Did she break the pledge?
By Matt Artz
Monday, March 2nd, 2009 at 7:41 pm in City Council Election, Fremont
In this video, at the 1:32 mark, Trisha Tahmasbi pledged not to take money from developers
during her run for City Council last year. And technically, she didn‘t.
But on Oct. 31 — four days before the Nov. 4 election – she accepted at least $9,500 from
members the Patterson family, which own much of the land slated for Fremont‘s biggest
development project: More than 800 homes, two churches, parks, a school — all adjacent to
Coyote Hills Regional Park. She also got $500 from Richard Frisbie, the private planner and
former city employee, who is shepherding the project through the entitlement process.
The development proposal is heading to the City Council this year. The Pattersons have a big
stake in it. They spent about $600,000 in 2006 fighting Measure K, which would have rezoned
the land for agriculture and killed the project. After they get their entitlements and the housing
market rebounds, they plan to sell the land to firms that will do the building.
So did Tahmasbi break her pledge, or at least the spirit of it?
She says no. She wrote this text message to me today:
Frisbie is a planner and the Pattersons are landowners. Neither are developers.
My pledge was no money from developers.
Here‘s what she said last year in that YouTube video:
I would like you to know that I made a campaign pledge not to accept
developers contributions. I have done so in order to preserve the integrity of
the planning process and to remove even the slightest appearance of undo
influence of developers who have business before the city. I am proud of this
pledge, and I invite all of the other candidates to join me.
The pledge appeared to be good politics at the time. It distinguished Tahmasbi from her top
rival, Sue Chan, whose campaign was largely run and funded by the former Assemblyman John
Dutra — one of Fremont‘s biggest developers. And it blurred the differences between her and
Vinnie Bacon, who had already made the same pledge and had the backing of Fremont‘s
Bacon was shocked to hear about the contributions and said the Pattersons were in essence
developers. You can read his quotes in tomorrow‘s paper.
Councilmember Bill Harrison, who had endorsed Tahmasbi said the Pattersons aren‘t developers,
although he acknowledged they do have business coming up before the city. Councilmember Anu
Natarajan, who also backed Tahmasbi, didn‘t want to comment about the Pattersons.
Tahmasbi, 28, is deputy chief of staff for Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico. Despite the
support a majority of the city council, most unions and the Chamber of Commerce, she finished
fourth in last year‘s city council election, behind both Chan and Bacon. Late campaign
contributions for all 2008 Fremont candidates were released yesterday and are available at City
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
No Responses to “Did she break the pledge?”
1. Doug Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:01 pm
If Ms. Tahmasbi did not wish to give the ―slightest appearance‖ of taking money from developers
she should have stayed far away from the Paterson Family and Frisbie contributions.
The Paterson Family has a significant financial stake riding on the Fremont City Council‘s approval of
their land being developed. Richard Frisbie has a significant financial stake riding on that approval
This isn‘t even six degrees of separation. C‘mon Trisha what were you thinking?!
2. Irvington Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 8:28 pm
Wow, that‘s really parsing the definition of ―developer‖. Reminds me of Clinton‘s infamous ―that
depends on what your definition of the word ‗is‘ is‖ quote.
This is going to be a tough one to explain, Trish, ‘specially if you ever intend to run for office in this
town again. What you‘re giving us so far won‘t pass the laugh test. I do hope you can come up with
something more convincing.
Given the endorsements are cited in the article above, I was surprised when she finished fourth in
the race. Maybe there is something to karma after all.
3. Ardenwooder Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 10:43 pm
Interesting thought, newly appointed planning commissioner Lisa Quan lied about her business
licenses but we don‘t hear anything about that but something as frugal as this is getting its own
post? MATT ARTZ you need to quit you are one of the most biast reporters in this town. maybe your
accepting money from developers to write misconstrue the news so that you may misinform the
4. Andy Says:
March 2nd, 2009 at 11:19 pm
Can someone explain why is patterson project so bad. Yes they are building more homes, but also a
school right? And I think coyote hills is not yosemite, and they are building it only near coyote hills
and not *on* it.
5. Doug Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:46 am
The fact that the 20 Patterson Family members, and Mr. Frisbie, the planner for their land deal,
made their donations after the disclosure deadline is a strong indication they did not wish it to be
public before the election. No matter what Ms. Tahmasbi claims, the perception is bad. Very bad.
Ardenwood – I don‘t believe Matt ever used the word ―lied‖ about Ms. Quan‘s business licenses. In
fact, he was taken to task by another blogger for not digging deeper into city records and disclosing
her business license situation.
And one other thing Ardenwood, Matt is the ONLY reporter in town and only part time given
MediaNewsGroup‘s rotating furlough plan.
6. Anon Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 7:24 am
―she accepted at least $9,500 from the Patterson family, which along with Cargill Salt owns that
land slated for Fremont‘s biggest development project.‖
What does ―as least‖ mean?
7. WS Resident Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 7:39 am
Why is this all Matt‘s fault?
We all have phones, brains, and time. Stop bitching about Matt and get off your assets if you are so
(rightfully) indignant about our crappy politicians. Matt‘s one guy if we all called her and asked her
to explain that would have much more of an impression.
8. Matt Artz Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:45 am
―At least‖ means there was one name on the list that I couldn‘t pin down as a Patterson.
9. Linda Ramus Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:50 am
Don‘t insult our intelligence. The Pattersons, while technically not developers, are planning on
profiting hugely from development of their land. Even if they aren‘t ―developers‖ Trish would be
casting a vote that would mean millions of dollars to them. If that isn‘t a conflict of interest, if that
isn‘t trying to buy a vote I don‘t know what is. Where are the ethics with some of these people.
Vinnie Bacon at least was honest. He never took a dime from deveoplers. He just spent a lot of time
standing in front of grocery stores, shaking hands and meeting the voters.
10. Californiaguy Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:59 am
I am disappointed in Councilmember Bill Harrison, A nu Natarajan, answers, how much did the
Patterson‘s and Frisbee give to there campaigns.
The Patterson‘s have developed over 5,000 homes on there land. They are developers in every
sense of the word.
I cannot think of a better example of what is wrong with Fremont‘s City Council and Mayor.
Do we, the residents of Fremont, deserve this type of unethical politics. How long are we going to
let them ignore the Residents of Fremont and yet, they have not, met a Developer they did not like.
They represent Developers, not the residents of Fremont, just watch there actions over the last few
11. Anon Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:05 am
Actually Linda, I‘d say the Patterson‘s and their ―development‖ consultant Frisbie, the private
planner who is shepherding the project through the ―entitlement process‖ are most definitely acting
12. Anon Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:23 am
It‘s interesting, in Trisha‘s video (above) she sites her ―legislative experience‖ ?
Does being deputy chief of staff for Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico count as legislative
experience? No, of course not; it counts as legislative ―STAFF‖ experience!
13. La Boca Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 9:45 am
Trisha; sure sounds like the Patterson‘s are ―DEVELOPERS‖ to me! According to Wikipedia:
―Real estate development is a multifaceted business, encompassing activities that range from the
renovation and re-lease of existing building to the purchase of raw land and the sale of improve
parcels to others. Developers are the coordinators of those activities, converting ideas on paper into
real property. They create, imagine, fund, control and orchestrate the process of development from
the beginning to end. Developers usually take the greatest risk in the creation or renovation of real
estate — and receive the greatest rewards. Typically, developers purchase a tract of land,
determine the marketing of the property, develop the building program and design, obtain the
necessary public approvals and financing, build the structure, and lease, manage, and ultimately
14. Jim Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 11:10 am
I voted for her and now I wish I didn‘t
15. Anon Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Yes Matt (et. al.), she BROKE HER PLEDGE! And now denies that she BROKE IT?
16. Susan Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:13 pm
Her lack of integrity is appalling and the casual response of city council people suggests to me that
they condone her behavior and probably are complicit with it. Welcome to Fremont politics.
17. La Boca Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:16 pm
According to Wikipedia (or should I say ―Sticky- Wikipedia? (-;):
―Denialism is the term used to describe the position of governments, political parties, business
groups, interest groups, or individuals who reject propositions on which a scientific or scholarly
consensus exists. Such groups and individuals are said to be engaging in denialism when they seek
to influence policy processes and outcomes by using rhetorical tactics to give the appearance of
argument or legitimate debate, when in actuality there is none.‖
18. Vinnie Bacon Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:24 pm
Give me a break!! This obviously violates the intent of Trisha‘s pledge. And it was obviously timed
so that news of it wouldn‘t come out until after the election. As Linda said, to argue otherwise is to
insult our intelligence.
Frisbie and the Patterson‘s are applying for the largest development currently being considered in
Fremont. They will be asking the Council to increase the number of allowed homes on their site from
266 to over 850. They would literally make millions if the Council approves this. Accepting campaign
contributions from them clearly goes way beyond the ‘slightest appearance‘ of impropriety.
Bill Harrison‘s and Anu‘s attempts to cover for Trisha are equally disappointing. Maybe they‘re
concerned because they have also taken large campaign contributions from Frisbie and the
Pattersons. And let‘s not forget Bob Wieckowski and Bob Wasserman who have done the same.
We‘ll see how they all vote on this matter when it comes before the Council.
I believe this is indicative of how things get done in Fremont. It‘s not a pretty picture.
19. Vinnie Bacon Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:35 pm
The last I heard, the Patterson‘s propsed putting up half of the $19 million that would be needed for
a new school. They suggested that the City try to get the rest of the money from the State. If
anyone has more information on this, please fill us in.
(BTW, the Ardenwood area has some of the worst school overcrowding in all of Fremont. This is
where the Patterson‘s have already built over 5,000 homes.)
Maybe you, or a Council member, or Trisha, could explain to us why having 600 more homes here
would be good for Fremont when we‘re having trouble paying for our existing services. Given the
geography of the area, these people would probably shop mainly in Union City or in Newark.
Are you really arguing that since Coyote Hills is not Yosemite, that we shouldn‘t care about it?
20. Tom Meyer Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 12:55 pm
I love Coyote Hills and still enjoy it. As a kid back in the 60‘s and early 70‘s riding my bike with
friends from Glenmoor to the Hills. In the 90‘s I have taken my kids there to ride bikes. It needs to
be preserved at all costs. I wonder how many of our current council members have the type of
memories that I have. My guess would be none!!
21. Jen Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:24 pm
This issue distresses me greatly.
The Ardenwood area of north Fremont is already filled with homes built cheek by jowl. Forest Park
Elementary is already overcrowded from what I understand, and given the recent cuts to school
funding, it doesn‘t seem like offering to put up 1/2 the money for the school would really be of
much help. Great – so they pay for the building of the school – where is the money for the teachers,
the books, the general operation of the school going to come from? Last time I checked, FUSD was
having funding issues…
It frustrates me to no end that the Fremont City Council focuses on bringing new residents to the
city rather than concentrating on keeping and/or improving the quality of life for those people who
have chosen to make their homes here already. Fremont city services are already overtaxed. Please
explain to me how bringing in so many new residents would not stretch those services to a
No, they aren‘t building ―on‖ the parkland itself. But the development will be close enough TO the
park that it will disrupt the fragile ecosystem that is there, not to mention destroy the experience of
Coyote Hills for the park visitor.
And Vinnie is exactly right – Union Landing and the Jarvis/Newark Blvd. shopping centers are MUCH
closer for that development than anything in the Fremont city limits.
I‘ll definitely be keeping an eye out for when this goes before the council. Shame that it‘s even
gotten that far.
22. La Boca Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 1:31 pm
The more I think about this one, the more OUTRAGEOUS it is! This is nothing less than two BOLD
FACE LIES! The first well calculated, and the second caught off-guard!!
Trisha Tahmasbi is deputy chief of staff for Assembly Majority Leader Alberto Torrico, and on the
Ohlone College Board (if I heard correctly)?
Do people who hold positions of such PUBLIC trust really lie like this? Apparently, ―people‖ do; and
23. Schmelzpunkt Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:17 pm
You geniuses ever consider the connection between Trisha‘s fourth place showing and her pledge
not to take money from developers?
Unlike many in the field, she limited her access to the well of funding offered by developers, while
not having the means to self-finance her campaign.
Now… does this mean you‘re going to be fair and do a story about the new planning commission
appointee and her dubious claims about her business licenses?
24. La Boca Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:25 pm
Schmelzpunkt: Did you ever consider the connection between Trisha‘s pledge and Matt‘s post
above? She DID take money from a developer!
She ―limited her access‖ – get real!
25. Irvington Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:41 pm
Schmellie – so we‘re supposed to give Tricia a pass because she only took SOME money from
developers after she said that she would not take any?
This isn‘t real complicated – she said she wouldn‘t, then she did.
You see, the campaign process is an opportunity for a candidate to say what they believe in, what
they intend to do, and then do it. If they can hold to their principles while they‘re running, maybe
we can believe that they will do the same if they‘re elected.
We clearly do need to do something about the Palinification of the electoral process around here, by
which I mean the increasing cost of running for local office. I do hope that local candidates will take
a page from the Obama handbook and set up websites which include the ability to accept a larger
number of donations from smaller sources, thereby mitigating the need to take large amounts of
money from interests which will later expect to be repaid by votes in their favor.
26. Step Child Of FUSD Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:55 pm
Yes La Boca, she limited herself until FOUR DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION. Trisha should be
commended for her efforts regardless of this incident. As most political scientists will tel you early
and late money are the most important in campaigning. She needed that money to run an effective
campaign against Sue Chan whom was propped up by real land developers ―The Dutras‖ since day
one. Why don‘t I hear any criticism her way for having a majority of land developer money behind
27. Schmelzpunkt Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 2:57 pm
Ms. Tahmasbi didn‘t lose votes because she took money from what may or may not be a developer.
And no, I don‘t think we should give her a pass, but it‘s not immediately clear (despite Matt‘s
insinuations) if she broke her pledge.
But she did not, however, have the resources of Ms. Chan and Mr. Bacon and it‘s quite ridiculous
everyone is overlooking that.
28. La Boca Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:12 pm
Step Child & Schmelzpunkt; Please definition of DENIALISM above.
29. La Boca Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Step Child & Schmelzpunkt; Please SEE definition of DENIALISM above.
30. Irvington Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:33 pm
Clearly, we differ on what a ―developer‖ is, and that‘s OK.
Step Child and Schmellie -
If Ms. Chan took money from developers, that would tend to indicate that she is endebted to them
and that obligation could reasonably be expected to influence her vote. I do not know where Ms.
Chan‘s money came from; it‘s not that I don‘t believe you when you say it was from the Dutras,
only that I haven‘t seen any documentation of that.
Likewise, I would be interested to know where Mr. Bacon‘s money came from. He said that he would
not take donations from developers and, unless and until I see evidence to the contrary, I‘ll believe
I do believe that all this hoo-ha about Dirk Lorenz and Tricia Tamasbi is going to bring the issues of
funding and impartiality to the forefront in upcoming elections (Anu and Bill H. are up at the end of
2010), and that is probably a good thing.
31. Furious With The Beat ! Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:37 pm
Matt Artz should be fired, she didn‘t take developer money, that‘s it. Matt Artz should be focusing
on people like Sue Chan & Lisa Quan people who work for the developers and not the citizens of
RECALL WASSERMAN, CHAN, & NATARAJAN
32. Californiaguy Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:43 pm
furious with the beat , Trisha?
33. Californiaguy Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:45 pm
Irvington, instead of casting doubt, Vinnie‘s donation records is public, check it out.
34. Irvington Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 3:56 pm
Furious, you‘re making this a matter of degree and using an extremely narrow definition of
The Pattersons have apparently dedicated their lives to wringing every last penny of profit from the
land that they inherited from their forbears, who are undoubtedly rotating in their graves over their
successor‘s actions. They intend to make buckets of money from developing this land. That makes
And don‘t tell me about the Patterson‘s having the right to do this to Fremont. I inherited plenty of
land in this town too, and you don‘t see me or my family putting ticky-tacky housing all over it.
Sure Sue and Lisa are in the developer‘s pockets. We know that, and it‘s wrong. They‘re even more
dangerous because they currently hold City offices. That is exactly why we don‘t need MORE
candidates in those deep pockets with them.
Cal, nice one!
35. Irvington Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:01 pm
Cal, I don‘t want to cast any doubt on Vinnie‘s donations. I said I‘d believe that he did what he said
he would do (not take developer money) unless and until I see evidence to the contrary.
Do you know where I can find these donation records? Are they on his website? I haven‘t visited it
since the election. Through the State? The City? I‘d really like to know, because I hope it will prove
that he did the right thing, and that information could help him in the next election. Unfortunately,
in the current political environment in this town, you do kinda have to prove if you did the right
thing. Sad but true.
36. Andy Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:07 pm
If the facts are all made clear, then people will support you. Supporting NIMBYism will not get
majority support from people of fremont. However, as you point out in this case, building more
homes in ardenwood area is not good unless they plan to fully fund the school and resolve other
37. Alan Stirling Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:20 pm
I have met Trisha T. and she is a sweet innocent child who has been corrupted by the people who
mentored her. This did not happen because Trisha T. is a duplicious person. She is the unwitting
victum of the people she trusted to teach and guide her. Someone else told her it was OK to do this.
Remember she was a staff person in a political office. She can only learn from what she was
exposed to so please dont judge her so harshly.
Now lets look at who she trusted for guidence. Mayor Bob Wasserman and his second banana Bill
Harrison. Wow. There are two pillars of integrety to study. Notwithstanding the violating of Open
Meetings Act, look at the rest of their performance. Then comes Anu with her website soliciting fees
to help with govt. business when she was appointed to the planning commission and while
appointed to the council by Bob Wasserman. Then the Fremont police dept. that should have been
minding our streets, or at least minding their own business, wanted to mind our elections. But
maybe that is their business, minding our elected officials cuz thats how the salary is increased.
They dont live in Fremont for the most of they so why did they jump on her bandwagon? Why did
she let them? Maybe Wasserman was involved. Trisha T. deserves a full and fair hearing to explain
who was telling her all these wrong things and why she believed them.
She is only 28 years old for goodness sake. She has only been an adult for 10 years. She is a
product of her social enviorment. Put the blame if any on the enviorment that corrupted her not on
the child victum.
38. Furious With The Beat ! Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:32 pm
irvington – I‘m stating the obvious she did not break her pledge I repeat she did not break her
Cali – I‘m an angered citizen seing this bias on this blog,
RECALL WASSERMAN,CHAN & NATARAJAN
39. Perry Masonary Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:40 pm
Quite chivalrous, but I just can‘t quite buy it.
As you point out, Ms. Tamasbi is 28 years old, and presented herself as a candidate who was
mature enough and posessed of the necessary experience to serve on the highest elected body in
this town where she would be tasked to make decisions that would effect our City for many years to
come. As such, she is solely responsible for who she chooses to take guidance from and for the
consequences if she chooses to act upon their advice and things go sideways. I would no more
accept advanced age (I‘m lookin‘ at you, Bob Wasserman) as an excuse than I would take Ms.
Tamasbi‘s relative youth as a valid reason to give her a pass on this one.
If Ms. Tamasbi has an explanation for all of this, she certainly has access to the media to do so, and
I‘m sure we‘d all be glad to hear it, but I haven‘t heard anything from her in the past 24 hours.
I am interested in some of the information in the second paragraph of your post, but I find some of
it very confusing. Could you please clarify about Anu and the PD? How was the PD ―mind(ing) our
40. Perry Masonary Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 4:44 pm
If Tricia did not break her pledge not to take donations from developers, why isn‘t she out in the
media defending herself?
If she intends to run for office in this town again, I would think that she would want to set the
record straight as soon as possible.
If what has been reported here is inaccurate in some respect, she would be in the best position to
correct the record.
I think we‘d all like to hear what she has to say.
41. Jen Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:06 pm
If Trisha was such a ―child victim‖ than it‘s no wonder she lost the election!
She‘s certainly not old enough to contribute to city government if she‘s not old enough to realize
she‘s being led down the proverbial garden path…
42. SaSha Fierce Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 5:41 pm
lets get things straight, as I recall Tahmasbi did not accept money from ―developers‖ you can say
that my definition is vague but you know what? You guys can take things out of context and blame
inocent people for doing nothing wrong but it won‘t change the fact that she didn‘t accept developer
43. Gus Morrison Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:11 pm
Let‘s put this discussion in context. There were four candidates for city council who had a chance to
win one of the two seats available. It was pretty much assumed Bob Wieckowski would be
reelected, so the other three, Chan, Bacon, and Tahmasbi were fighting for the other seat.
Vinnie grabbed the ―I won‘t take money from developers‖ position first. This was pretty easy for him
because he knew there weren‘t many (any?) developers who would give him donations.
Trisha reacted to Vinnie and made the same statement. This put she and Vinnie on one side and
Sue on the other.
Time goes on and the election is getting close. According to the late filings (I haven‘t seen the final
ones,) Vinnie and Trisha are in debt more than $15,000, mostly to themselves. Now, I remember
when I was 28 and I didn‘t have that kind of money to throw around. Things are drastic, printers
need to be paid, others are looking for money and the election is imminent. So we parse the
question – what is a developer?
In technical terms, the Patterson family has not built a single home since Fremont was incorporated.
They have sold land for homes, as have almost all of the old time farm families who were here. In
order to sell the land, they have applied for entitlements (approvals) prior to offering it for sale. In
so doing, they have ceded the Ardenwood Park area to the city along with the George Patterson
In their current application, they are planning to move all of the development east of Ardenwood,
with no houses on the park side. Their plan is for 800 homes, not 850 as Vinnie said. On the west
side of Ardenwood, they have committed to build an elementary school to house the kids from their
development. And, as I understand their plan, the eventual developers will still pay the developer
school fee to the school district. I believe they have told the school district that, if they want a
larger school than needed to house their students, additional funds should come from other sources.
Also, on that side of Ardenwood, there will be two churches and the family will construct and donate
a 38 acre city park to the city of Fremont. All of the remainder of the land, more than 250 acres, I
think, will be donated to the Park District to be added to Coyote Hills Park.
So, it‘s a fine line and, faced with what Tricia faced, I can see how she made the decision. But,
there is a lot more to this story.
The big problem which isn‘t being talked about is that of the four candidates for council and the
three candidates for mayor, 6 finished the campaign with significant deficits (and one candidate who
wasn‘t among the four I talked about, also finished with a significant deficit.) It is relatively easy for
an incumbent to raise money, but the two incumbents (Bob W and Bob W) both finished in the hole.
The cost of elections keeps going up. The 200 word Statement of Qualifications in the sample ballot
cost each candidate $2300, or $11.50 a word. The mail universe for me was 40,000 homes +/- and
the postage for each mailer was about $9000 (I mailed 3). My mail program alone would have
required 100+ people giving maximum donations.
So who gives to campaigns? The reports are available at the city clerks office. For me, the majority
of my donors list their occupation as retired, although I raised a significant amount from building
trades unions because of my position on the A‘s. On other reports, one can see real developers, real
estate interests, partisan political people, Rotarians, etc. It is difficult to raise the kind of money
running for office in Fremont has come to require.
We don‘t have a strong tradition of political contributions, we‘re too big anymore to make much of a
dent going door to door. We don‘t have any mass media short of the Argus and they weren‘t a
factor in November. Cable TV ads are cheap, but not really effective. Everyone doesn‘t have cable,
some have satellites or uverse, so while they are cheap, the coverage is ineffective short of huge
expenditures. We are stuck with mail as a candidate‘s means of communication. Mail costs money.
Money comes from donations. Donations come from people with money. People with money often
have a vested interest. Vested interests are not naturally bad, just requiring decision makers to
understand and vote their conscience. Jesse Unruh, long time Speaker of the Assembly said ―If you
can‘t eat their food, drink their booze, smoke their cigars, (bleep) their women, and still vote
against them the next day, you have no business in the legislature.‖ He also said ―Money is the
mother‘s milk of politics.‖
In my 25 years of service, I never had anyone remind me of a campaign donation when a vote was
coming up. The hardest thing for me was to vote against a friend. But in local government, almost
everyone you see is a friend, or a friend of a friend. You cannot avoid voting against a friend every
now and then and any competent elected official will do the right thing when the time comes.
All that said, we need to find a new way of doing politics, of doing campaigns. Public funding, more
cooperation by the agencies, expenditure limitations, something – anything. Running for office
ought not be limited to those who can afford to spend tens of thousands of their own dollars or
those who are willing to go, hat in hand, to the vested interests, whether it be land owners,
developers, police unions, other labor unions, or city vendors. There has to be a better way. I tried
a web site, with PayPal, to collect donations. I got some, but not many through that avenue.
Let‘s try to find a better way.
44. Step Child Of FUSD Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 6:52 pm
Thank you Gus for speaking truth to power. I am willing to work with you on clean money
45. Ardenwooder Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 7:57 pm
Gus Morrison for MAYOR !
I agree with you furious RECALL WASSERMAN CHAN AND NATARAJAN
46. Perry Masonary Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 8:11 pm
Alan and Gus -
I find this whole ―old dudes in defense of Tricia‖ thing fascinating. Don‘t get me wrong, I have
enormous respect for old dudes, but they can be wrong like anybody else, and I can‘t follow y‘all on
―She‘s just young‖, ―she was poorly advised by evil old pols‖, ―she didn‘t have enough money‖;
these are excuses that you wouldn‘t even try to put forward with a straight face if she was a young
man rather than a young woman. In the long run, you do young women a disservice when you do
not allow them to be wrong when they‘re wrong, without bogus excuses being made for them
because they‘re young and cute.
I know that you both know that, when it comes to being a City Councilmember, as the old song
goes, ―this ain‘t no party, this ain‘t no disco, this ain‘t no foolin‘ around‖.
I guess my point is, if she couldn‘t run with the big dogs, she should have stayed on the porch.
BTW, Gus, I love you to death, but someday you need to ‘splain that whole Patterson Ranch
consulting deal to me. It seems so out of character for you and makes my brain hurt.
47. Alan Stirling Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:27 pm
Perry Masonary, in response,
you deserve a full and frank response to The Trisha T. opinion (I do see your point), and The Anu /
Wasserman history. I cant do it in a blog, no way to insert exhibits. Both incumbent persons issues
were in conventional print. Anu in the tri city Voice and Wasserman and his foolish crew, including
Wiekowski who of all should have known better, in the Argus. But time has passed and a lot of folks
just came in. If you want to meet up I will show you the website print out. I can keep your identity
secret. No problem there. My direct email is email@example.com and contrary to your
allegations of excessive chronology, it is NOThttp://www.oldguys.com. Now Gus is the guy who
is really old, he just looks young.
48. Alan Stirling Says:
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:45 pm
Perry Masonary more response on the PD in our elections.
Very few of our PD live in Fremont but in every election they have endorsement forums, they
contribute, and they even campaigned vigoriously for the failed Prop L that I spoke against in 2005.
Even thhough the PD knew the Prop L was fraudulently portrayed they went for it and spent big
money and put out big effort to try and get the votes. Shortly after that they got a big raise. Even
though the measure went down in flames they were rewarded and I will admit that its not a surprise
but they diminished themselves and lost moral stature. I honestly cant understand how grown men
would pander for pennys like that. The situation worsened when they said they wanted to be paid to
put on their clothes each day. Note they are already paid to drive to work each day and paid
overtime to work out in their private gym under the police station.
There is an old Native American Indian proverb:
―We do not curse the hawk when he eats the sparrow‖
(From the desert warchief, Ugotamee),
The hawks endorse it, the sparrows dont. So how does that fly with you?
49. Leslie Stuart (Informed Resident) Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 12:43 am
If we misuse the term Developer and call the Patterson Family developers, we might as well go to
Cambridge and change their definition of a Developer to fit anyone and everyone who decides to
build something (i.e. if I decide to build a toothpick pyramid for a class I should be named a
developer) Another example: if I decide to Change and Develop my car engine into something
Better, more Advanced – then according to EVERYONE on this blog I should have the title of a
developer and not be allowed to donate my hard earned money to a candidate I support. A good
example we could use is Ohlone College. With their frontage property undeveloped, many
DEVELOPERS came in to propose plans/ideas for that area, the people who essentially vote yes or
no to these proposals either like the development idea or not, those people who have a say in this
development is the Administration/Board since the land BELONGS to OHLONE COLLEGE THEY
DECIDE WHAT BUILDS WHAT DOESN‗T- technically according to everyone on this blog then Ohlone
Admin should be considered Developers then! You‘re all probably thinking wait no? EXACTLY, none
of you make sense on this blog, take a step back and read out loud your hideous allegations.
Now lets make use of this, let me share onto everyone on this blog some real knowledge.
The term Developer, when speaking in terms of career/job, can refer to any of the following:
software developer, game developer, real estate developer, photographic developer, web developer,
hair developer, land developer, property developer, xda/sql/facebook developer, etc. The word
Developer itself is a noun meaning: someone, especially a child, whose physical or mental
development can de described in a particular way (I.e. Tom was a late/slow developer).
The Patterson Ranch has been around for over 150 years land inherited by the Patterson Family.
This land which belongs to them, is up for them to decide what they wish to do next with it. For
example, my own home, I am the owner of my house and the land it sits on, if I wish I can either
sell this land of mine, or develop my land to fit my own needs or the family‘s needs. The same goes
for the Patterson Family, it‘s simple – they own land where, ―argiculture is no longer economically
viable…due to proximity of protected lands, farm unable to use pesticides…faces loss of crops to
foraging wildlife from Coyote Hills…lacks local farm-produce facilities.‖ (Raman, Tri-City voice 2005)
LET ME EMPHASIZE TO EVERYONE ON THIS BLOG THAT THE PATTERSON FAMILY ARE STRICTLY
LAND OWNERS NOT DEVELOPERS. Here is some more knowledge you all MUST KNOW. The owners
of this land, are of course in favor of the development because it fits their NEEDS and WANTS, yet
they are NOT the ones handling the development proposal. KEN KAY ASSOCIATES – LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECTS IS HANDLING THIS DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL, NOT RICHARD FRISBIE (who only
elaborates the idea of the Development Group). FRISBIE IS LIKE COUNCILMEMBER ANU
NATARAJAN YET ANU NATARAJAN UNLIKE FRISBIE IS A PLANNER/ARCHITECT BY PROFESSION- WE
SHOULD BE MORE AFRAID OF WHAT SHE CAN DO AS THE CITY COUNCILMEMBER. KEN KAY
ASSOCIATES, THE REAL DEVELOPERS/ARCHITECTS ARE THE ONES OFFERING DIFFERENT ROUTES
AND VARIATIONS FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT TO TAKE PLACE ON AND TO BE SUCCESSFUL.
To inform the misinformed users on this blog and citizens of FREMONT, the following information is
the consulting team for the Patterson Ranch Development. Everything below is written in detail so
NO ONE can confuse someone for a developer or this and that:
ARCHITECT PLANNER: HUNT HALE JONES ASSOCIATES
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: THE GUZZARDO PARTNERSHIP
CIVIL ENGINEER: MACKAY & SOMPS
CAPITAL FACILITIES ENGINEERING: LARRY MINES, PE
HYDROLOGICAL ENGINEERING: BALANCE HYDROLOGICS, INC
SOILS & GEOTECHNICAL: TERRASEARCH, INC
FLOOD HAZARD: SCHAAD & WHEELER
CULTURAL RESOURCES: BASIN RESEARCH ASSOCIATES
WETLANDS & WILDLIFE: H.T. HARVEY & ASSOCIATES
WETLANDS & WILDLIFE: CONDOR COUNTRY CONSULTING
TRAFFIC ENGINEERING: HEXAGON TRANPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC
POLITICAL CONSULTANT: STATION HUGHES
FACILATOR: APEX STRATEGIES
LEGAL: MORRISON FOERSTER
–CONSULTING TEAM FOR THE PATTERSON DEVELOPMENT.
Now I can leave with you all being better informed of the situation around you. Lets never confuse
owners with developers and individuals on a consulting team as a Developer — if you do it just
shows California‘s Educational Institutions are slipping…that reminds me NO MORE TAX CUTS FOR
CA‗s EDUCATION SYSTEM!
50. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 8:46 am
Leslie Stuart @ 12:43: Let‘s assume your limited definition of a ―real estate developer‖ for a
moment; in which case, Trisha accepted donations from the OWNERS of the largest development in
Fremont – who stand to make a lot money from the development of their land.
In other words, you make a ―distinction‖ without a difference!
DISTINCTION WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE (according to Wikipedia):
A distinction without a difference is a type of argument where one word or phrase is preferred to
another, but results in no difference to the final outcome. It is particularly used when a word or
phrase has connotations associated with it that one party to an argument prefers to avoid.
―In legal terminology it means a change in definition which does not change the set which is
defined. For example changing ‗unseparated married men‘ to ‗males who have a non-separated
spouse‘ is a distinction without a difference.‖
An example from the 2008 film Changeling comes when a police captain is being questioned about
his decision to institutionalize a woman. When the questioning attorney describes the woman as
having been ―thrown into the mental hospital‖ the policeman asserts that ―She was not thrown, she
was escorted.‖ In either case the result is the same.
The phrase can also have a meaning beyond the preference for euphemisms. In general this
involves an over specificity with regard to terminology which, while technically correct and accurate,
does not change the overall meaning or understanding of the case in point. For example, some
people characterized anti-Muslim comments made by an United States Representative as ―racist.‖
While someone might technically quibble that Muslims are not a race and that therefore his actions
were not ―racist‖ this is a distinction without a difference since prejudice on religious grounds is not
generally considered any more socially acceptable than prejudice based on racial grounds.
51. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 9:33 am
P.S. ―Oh what tangled webs we weave, when our objective is to deceive.‖
52. Leslie Stuart Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 9:45 am
Nice use of the dictionary or shall I say internet, but I‘m sure you should know Professors nor any
educational institution does not rely nor like the use of wikipedia – again this proves we REALLY
Need to fund our educational institutions when people can only use wikipedia in self-defense of their
argument. Good reasons though – I must applaud you.
Yet, the matter of the fact remains, Tahmasbi never accepted money from a Developer. The owners
of the land, like any owner of any land eventually receive revenue/profit as years pass your land
becomes worth more as the dollar amount increases-especially the land we‘re talking of.
You can continue to defend Matt Artz‘s allegations of Tahmasbi breaking her pledge. Or take a real
good look at the picture and learn how to decide for one self how to judge and critisize an individual
without submitting yourself completely to the less informed editor/writer of the article.
I believe I made my point clear with my first statement: Frisbie and The Patterson Family are NOT
Developers. They are not like the Dutras, swarming all over Fremont looking for land to purchase to
make money off of. They are not an entity, looking for means of creating new projects in Fremont.
I made a mistake earlier saying Frisbie and Anu are not similar. Indeed they are similar, both are
City Planners. Frisbie elaborates what the development plan made by a seperate entity (KEN KAY
ASSOCIATES OR HUNT HALE JONES ASSOCIATES) makes. Anu Natarajan is a good example of
what Frisbie is (profession wise).
The Patterson Family – are land owners. Frisbie paid to speak of the concept of the development
ideas made by another group with the title ASSOCIATES at the end.
Again let me rephrase: never confuse owners with developers and individuals on a consulting team
as a Developer. If you do so, then any person deciding to run for political office should NOT accept
ANY support/money from Ohlone College‘s Administration or Board Members, because essentially
since Ohlone owns the land they will be receiving the profit/revenue – that is exactly what you are
saying La Boca – which is abusrd.
53. Irvington Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 9:47 am
Thank you, La Boca, for your response to Ms. Stewart‘s post.
You seek to establish a very strict definition of the term ―developer‖, positioning the Patterson
Family as simply ―owners‖ whose role in the development of this property is thereby minimized. You
cite examples of building a toothpick pyramid or developing your car engine to illustrate your point.
The difference, you see, is that, if you decide to build a toothpick pyramid, you will not stand to
make a huge bucket of money from that project. If you develop your car engine, you may realize an
increased utility to you personally, but your modifications will not affect a significant portion of the
population in this city.
The comparison of Patterson Ranch to Oholone College also has some significant problems. The
Ohlone Community College District is a publicly controlled entity, the mission of which is to serve
the community. The Patterson family have shown themselves to have no interest whatsoever in the
interests of the community which was their home for many years. Their interest is solely in profit.
They profit from developing the land. They are developers. They seek to take a pristine place that
they are blessed to own and develop it into cold, hard cash.
You do own your home, Leslie; however, depending upon the zoning of the area where it is located,
you can be limited in how you can develop it. This is the same mechanism that many people feel
would be appropriate to exercise in limiting how the Patterson‘s land can be developed. Government
is frequently required to step in when individuals have demonstrated that they lack the capacity to
act in a way which promotes the common good.
Citing one quote that states that the land may not be viable for agriculture does not automatically
give the Patterson‘s license to cover it in asphalt and concrete. The homes which the Pattersons
propose to construct will also use pesticides on their lawns. The development includes a school and
open space which will also use pesticides. Pesticides are not the issue; they are a smoke-screen.
Please do not try to sell to the people of this town the idea that the Pattersons are some kind of
helpless pawns being led astray by those evil developers; that they lack the capacity to direct what
is done with the property. Many of us have also inherited property in this town, and we choose to
make responsible choices on how, when or whether to develop it.
Also, Mr. Frisbie is not currently a Councilmember in this city, he is not even ―like‖ a
Councilmember, and if he is operating under the impression that he is a Councilmember, we have
bigger problems than even I thought. Yes, many citizens are concerned about Ms. Natarajan‘s
presence on the council, and that will be dealt with in a legal fashion.
I hope you will give my regards to the Patterson family, along with my sincere wish that they will
come to their senses and decide to act responsibly.
54. Anon Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Leslie, Trisha can take money for her campaign from whoever she wants. The problem here is that
she tried to hide the fact that she was receiving support from the owners of the largest
development project in Fremont UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION!
Leslie, ―I must applaud you‖ for your obvious effort to help a friend and/or colleague. However, I‘m
not sure that your obvious bias and lack of understanding and ―DENIALISM‖ is going to help her.
Likewise, your condescending comments about education and the people posting on this Blog site
are really insulting. Do you all talk this way at Ohlone Board meetings?
Irvington, as usual, thanks for the further insight!
55. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 10:16 am
Leslie @ 9:45 am: ―You can continue to defend Matt Artz‘s allegations of Tahmasbi breaking her
pledge.‖ Matt never alleged this, and in fact stated that ―technically, she didn‘t.‖
If you think the people posting on this Blog are so stupid and un-important, why are you spending
the time doing ―damage control‖ for your friend?
56. Leslie Stuart Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 10:51 am
Anon & La Boca: Wow such harsh words from the opposition to the Patterson Development. Is
everyone as harsh as you guys are with your words? If so, I would never want to be on your side,
even if I agreed with your statements.
La Boca: You see people, human beings, are prone to do this ALWAYS, take words and manipulate
them to fit their own thoughts..I never said people on this blog are ―stupid and un-important.‖ I just
wish people look at the facts rather than try digging up something that doesn‘t exist!
Anon: ―your obvious bias and lack of understanding and ―DENIALISM?‖ Lets not resort to personal
attacks here. I‘m only representing the FACTS in this situation. If my argument still doesn‘t make
sense then why is it so important for you to come on and resort to personal attacks?
Irvington: ―The Ohlone Community College District is a publicly controlled entity, the mission of
which is to serve the community. The Patterson family have shown themselves to have no interest
whatsoever in the interests of the community which was their home for many years. Their interest
is solely in profit. They profit from developing the land. They are developers. They seek to take a
pristine place that they are blessed to own and develop it into cold, hard cash.‖
–Irvington nice statement, but if you can become more informed with Ohlone and the Frontage
Property, you will come to understand the college is in a huge deficit and are looking for
development that generates revenue more than anything. Attend the next meetings when this topic
comes up and attend administration meetings – you will come that the public‘s interest is not
completely taken into consideration. Yes, Mission is to serve the community – good point Irvington.
You also say the Patterson Family has no interest of the public in mind – but that‘s not true. This
development project has been thought of since 1991, the reason it‘s been put off for over a decade
is because they toke into consideration what the Fremont Community had to say.
–This kind of information is at the disposal of anyone, just research more onto this Development
and you can find out what I have found out.
Again let‘s keep this argument with stating the facts, lets not resort to assumptions and personal
57. Californiaguy Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 10:55 am
In response to Gus Morrison‘s definition of a developer, just remember the Patterson‘s paid Gus
over $200,000 for being there lobbyist for the development of the Patterson Project!!!
58. Irvington Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 10:59 am
Leslie, you are correct, the Pattersons are not the Dutras. Far be it from me to defend the Dutras,
but they at least make the effort to go out and identify profit opportunities, they do not have those
opportunities laid in their laps by their predecessors.
Again, If Mr. Frisbie is operating under the impression that he is a City Planner, or allowing his
clients to believe that he is a City employee, that needs to be investigated and corrected. It is my
understanding that The Frisbie Planning Co. is a private company.
If Ohlone College does receive any income from the development of College property, it is my
understanding that the benefit will accrue to the Community, not to the College specifically. Like the
Fremont Unified School District, the College is a public, not a private, entity.
Finally, if it is your intent to continue to disparage the level of discourse which you find on this site,
I encourage you to go elsewhere. As a person who was educated by the Fremont Unified School
District, I will match you ―grammar for grammar‖ on any day. As a person with good sense, I will
refrain from pointing out the numerous errors in your own posts.
I do believe that Tricia may have, inadvertently, provided a service to the City. Voters may, in
future, pay much more attention to whether or not a candidate holds true to their stated principles.
Being telegenic helps, but it‘s not everything. Ask Mitt Romney.
59. Perry Masonary Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:03 am
Cal, you‘re right, and I‘d love to hear Gus enlighten us with an explanation of how he decided to
become involved in that project, and more specifics on what his role was. It is my great hope that
he can explain all that to us, because I do think he was a great Mayor and a is a great guy in
general, which is why his involvement in the Patterson Ranch project just doesn‘t compute to me.
60. Jen Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:14 am
There seems to be a lot of hair splitting on the part of those who support Ms. Tahmasbi.
I think those of us who see her acceptance of money from the Patterson family as violating her
pledge are thinking of the ―spirit‖ of what she said. She said ―no money from developers‖, the
intention of that statement seeming to ensure that she did not appear to be in the pocket of any
one group and could appear completely unbiased and without indebtedness to a person or group for
financing her campaign. Although the Pattersons are not actually building the homes /development
themselves, the would certainly fall into the category of groups from whom a contribution would
seem to indicate who she might support in the future if elected.
61. Doug Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:18 am
Irvington, you may already be aware of this, but Richard Frisbie was formerly a planner on the COF
staff. Yes, he now has his own company.
62. Irvington Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:25 am
I was not aware of that, but it appeared to me that Leslie was portraying Mr. Frisbie in her post as a
current City officer/employee (alternatively as a Councilmember and as a City Planner). If that was
her intention, it would be incorrect and misleading.
63. Irvington Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Leslie, I appologize if you feel that you have personally been attacked by the posts on this site. I do
not think that was anyone‘s intention. We do vigorously discuss issues here, so you may need to
bring your shin-guards.
I will, however, cop to possibly attacking the decisions that have been made so far by the Patterson
family. I‘m not sure why you would take these comments personally, unless you are a member of
the Patterson family. If that is the case, I continue to hope that you will value your heritage, change
course and act responsibly.
As far as Ohlone is concerned, I am aware that they are in a huge deficit and looking for
development that generates revenue. These days, who is not? If they are not taking the public good
into consideration in the development of the property that is entrusted to them, the public will have
to deal with that deficiency. Perhaps you heard about how the public dealt with the City Council‘s
recent decision-making deficiencies in regard to the stadium proposal?
Do let the Pattersons know that we all appreciate that they ―toke‖ our opinions into consideration.
How fortunate for them that the property was appreciating in value during most of that time.
64. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:38 am
Leslie; LET‘S TALK FACTS!
Trisha took the donation from the owners of the largest development project in Fremont, after the
date which it would be reported to the public PRIOR TO THE ELECTION. Period.
65. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:45 am
Again; ―Oh what tangled webs we weave, when our objective is to deceive.‖
66. Leslie Stuart Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 12:03 pm
La Boca: Correct – they are owners. Thank you for stating that fact to the public.
Irvington: My intention was not to mislead using Frisbie and Anu as examples of one another.
Tahmasbi‘s statement: ―No money from Developers.‖ It statement was not, ―No money from land
67. Leslie Stuart Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 12:04 pm
excuse me La Boca my mistake: Tahmasbi‘s statement: ―No money from Developers.‖ HER
statement was not, ―No money from land owners.‖
68. Charlotte Allen Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 12:21 pm
At the very least we now know that, like the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland, every word out of
Trish‘s mouth means nothing except what she says it means. Which may change radically from day
69. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
Leslie, that is what I would call a ―DISTINCTION WITHOUT A DIFFERENCE .‖
70. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 12:25 pm
Do words and intentions have no meaning? Do actions and deeds have no consequences?
71. Gus Morrison Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 4:26 pm
In 2006, I worked as a consultant to run the campaign against Measure K. I wrote a detailed
summary of that on my blog (which I haven‘t done much with since a year ago December.) Here is
One must remember that Measure K was not an open space measure or a measure to add to Coyote
Hills Park. It divided 520 acres of land into 9 residential lots. Those lots allowed for up to 20,000
square feet of structure on each with all the fences, walls, and people intrusions into the park.
There was no protection for the park.
According to Vinnie Bacon on an earlier post, the Patterson family is entitled today to 227 homes on
their 428 acres. Under the initiative, they would have been entitled to 7, with Cargill getting two.
That didn‘t seem fair to me and didn‘t even make sense from any sensible land use scenario.
Check out the blog entry.
72. Leslie Stuart Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
La Boca – calm down Tahmasbi lost her race. Tahmasbi lost not taking money from Developers –
end of story.
You can continue to go on your rant and rave, but as citizens – why do we stop on our tracks and
attack Tahmasbi when she‘s not even a Councilmember?
Lets focus no on the current local political officials who do hold office. Mayor Wasserman – a man
who speaks only for himself. Quan – so called ―elected‖ by Natarajan, Harrison, Wasserman and
Chan – for their own special interests.
Lets put our focus on people who currently hold positions in city government whom are acting out
agianst city protocol and the community‘s needs. Lets put our focus on our current city officials
corrupting the process of demcoracy.
73. Irvington Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 6:02 pm
Nice try. This ―shiny object‖ tactic isn‘t working for the GOP and it isn‘t going to work for Trisha.
As I write this, the cable news is all over whether Limbaugh is the head of the Republican party.
They believe that if they can get everybody distracted by The Boss, they won‘t notice that the GOP
is intellectually bankrupt.
You are seeking to distract us with the glaring character deficiencies of other local pols so that we
will give your girl a pass. True, she may be in little league when compared to somebody like Bob
Wasserman, the Bobby Bonds of arrogant representation, but that doesn‘t mean we can or should
overlook what happened and how we feel about it.
As you and the GOP will find, people in these parts are capable of keeping more than two mental
balls in the air simultaneously. People‘s perception that Trisha violated the spirit, if not the letter, of
her campaign pledge does not mean that we are unaware that we are currently being governed at
the City level by the choicest collection of dopes this side of CPAC.
―Please, pay no attention to the giant faux pas that I just committed, look at that guy over there –
he‘s the real bad guy!‖ Right.
If you are suggesting that Trisha‘s current predicament is so significant that it could permanently
distract all of us from remaining on the case of what‘s going on in City Hall, you are giving her
waaay too much credit and, frankly, insulting the intelligence of local residents.
Since you don‘t seem to get it, let me explain why this bugs people so much. I believe that it is
because Trisha‘s actions do insult the intelligence of regular people. Some of us believed Trisha
when she said that she would not take contributions from developers. Regardless of your attempts
at justification, we now feel that she lied to us. And not only lied, but accepted donations at a time
when she knew that her lie wouldn‘t be made public until after the election.
When people perceive that they have been lied to by someone simply so they can get elected, it
reinforces all of the lowest stereotypes of politicians, and in this case it has done so at a time when
people are really trying to believe that it is possible for things to be different, for government to
better serve people‘s needs. It has done so at a time when this City has never needed principled
I believe that we do intend to focus on the people who currently hold positions in our City
government who are acting against the City‘s needs.
I also believe that we will remember this situation the next time we see Trisha‘s name on a ballot.
See? Two concepts at the same time.
74. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 10:11 pm
Irvington @ 6:02 pm: Thank you!
75. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
Leslie, reasoning with you is like ―nailing jello to a tree.‖
76. La Boca Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:42 pm
Vinnie, deep breath. Let it pass.
Frustrated; over the top.
77. Andy Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:44 pm
You have a reasonable argument. But just because I own a large piece of land, I shouldnt be
allowed to do whatever I want in that land, esp. if it is within a city.
78. Frustrated_with_the_Argus Says:
March 4th, 2009 at 11:59 pm
All I can say now is – thank you – for acknowledging a reasonable argument in this current
- Frustrated (and tired)
79. La Boca Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 12:10 am
Leslie, just for you! (according to Wikipedia; aka, ―Sticky/Wiki-pedia‖)
For other uses, see catharsis (disambiguation).
In medicine, a cathartic is a substance which accelerates defecation.
This is in contrast to a laxative, which is a substance which eases defecation, usually by softening
the stool. It is possible for a substance to be both a laxative and a cathartic. However, agents
such as psyllium seed husks increase the bulk of the stool.
Cathartics such as sorbitol are sometimes used in response to poisoning.
As an adjective, cathartic means psychotherapeutic or emotionally beneficial, productive of
catharsis; viewing art or listening to music may be cathartic experiences.
Good night all! )-;
80. La Boca Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 12:12 am
81. La Boca Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 12:17 am
P.S. I meant it as an adjective.
82. Bill Spicer Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 2:18 am
You can add my name to your hate list. I too spent hundred of hours and money to help preserve
the integrity of Coyote Hills. My name is Bill Spicer
83. Small World Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 7:07 am
All this time I‘ve been wondering what ever happened to ―English Teacher.‖ She was one throat
slasher during the campaign with her comments. Then she dissapeared as soon as Matt revealed
someone‘s true identity.
I have found that ―English Teacher‖ once again after reading this current blog – La Boca otherwise
known as Irvington!
84. La Boca Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 8:56 am
Small World @ 7:07 am: Don‘t want to disappoint you, but, I‘m not Irvington.
85. La Boca Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 8:58 am
If you don‘t believe me – I think Matt can verify that. I‘m not English Teacher either, I‘m La Boca!
86. Step Child Of FUSD Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 9:48 am
Vinnie do you have PROOF that Trisha Tahmasbi has been on this blog thread?
87. Jen Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 11:09 am
I too am against the development of the Patterson property. I am a lifelong Fremont resident and
have seen more and more of the city turned into suburban sprawl and don‘t feel there should be
200, 457 or 800 homes on that land.
My name is Jen and I am not Vinnie Bacon in disguise.
And given what my home is worth now vs. what I paid for it, Vinnie looks like a very smart man for
renting….Just because you rent does not mean you are not committed to the community where you
88. Irvington Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 11:42 am
You know, I wasn‘t going to even bother to deny that Boca and I aren‘t the same person; actually,
it‘s kind of a compliment for both of us, I think. In full recognition of the fact that, in all probability,
none of y‘all will ever really know who I am, I am prepared to ―come out‖ officially here, for the first
I am, in fact, Rush Limbaugh. I know, you thought he was a big fat conservative idiot, but that‘s
just a front, a robotic shell that I use strictly for business purposes. Yes, The Rushmeister is, in
reality, an aging hippie pinko, living in Fremont.
Deal with it.
89. La Boca Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
Irvington @ 11:42 am; It is a compliment to be compared to you! At least under the pen-name! (-;
I can‘t stop laughing over your ―real‖ identity! In fact, it feels so good to laugh so hard I my have to
send you a check for health care!
90. Andy Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
300 acres of donation of their land is commendable. But then building 800 new homes now, when
we know there is a glut supply of homes waiting to be sold cannot be allowed. We need a centrist
approach to this thing. While I cannot agree with people who say there should be NO development
at all on patterson ranch, I also dont agree with people who support building homes in fremont in
the next 5 years. I am echoing this feeling of a large number of people, that is problems in fremont
are due to left wing and right wing idiots who stick to their stupid idealogy. What we want is a
pragmatic approach else the consequences will not be good for fremont
91. Andy Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 12:24 pm
A new measure if it seeks to prevent building of more homes in patterson, then I am sure it will
win!! Vinnie and co, if thats your real intention please go ahead, I guarantee you it will win.
But if the measure seeks to prevent any development at all in patterson ranch, I guarantee you that
it will lose.
I am not affliated with Trisha or with Vinnie, nor with Bon or Gus. As I said before I am just echoing
the sentiments of the guys on the street
92. Perry Masonary Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 12:59 pm
Frustrated, regarding your post #76.
I will refrain from commenting upon the substance of your message, because I have a firm personal
policy against arguing with crazy people, but, for the good of the site and the generally sane people
who post here, I do have a few style pointers for you.
CAPITALIZATION is the printed equivalent of shouting; as in real life, rational people employ it
sparingly and as a last resort.
Involuntary repetition of the same words and phrases over and over are generally accepted signs of
incipient dementia. For your own good, I would suggest a thorough mental evaluation by a qualified
Referring to people as any form of Nazi is pretty much a universal deal-breaker, which automatically
casts doubt upon the veracity of all of the other statements in your current post and your
Finally, proof reading is always a good idea and a courtesy to both other posters and the English
language. Don‘t listen to the voices in your head that tell you that it‘s not necessary. Just straighten
your tin-foil hat and do it, please.
93. Matt Artz Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 1:39 pm
I‘m not comfortable with the accusations against certain anonymous commenters, so I‘ve deleted
Vinnie‘s comments as well as the one that called him a Nazi. During last year‘s election, we
instituted a rule barring comments that accused anonymous commenters of being real people
involved in Fremont politics.
Interestingly enough, we dubbed that ―The Tahmasbi Rule,‖ although it wasn‘t named for Trisha.
Vinnie might have good reason to think Trisha is behind some of those posts, but he can‘t know for
sure. The Tahmasbi rule is back in effect.
94. Irvington Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 1:48 pm
OK, what happened here? I was going back to comment on some of Vinnie‘s posts which were in
response to Frustrated‘s infamous post #76 and they‘re gone.
I can see removing Frustrated‘s post, given her repeated references to Nazis, but why take Vinnie‘s
out? I was just going to compliment him on the commendable restraint that he exercised.
So, Matt – why remove Frustrated‘s AND Vinnie‘s posts? I think that implies that there was
something wrong with Vinnie‘s posts, which I don‘t believe that there was.
Perhaps you can enlighten us all a bit about just where the line is, and how you determine if it‘s
95. Irvington Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 2:04 pm
Matt, thanks for the info – I guess we were both posting at about the same time.
It‘s a shame that Vinnie‘s posts were removed. I‘ve given him some (I hope) soft-ball criticisim
recently in other posts, but I must say that he has risen in my estimation as a result of the way he
handled Frustrated. You can tell a lot about how people react when they‘re attacked; you did well,
So, if I understand the ―Tahmasbi rule‖, if you are ―involved in Fremont politics‖, you are free to use
your own name to post if you wish, but others cannot ―accuse anonymous commenters of being real
Good rules, but they raise two questions in my mind:
How do you define ―involved in Fremont politics‖, and
How do you define ―accuse‖?
Are you ―involved in Fremont politics‖ if you are a member of any City board or commission, if you
walk the neighborhoods during an election to distribute election information, if you speak at a
Are you ―accus(ing) anonymous commenters of being real people‖ if you simply ask them if they are
so-and-so, if you point out that what they are saying sounds like a particular person, or do you have
to affirmatively assert that they are definitely a particular person?
I‘m just trying to understand the rules better, Matt, so you won‘t ever have to take any of my posts
down. I hope your reply will help clarify things for others as well.
96. Matt Artz Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 2:33 pm
Irvington, the rule was implemented during the campaign because several partisan commenters
went on rampages accusising all sorts of politial opponents of authoring anonymous posts that they
didn‘t like. You‘re right though, the Tahmasbi rule leaves open too many questions. Perhaps the rule
should be that no one can accuse an anonymous poster of being a real person without solid proof.
Sound reasonable? We can call it the Irvington rule.
97. Irvington Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 2:39 pm
Oh, boy, I‘ve got my own rule now. I‘ll try to take that as an honor, as long as everybody
understands that you DIDN‘T name it after me because I committed some gross violation of good
taste and/or common sense.
I guess I could go on to press you about what constitutes ―solid proof‖, but that would just be
98. Go Artz! Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 4:28 pm
Everyone on this blog needs to get over themselves, narcissism is pitiful.
Yay for Artz for doing the right thing!
99. La Boca Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 10:06 pm
Hey Matt, here‘s an idea.
What about leaving an empty box with the posters pen-name in it as usual, but leave blank areas
where the post was?
It would kinda tell a story without showing the post contents.
100. La Boca Says:
March 5th, 2009 at 10:14 pm
…with regards to the posts that you screen out for whatever reason?
101. Small World Says:
March 6th, 2009 at 11:44 am
Repeating ―Go Artz‖: ―Everyone on this blog needs to get over themselves, narcissism is pitiful. Yay
for Artz for doing the right thing!‖