Mayor Candance Andersen Will Not Get My Vote For Supervisor Around Town, posted by RJW, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Apr 29, 2012 at 1:10 pm
Danville Mayor Candance Andersen says the fact she is anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, has no bearing on whether you should vote for her for Supervisor. I agree with her, as those issues will not come before her as Supervisor.
However, although I am a Republican, like Mayor Andersen, I will NOT vote for her for Supervisor, due to her absolute failure as Mayor to stop the illegal Magee Ranch development in Danville. As Mayor, and as a long time city council member, she has the authority, the clout, the bullypulpit, and influence, to stop this illegal development. However, she has done nothing to stop this illegal development, and in fact is forcing local residents to hire an expensive attorney to sue the Town(where she is Mayor)to force the court to enforce the law that requires an election for approval to change the zoning to allow this huge development.
This Magee Ranch illegal development, will make an already horrible commute, near Green Valley Elementary School, Los Cerros Middle School, and Monte Vista High, and Diablo, that much worse, not to mention what the grading will do to the environment and beautiful setting. This is why we have laws, that require a vote of citizens, to allow this development. She claims to be an experienced attorney, but yet she seems to have little respect for the laws that require a vote. If the citizens vote for this development, so be it. But follow the laws, and use your position as Mayor, to make sure that the laws are enforced.
If you have children that attend Green Valley Elementary School, Los Cerros Middle school, or Monte Vista High, do NOT vote for Mayor Candance Andersen for Supervisor, as her failure to stop this illegal development will greatly increase the traffic around these schools, and cause safety concerns.
Posted by [removed], a resident of another community, on Apr 29, 2012 at 4:35 pm
This commentary directly relates to key concerns in our Diablo Vista Region, Saranap to Blackhawk, and focuses on key issues of the district 2 campaign.
Government Communication is in question as the Danville town government and council have specifically avoided the issues of traffic and its diversion to Green Valley/Stone Valley corridor from an already over-burdened Diablo Road. More certainly, it is a subject for county and town of Danville review under the well-considered claims of legal violations for such planned development at Magee and Weber Ranches.
The impact is obvious and Mayor Andersen should answer the challenge of the town council claims that they are within their rights to ignore the laws restricting such zoning changes without a vote of the Danville voters and should answer for the impact of the town council's positions disregarding traffic impact on Diablo, Blackhawk and Alamo.
To qualify that responsibility is to note that the decisions to move forward with Weber and Magee Ranch development happened before Mayor Andersen's present term as mayor. In addition, other council members, some simply appointees, have been the most vocal is support of these projects. Importantly, Mayor Andersen is counsel capable of representing the interests of the people of Danville, Diablo, Blackhawk and Alamo in determining legal restrictions still remaining for the projects and any specific county involvement to protect Diablo, Blackhawk and Alamo interests. Simply, that is what a Mayor should do as a town leader and a good neighbor to impacted communities.
Most importantly, we need to know why these projects continue toward construction when significant county areas are impacted by the results. Where is Mary's representation of Diablo and Blackhawk? Where is Gayle's staff, during her illness, to protect Alamo? For that matter, where is all CCC-BOS members in this need to protect Danville and County residents?
This is a great story that deserves more than town square forum consideration! These are exceptional questions related to primary issues of district 2 voters and much can be said about districts 2 and 3 candidates in the support of resolve of this critical traffic burden.
Posted by Alamo Ron, a resident of the Alamo neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 8:13 am
I, too, would like a candidate to pass EVERY litmus test and agree with me on EVERY issue. Unfortunately, that is not the real world. I suggest you look beyond just the one land use issue and accept that Candace is the best candidate on most issues. She's certainly far better than the alternative...
Posted by RJW, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Apr 30, 2012 at 9:05 am
This "one land use issue" is not trivial. It will permanently adversely affect so many of us in Danville. Anybody can show up at a ribbon cutting ceremony, pose for photographs, attend worthless committe after committe meetings, and put up campaign signs all over town. A real leader has the courage to stand up and fight for what is important to her constitutents. Her failure to do anything on this important issue that actually affects us in Danville is so troubling that it is a litmus test. In good conscience, I can not, and will not, vote for her.
Posted by Informed Resident, a resident of another community, on Apr 30, 2012 at 9:06 pm
Really? Another one of your lame attempts to disparage Supervisor Piepho (and Glover) without any real substance? I’m not sure why you keep trying to sling your mud, because no one is buying it. It is almost as if you are trying to convince yourself.
Your pathetic barbs reflect poorly on you. I’ll wager that is why you post anonymously under variations of “Voter” over and over. This also provides insight into your character …and more of your jealous infatuations.
In case you haven't noticed, Piepho is Chair of the Board and Glover is Vice Chair. So much for your fears about turning the BOS over to their "whims".
Posted by Grand Jury Voter, a resident of another community, on Apr 30, 2012 at 9:27 pm
Having read the last 18 months of County Grand Jury reports I can not imagine a more questionable leader than Mary Piepho. Understanding that many of her acts that te Grand Jury discusses occurred when Tomi Van de Brooke served as Mary's Chief of Staff causes me to reject Tomi's candidacy.
Perhaps if Tomi were to distance herself from those decisions and actions I could reconsider, but she won't ever do that. Those two are, as the saying goes, Thick as Thieves!
I don't follow the comment about Pieho being the Chair of the BOS but I expect the only reason to raise that is to add credibility to Mary. Not likely to work with anyone who understand the situation, but clearly it is intended for those who do not.
Posted by Informed Resident, a resident of another community, on May 5, 2012 at 1:22 am
Voter, errrr, I mean “Voter” of the best choice or should I be calling you Grand Jury “Voter” this time around???
My goodness, do you think we actually all share your unique dysfunction? Do you think we cannot tell that you are the very same disgruntled one baller, trying to once again fool the forum readership? Sorry, but that doesn’t fly in anyone’s mind except your own. You are really a case study.
I have read the grand jury reports (I always do) which makes it very clear to me, that you haven’t. You know, they are on line and easily accessible; Web Link
As anyone can plainly see by reading the reports, Mary Piepho is not implicated at all. In fact she is not even mentioned! So much for your conspiracy theories. So much for you attemps at trying to lead readers to believe your rhetoric. Actually it just goes directly to the point of your odd infatuation…or is it jealousy? Quite frankly it is hard to discern and your behavior is becoming increasingly suspicious.
In the grand scheme of things you are fooling no one but yourself. You don’t even live in District 2, so lets quite playing games; you don’t get to vote for or against, Tomi Van de Brooke.
In closing, it is a shame you could not comprehend the value of Mary Piepho and Federal Glover being Chair and Vice Chair as well as neither of them having a challenger. It really says a lot. It is no surprise that the fundamental aspect if this importance would be lost on you. You are clearly a candidate for the Dunning-Kruger study. Web Link (It’s ok if you don’t see it…that is actually part of the effect).
Good luck with your witch hunt. At some point you may actually tire from beating your head against that wall. …But if not, you are providing a lot of entertainment.
Enjoy the weekend, because the “jury” is still out.
Posted by [removed], a resident of another community, on May 6, 2012 at 2:43 pm
Since the result is EMCEB libel and you are the President, do you ever read the commentary you sponsor under the pseudonym Informed Resident. Do you see such commentary as "respectful and thruthful? Does it fulfill your promise that the " Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion?"
In this exchange, informed resident commentary misrepresented the truth in an effort to defame positions by what is identified as Mary Piepho's enemy list, in so many words. It seems a challenge for your Express editor to fact-check the commentary and actually answer the questionable claims impacting the scope of CCC Grand Jury Reports, any claims for approval of any candidate running unopposed without voters' choice, and any current majority approval of CCC-BOS performance by Contra Costans. No reference was the complete disclosure and no claim was full reality.
This time, Gina, employ your journalism rather than your sponsorship.
Posted by Informed Resident, a resident of another community, on May 7, 2012 at 11:41 pm
Libel Hal? Really? It is amusing what a “selective” point of view you have. A certain voter, commits the act over and over, but you just choose to ignore that? Wow. You also bend the truth in many of your posts but that is ok right? But when someone clarifies your misgivings, all of the sudden that is libel? Sorry but it doesn’t work that way in the real world. I think your hat is a little out of square.
This is a forum for opinions. Put on your big boy pants and stop trying to make everything fit your own definitions. That would be a great start because you sounding just like your east county buddies Don Flint and Alamo transplant, Bill Richardson. They have the very same “unique” habits that you display and their fingerprints are on quite a few documents. Twisting the truth and then crying foul when you are caught doesn’t really play out very well with those of us who actually pay attention. You might just have to come to grips with being exposed for not telling the truth can be a little uncomfortable. In this case (as many others) a fact check would have you in a really bad position and I am positive you would inturn attack or try to discredit the fact checker.
C’mon Hal, read the Grand Jury reports-they are online and show us all what you come up with to support your “accusations”.