanton edtors, Bob Cordtz and James Jordan. To do so may result in legal action. For more information on copyright laws and protections click here.