In your post #19 you state “of course I still don’t know anything about him” So how come you stated he had spoken against measure A. If you want to have any shred of credibility left, Kirwin, put up or shut up.

A Google search shows he was a V.P. of TheraSense, (VP marketing, then Operations) and made a great deal of money exercising his stock options. Also shows him to be a defendant in class action suit of the employees of TheraSense. Of course I still don’t know anything about him, but I’m sure many will be watching him like the rest of PB.

Holy crap John - nice way to show gratitude for all the public service Jean has done.

This whole city owes her huge thanks for all her work trying to prove to the city that we should get the “Central Park” right-of-way back from the railroad for “a song”. That was Jean Sweeny’s song.

I may not always agree with her, but often she makes sense, as with most of her ‘green’ ideas for the Point; and her work has saved the city millions of dollars. Then again as I recall your decisions on the PB were not based on saving the tax payers’ money.

Aside from Edvard certainly not reading beyond the headlines, his idea that the ‘present’ should not decide for the ‘future’ is pure naivety.

Edvard - that is how it always works - always has, always will. It’s called evolution, whether on a cellular level or a societal level, the present always forms the future.

“The entire argument against building these homes is about noise,”

Jeez Edvard - you’ve really not been paying attention!

Your comments about the decision already being made also show that you are trying to judge the content by the headline - you should have read the articles. This “soundbyte mentality” is probably more common now than ever, as the younger generation is bombarded by more and more info, resulting in less thorough inspection of fact and reason. Often quality is better than quantity, especially in areas of how you are going to invest your time - better to do fewer things if you will be able to them well. As in; read the entire article before commenting on the reasons or the decision.

Anyhow, please read my other statement about this issue, which is that this whole thing is supposedly about the noise and ‘pollution’ that future residents might have to endure. So I suppose that we’re in the business of making decisions for people who don’t even live here yet? Someone in Alameda has a mighty powerful crystal ball…

In another unrelated thread (instead of this one, which happens to be about the appointee to the Planning Board. Kirwin charged that Autorino has gone on record as opposing Measure A. Other than citing Jean Sweeney as your source (who made up her charge) prove that Autorino has spoken against Measure A.

In regards to local residents have ‘concerns’ about new houses and anything else being built due to the noise, well I fail to see this as being a legitimate concerns seeing as how this neighborhood is very close the the Oakland Airport and I-80. These residents just need to come clean and admit the truth which though sounds ugly, is really that they all want their homes to be the last built on the block.

It won’t get passed. The little gentleman’s club that Alameda has become will assure that will be the case.

- Wish I could remember the lyrics to that Beatles song.

However, it will take some time before I will be able to feel trusting, or ‘comfortable’ with the intentions of the handful of votes deciding the fate of our community. I’ll have to wait and see what happens since I lack your trust.