As a former mayor of Belmont, I served on the Belmont City Council from 2007-2015. I have been a resident since 1995, a parent of three children who have attended schools in our community and served the community as a teacher, library committee member and youth sports coach.
I understand how the city operates, its needs and the steps being taken to make it even better. We need to preserve our village feel, open space and neighborhoods while still meeting the needs of our changing community through traffic improvements, healthy recreational programs and facilities, economic development, smart and balanced growth, public safety and improved infrastructure.
Councilmembers Warren Lieberman, Julia Mates and Charles Stone are committed to these values. They have shown this through their commitment to civil and constructive discourse with each other, with our residents and business owners, as well as with neighboring cities and agencies. I am proud of the positive and collaborative direction of our current council relating to internal issues and their demonstrated ability to work positively with others on regional issues.
Recommended for you
I am familiar with all three of these councilmembers — each is committed to representing our entire Belmont community, and is fully invested in listening to the needs and concerns of residents as seen in the shaping of the Belmont General Plan Update and Vision Statement.
Please join me in voting for Lieberman, Mates and Stone to continue to move Belmont forward positively.
“Civil discourse” of elected officials is meaningless if it’s achieved by not asking hard questions, or avoiding discussion of widespread resident concerns. I disagree that the incumbents listen and represent all Belmont residents. • Stone and Lieberman were deaf to objections to McMansion zoning revisions - a resident referendum forced them to repeal. • Council dismissed resident input into the downtown plan; in the face of resident outrage over the 4-story adopted zoning, Lieberman denies it existence and Stone pretends it won't be built. “Collaborating regionally" is useless if it’s not serving the interests of Belmont residents. The incumbents’ main platform is their regional political endorsements; their agenda is not Belmont residents’ best interests. I'm voting for the only candidate who is NOT beholden to outside interests, and does not seek political endorsements - Deniz Bolbol.
I totally agree with KDM. If the local candidates are endorsed by regional politicians, watch out, because they have regional interests in mind and are possibly bucking for the next county office. We already have a one-party political machine in California, do we really need that at the local level as well? Let's vote for Denize and do not vote for any of the incumbents so that Deniz will get the hard-fought majority vote.
I disagree that regional endorsements are somehow bad. Belmont is just one city of many on the peninsula, and being able to work with those other cities is super important. We share all kinds of services with those other cities, and we all spend a lot of time in them as well.
If people were outraged over 4 story zoning they did not write to the City Council about it, or bother to show up to any of the meetings. Most of the comments (including from myself) asked for even more housing to be added to the plan.
Here are the written comments starting on page 135. Most of them are asking for even more housing than the plan specifies. https://www.belmont.gov/home/showdocument?id=15934 Here was the public comment on the draft EIR. Most of the comments are asking for even more housing than the plan specifies. https://www.belmont.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=16058
It seems like they were listening to the input from Belmont residents, specifically, heavily rent-burdened households who are at high risk of displacement from the area due to a lack of new housing construction.
I pay $36,000 for an apartment where the door hinges are falling apart and the hot water works intermittently. My brother and sister and a lot of my friends I grew up with are gone. This is a really pressing need for the city.
If the council is "fully invested in listening to the needs and concerns of residents," why have none of them responded to the scores of emails I've sent them the past few years, or discussed my concerns in council meetings? Others have told me they've had the same experience. It seems clear that this council is responsive only to those they agree with, and doesn't represent "our entire Belmont Community." That's why it's so important to elect Deniz, to make sure the rest of us are also represented.
My experience with the council on a personal issue from 2010-2013 is instructive. At that time, both Lieberman and Braunstein were serving on the council. In early 2010, I asked the council for help on a zoning issue regarding a neighbor, and only Coralin Feierbach and Dave Warden responded and tried to help. While they are the “old guard” that Lieberman constantly disdains, neither Lieberman nor Braunstein responded or tried to help.
When Lieberman came to my door in 2013 campaigning for re-election, he agreed he should have responded, and said he would pursue the issue with city officials and get back to me, because it was still not resolved. However, I never heard back from him on that issue.
Actions speak much louder than words, and my experience is that neither Lieberman nor Braunstein has ever been “fully invested” in listening to all residents. Let’s elect someone who is.
With all due respect, David Braunstein was the mayor in 2015 when the referendum occurred. He sat on the dais asking the Ask Belmont Citizens (ABC) group that organized the referendum to step forward and let the City know the group’s concerns/suggestions. ABC submitted a detailed letter suggesting a citizen committee to drive the conversation about the zoning changes instead of the subcommittee of two council members. However, during the August 25, 2015 Council meeting, Mayor Braunstein didn’t have the courage to discuss the letter submitted by ABC and allowed a dismissive comment by Council member Stone to reject the idea without any discussion. No wonder David Braunstein is endorsing the slate of incumbents.
I’m voting ONLY for Deniz Bolbol because she will have the courage to bring up issues raised by residents instead of brushing them under the rug if they don’t support Council’s agenda.
The Daily Journal got it right "The current council does not mark a “sea change” but rather a settling down, and a move toward progress. That has been refreshing, but it is by no means perfect. Still, if the biggest knock on a council is that it gets along, then it has to be doing something right.
For those reasons, we recommend incumbents Warren Lieberman and Charles Stone, and appointed incumbent Julia Mates."
For those interested in facts, rather than hyperbole and unsubstantiated mud slinging, I did a quick search of my emails back to January, 2016. I have responded to emails from Mr. Strinden on February 11, 2016, February 17, 2016, March 29, 2016, January 24, 2017, February 2, 2017, February 6, 2017, November 27, 2017 November 28, 2017, and November 29, 2017. I'm fairly certain I responded to some before January, 2016, as well. I can't speak for any other councilmembers, but I have been copied on many, many, many emails from staff responding to Mr. Strinden's various comments and requests. I'd conservatively estimate staff has spend 30-40 hours just penning responses to him over the past several years. Anyhow, carry on with the mud slinging. :)
Charles, you are correct that you responded to me on those dates, but your responses were brief, not substantive, condescending, and/or misleading. I agree that you have responded at times, but not in any meaningful way that addressed the substance of my comments.
More typical, is that you never responded at all to my emails on 3/18/15, 3/19/15, 4/22/15, 5/6/15, 8/20/15, 8/21/15, 9/9/15, 2/23/16, 3/19/16, 3/22/16, 5/22/16, 6/28/16, 7/25/16, 7/26/16, 9/23/16, 10/9/16, 2/26/17, 3/21/17, 4/23/17, 5/14/17, 5/23/17, 6/11/17, 10/27/17, 11/25/17, 11/26/17, 4/1/18, 5/8/18, and 5/19/18.
While you have responded more than the other councilmembers, it was more to shut me down with a brief response when you saw the opportunity, rather than engage in any meaningful dialogue on the substance of the issue.
I think that Belmont needs leadership change in the City Council. I do not feel comfortable with what appears to be a trio cabal seeking re-election to support a broad group of Belmont residents -- not special interests. I do not like politicians who on the one hand come knocking on your door for your vote, but once in office, they sweep residents concerns under the carpet. That's why I'm voting for Deniz Bolbol to bring some balance to the incumbents who forgot they serve Belmont residents not special interests. Further, we live in a high fire zone. I have family in NorCal where all residents couldn't fathom a wildfire sweeping through town until it did. This is one of the top concerns that Deniz wants to tackle in addition to the overcrowding mess that we now see in San Carlos.
Citizen 94002 Regarding the accuracy of statements by Charles Stone one should defer to Belmont City Council member Stone's better half as he himself intimated at approx 1 hour 32 minutes into Belmont's 9-25-2018 Council meeting when Council member Stone suggested: " ...... I could be wrong, it happens sometimes, all the times if you ask my wife........"
Council members and candidates Stone and Lieberman both have records of making extraneous and irrelevant remarks from the podium at council meetings, often at great lengths. On the other hand, the third incumbent, council member and candidate Julia Mates has exhibited nuggets of wisdom, for example at the recent meeting of Belmont’s Audit Committee. The best way to avoid the re-election of both Messrs Stone and Lieberman is to cast just two votes, one for Deniz Bolbol and one for Julia Mates.
It is certainly a time for a change in the make up of the current Belmont City Council. I am voting for Deniz Bolbol only. She is determined to act as a voice for the entire community.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(16) comments
“Civil discourse” of elected officials is meaningless if it’s achieved by not asking hard questions, or avoiding discussion of widespread resident concerns. I disagree that the incumbents listen and represent all Belmont residents.
• Stone and Lieberman were deaf to objections to McMansion zoning revisions - a resident referendum forced them to repeal.
• Council dismissed resident input into the downtown plan; in the face of resident outrage over the 4-story adopted zoning, Lieberman denies it existence and Stone pretends it won't be built.
“Collaborating regionally" is useless if it’s not serving the interests of Belmont residents.
The incumbents’ main platform is their regional political endorsements; their agenda is not Belmont residents’ best interests. I'm voting for the only candidate who is NOT beholden to outside interests, and does not seek political endorsements - Deniz Bolbol.
I totally agree with KDM. If the local candidates are endorsed by regional politicians, watch out, because they have regional interests in mind and are possibly bucking for the next county office. We already have a one-party political machine in California, do we really need that at the local level as well? Let's vote for Denize and do not vote for any of the incumbents so that Deniz will get the hard-fought majority vote.
I disagree that regional endorsements are somehow bad. Belmont is just one city of many on the peninsula, and being able to work with those other cities is super important. We share all kinds of services with those other cities, and we all spend a lot of time in them as well.
If people were outraged over 4 story zoning they did not write to the City Council about it, or bother to show up to any of the meetings. Most of the comments (including from myself) asked for even more housing to be added to the plan.
Here are the written comments starting on page 135. Most of them are asking for even more housing than the plan specifies. https://www.belmont.gov/home/showdocument?id=15934
Here was the public comment on the draft EIR. Most of the comments are asking for even more housing than the plan specifies. https://www.belmont.gov/Home/ShowDocument?id=16058
It seems like they were listening to the input from Belmont residents, specifically, heavily rent-burdened households who are at high risk of displacement from the area due to a lack of new housing construction.
I pay $36,000 for an apartment where the door hinges are falling apart and the hot water works intermittently. My brother and sister and a lot of my friends I grew up with are gone. This is a really pressing need for the city.
If the council is "fully invested in listening to the needs and concerns of residents," why have none of them responded to the scores of emails I've sent them the past few years, or discussed my concerns in council meetings? Others have told me they've had the same experience. It seems clear that this council is responsive only to those they agree with, and doesn't represent "our entire Belmont Community." That's why it's so important to elect Deniz, to make sure the rest of us are also represented.
My experience with the council on a personal issue from 2010-2013 is instructive. At that time, both Lieberman and Braunstein were serving on the council. In early 2010, I asked the council for help on a zoning issue regarding a neighbor, and only Coralin Feierbach and Dave Warden responded and tried to help. While they are the “old guard” that Lieberman constantly disdains, neither Lieberman nor Braunstein responded or tried to help.
When Lieberman came to my door in 2013 campaigning for re-election, he agreed he should have responded, and said he would pursue the issue with city officials and get back to me, because it was still not resolved. However, I never heard back from him on that issue.
Actions speak much louder than words, and my experience is that neither Lieberman nor Braunstein has ever been “fully invested” in listening to all residents. Let’s elect someone who is.
With all due respect, David Braunstein was the mayor in 2015 when the referendum occurred. He sat on the dais asking the Ask Belmont Citizens (ABC) group that organized the referendum to step forward and let the City know the group’s concerns/suggestions. ABC submitted a detailed letter suggesting a citizen committee to drive the conversation about the zoning changes instead of the subcommittee of two council members. However, during the August 25, 2015 Council meeting, Mayor Braunstein didn’t have the courage to discuss the letter submitted by ABC and allowed a dismissive comment by Council member Stone to reject the idea without any discussion. No wonder David Braunstein is endorsing the slate of incumbents.
I’m voting ONLY for Deniz Bolbol because she will have the courage to bring up issues raised by residents instead of brushing them under the rug if they don’t support Council’s agenda.
Good points.
Charles Stone: "When I hear public hearing, I hear delays. And I don't want to hear delay." Nice sentiment about public input.
The Daily Journal got it right
"The current council does not mark a “sea change” but rather a settling down, and a move toward progress. That has been refreshing, but it is by no means perfect. Still, if the biggest knock on a council is that it gets along, then it has to be doing something right.
For those reasons, we recommend incumbents Warren Lieberman and Charles Stone, and appointed incumbent Julia Mates."
For those interested in facts, rather than hyperbole and unsubstantiated mud slinging, I did a quick search of my emails back to January, 2016. I have responded to emails from Mr. Strinden on February 11, 2016, February 17, 2016, March 29, 2016, January 24, 2017, February 2, 2017, February 6, 2017, November 27, 2017
November 28, 2017, and November 29, 2017. I'm fairly certain I responded to some before January, 2016, as well. I can't speak for any other councilmembers, but I have been copied on many, many, many emails from staff responding to Mr. Strinden's various comments and requests. I'd conservatively estimate staff has spend 30-40 hours just penning responses to him over the past several years. Anyhow, carry on with the mud slinging. :)
Charles, you are correct that you responded to me on those dates, but your responses were brief, not substantive, condescending, and/or misleading. I agree that you have responded at times, but not in any meaningful way that addressed the substance of my comments.
More typical, is that you never responded at all to my emails on 3/18/15, 3/19/15, 4/22/15, 5/6/15, 8/20/15, 8/21/15, 9/9/15, 2/23/16, 3/19/16, 3/22/16, 5/22/16, 6/28/16, 7/25/16, 7/26/16, 9/23/16, 10/9/16, 2/26/17, 3/21/17, 4/23/17, 5/14/17, 5/23/17, 6/11/17, 10/27/17, 11/25/17, 11/26/17, 4/1/18, 5/8/18, and 5/19/18.
While you have responded more than the other councilmembers, it was more to shut me down with a brief response when you saw the opportunity, rather than engage in any meaningful dialogue on the substance of the issue.
Looks like a handful of people have become entranced by Bolbol. Hopefully that's all it is.
I think that Belmont needs leadership change in the City Council. I do not feel comfortable with what appears to be a trio cabal seeking re-election to support a broad group of Belmont residents -- not special interests. I do not like politicians who on the one hand come knocking on your door for your vote, but once in office, they sweep residents concerns under the carpet. That's why I'm voting for Deniz Bolbol to bring some balance to the incumbents who forgot they serve Belmont residents not special interests. Further, we live in a high fire zone. I have family in NorCal where all residents couldn't fathom a wildfire sweeping through town until it did. This is one of the top concerns that Deniz wants to tackle in addition to the overcrowding mess that we now see in San Carlos.
Citizen 94002
Regarding the accuracy of statements by Charles Stone one should defer to Belmont City Council member Stone's better half as he himself intimated at approx 1 hour 32 minutes into Belmont's 9-25-2018 Council meeting when Council member Stone suggested: " ...... I could be wrong, it happens sometimes, all the times if you ask my wife........"
Mic drop!
Council members and candidates Stone and Lieberman both have records of making extraneous and irrelevant remarks from the podium at council meetings, often at great lengths.
On the other hand, the third incumbent, council member and candidate Julia Mates has exhibited nuggets of wisdom, for example at the recent meeting of Belmont’s Audit Committee.
The best way to avoid the re-election of both Messrs Stone and Lieberman is to cast just two votes, one for Deniz Bolbol and one for Julia Mates.
It is certainly a time for a change in the make up of the current Belmont City Council. I am voting for Deniz Bolbol only. She is determined to act as a voice for the entire community.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.