|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Pleasanton Weekly got it wrong
The Pleasanton Weekly’s July 25 editorial got the facts — and the story — flat-out wrong.
For over a year leading up to the last election, the previous City Council worked publicly and transparently to address the city’s growing budget crisis. This included council meetings, special meetings, community workshops, mailers and direct outreach. The Pleasanton Weekly was there. To now claim the Council was evasive or disingenuous isn’t just misleading — it’s dishonest.
The editorial suggests the Council should have done nothing while multimillion-dollar deficits loomed — and that residents didn’t deserve a say in how to respond. That’s outrageous. Rather than acknowledge its role in sowing confusion, the editorial board doubled down, defending its divisive actions and downplaying the consequences. That’s not journalism. That’s spin.
Measure PP was a responsible attempt to face a mounting fiscal threat. All Councilmembers received the same sobering financial projections from city staff. Four took action. One, Jack Balch, chose not to. Voters had the final say through a public, democratic process.
The defeat of Measure PP was not inevitable, as the Weekly claims. If failure had been certain, it never would’ve reached the ballot. The risk of doing nothing far outweighed the risk of asking voters to act. Now, Pleasanton faces the very cuts that Measure PP sought to avoid — cuts that were preventable.
The Weekly’s praise for pulling $3 million from the pension trust is misleading. That money isn’t “free” — it adds to our unfunded liability and does nothing to fix the structural deficit.
Economic development is important, but it’s no quick fix. Costs are rising. Without new, stable revenue, more painful cuts are on the way.
Pretending the crisis is over doesn’t help. It misleads the public and delays real solutions. Pleasanton deserves facts — not revisionist history.
— Valerie Arkin, former member of Pleasanton City Council, Pleasanton USD Board of Trustees and Pleasanton Library Commission
District 1
Councilmember Jeff Nibert was elected to represent the people of Pleasanton’s District 1 — not override them. Repeatedly, his vote runs counter to the voices of those who elected him. That is not leadership. That is a breach of trust.
When people speak, their representatives should listen. Councilmember Nibert does not. He votes as if public input is background noise. We deserve a leader who listens. Councilmember Nibert ignored our concerns, dismissed our voices and consistently voted against our interests.
Voters in District 1 voted 55% against Measure PP. Councilmember Nibert ignored this and supported Measure PP. Nibert was fully aware voters in District 1 were against tax increase. Yet Councilmember Nibert supported a charter city ballot measure for tax purposes, claiming infrastructure needs the tax revenue.
Councilmember Nibert misunderstands the role of representative democracy — his voting record suggests personal conviction takes precedence over community consensus. Councilmember Nibert, your job is to represent us. Not rule over us.
Councilmember Nibert, you are out of step with constituent priorities. Councilmember Nibert, you are consistently misaligned with voter sentiment. Councilmember Nibert regularly diverges from community consensus. Jeff Nibert, you place personal or political agendas above public interests. Your tax and spending agenda is wrong.
— Michael Austin
Editorial stepped over the line
I am a strong supporter of independent journalism, but personally think your last editorial of July 25 stepped over the line. I have personally attended most City Council meetings (and am graduate of the five-month Pleasanton Community Academy) over the last 18 months and respectfully disagree with several of your comments.
The editorial included the statement that the prior City Council was contentious, divisive, failed to collaborate and distracted Pleasanton citizens. I believe this was off-base and a bit inappropriate.
It was also noted that the new City Council “embraced” the failure of Measure PP. Whether it was embraced or not, I question whether the city and residents are truly in a better spot.
Over the next few months, as the reality of the proposed cuts are felt, I would bet that our Pleasanton community will come to realize we have taken a step back and PP was a missed opportunity. As you note “with the budget finalized let’s move forward”.
– TJ McGrath
Enjoying Pleasanton’s heritage
My wife and I recently joined one of the Charles Huff Walking Tours hosted by the Museum on Main. Strolling along St. Mary Street, Division Street and Rose Avenue, we admired the stunning historic homes and learned about Pleasanton’s early founders and important citizens, including Bernal, Nevis, Hearst, Hansen, Orloff and Charles Huff, just to name a few.
Our knowledgeable guide shared captivating stories about the families who lived in these homes, their livelihoods and their contributions to our city’s rich history.
The tour concluded with a visit to the Museum on Main, where engaging exhibits brought Pleasanton’s past to life. A highlight was the demonstration of the horn atop the iconic Main Street archway sign — a thrilling experience to see and hear!
These free tours are a fantastic way to explore our town’s rich heritage. The next tours are scheduled for Aug. 9 and 12 where we will explore Railroad Avenue, Second Street and Neal Street. I encourage everyone to visit the Museum on Main to enjoy all its offerings and to join a walking tour to discover the people and stories that shaped Pleasanton.
We are blessed to live in the beautiful city of Pleasanton and to have a jewel such as the Museum on Main to share our wonderful heritage.
— David Ott
Trump, Epstein and immigration
At a filmed deposition in 2010, convicted child sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein was asked, “Have you ever socialized with Donald Trump in the presence of females under the age of 18?” Epstein pleaded the Fifth Amendment.
Preceding this, he was asked if he had ever socialized with Trump, to which he answered, yes. So, Epstein did socialize with our current president – this has been documented in a sworn deposition and in other examples that were taped (see Trump whispering like a naughty boy in Epstein’s ear at some past party).
Elaborating on this a bit, Epstein, the sex trafficker, socialized with Trump, a guy found liable of sexual assault and who pays hush money to porn actors. Here’s a rhetorical question: What was the purpose of Trump socializing with Epstein?
In other news, Trump’s approval rating on immigration, his signature issue, is underwater. His get-tough stance on immigration helped him get into the White House a second time, but his chaotic and brutal actions have tanked him in the polls.
According to the latest Silver Bulletin, 50.3% disapprove of his handling of immigration while only 46% approve. That may not sound like a huge difference, but consider that early in his administration, he had an approval rating as high as 53.4% on the issue, equating to almost an 8-point decline.
Conclusion: Our perverted president also does a lousy job on his top issue and people (i.e., voters) are catching on.
– Ward Kanowsky
Reps. must act to protect our health and future, not polluters
I’m deeply disappointed in every legislator who voted for one of the most harmful bills in history, Trump’s “One Big Beautiful Bill”.
Many people in our state and nationwide likely don’t understand what this legislation means for our families and communities. Here’s a breakdown of how some parts of this bill will directly affect us:
* Phase out tax credits for wind and solar power, which will drive up our energy.
* Withdraw funding for agencies like NOAA that monitor extreme weather, leaving communities vulnerable to climate disaster.
* Throws millions of children, seniors and families off Medicaid and food assistance.
Republicans cheered about taking away health care, gutting clean energy programs, selling public lands and giving massive tax breaks to billionaires. Policy reflects values, and I am horrified by the values represented in this bill and by every legislator who voted for it. We won’t forget this.
We must fight back by advocating for policies and voting for politicians who will protect people and the planet over corporate polluters. We need you to stand up for us and be our voice.
— Jaspreet Singh
