109 replies to this topic

[Twize ӿլ]

Left for work this morning and just noticed 3 more houses up for sale in my block? Don't know if the Folsom Exodus has started due to the rezoning...

[Folsom Phillip]

...depends on where you live! Perhaps if it's in the Prairie Oaks/Willow Springs area, one might reason to believe that it may be because of the impending rezoning...

it could be just a coincidence though.

[LilyPad630]

It could be the massive high tech lay offs in and around the County. Intel is planning to lay off more people. IBM has laid off many people already.

People are losing their jobs. A lot of them have working visas in the US. If they don't get another high tech job here they have to move somewhere else.

It's quite sad but I don't think people are selling just because of the possible rezoning of affordable housing. If they do sell in this housing market, good luck buying another house for the same price in California.

[jake]

For the record, I don't think Intel is doing another round of layoffs for some time. If things don't pick up in a year, that's a different story, but right now, they literally just got rid of 4,000 jobs, many of which just left. More layoffs after that? I don't see it. I think the stock hit its low and is gradually recovering, day by day...

[LilyPad630]

Sorry.

That's the scuttlebutt going around campus.

Maybe I said too much.

I know some friends who are personally being affected by the "rumors". Thought it was common knowledge. My mistake. Oops.

[David]

The reason that you are noticing a lot of for sale signs in the Prairie Oaks area is that people are cashing in on their equity and upgrading. Many of my neighbors have moved in the last 6 months because the demand is high for starter homes. A house that was bought for $160,000 three years ago is now going for close to $300,000. Pretty good deal. I have seen on my street how one house sells in about a week and then the neighbors put up a for sale sign and so on. I am planning on doing the same next summer when the prices jump again.
It doesn't have anything to do with the rezone, as it has been happening for months.

[jobu]

It has everything to do with home prices... Who wouldn't think about selling a house for about twice as much, only a couple of years after you bought it! Huzzah!

[cybertrano]

I will be next to move due to the impending rezoning. I am think of El Dorado Hills or any counties other than stinkamento County.

I think it's the unknown that concern me.....

[klsx2]

I live in the Willow Springs area and have seen a lot of houses being sold. However, I stay very current with my neighborhood and most of the sales have actually been people cashing out and going back home where they can take their incredible profit and sink it down on a very affordable home. On my street alone here is where they are moving.

Michigan, Virginia, Colorado, and Minnesota. Most were young families that cashed in and moved back to be closer to their families. As far as the rezone goes lets continue to pressure the City Council to not do any rezoning around the High School and maybe it won't be an issue. This is not to say that I don't want it in our neighborhood, just not around the high school.

[April]

And then again, it could be this rezoning situation made them feel jaded by living here, so they thought about how much money they'd be making off the sale of their house, and decided to move back where they came from.
I can't say I blame them any. I'd probably do the same thing.
Living in California is a lot more expensive than other states, and when the laws change to make it harder, it gets people to thinking of their choices.
I'd like to leave California too. I heard today about the law they are putting on the Nov. 5th ballot to allocate billions in taxes towards building shelters for the homeless and the low income houses here in the Sacramento County and almost lost my dinner.
You know if they build them, more will come. Drive downtown some time and see all the homeless on "K" street. Then ask yourself, how it would be if it was twice that much.
When it gets cold the homeless and poor come here from all over the nation, and it's like their winter vacation spot.
Don't be surprised if that law passes.
Isn't California generous with OUR tax money?

[cybertrano]

QUOTE (April @ Nov 2 2002, 12:24 AM)

And then again, it could be this rezoning situation made them feel jaded by living here, so they thought about how much money they'd be making off the sale of their house, and decided to move back where they came from. I can't say I blame them any. I'd probably do the same thing. Living in California is a lot more expensive than other states, and when the laws change to make it harder, it gets people to thinking of their choices. I'd like to leave California too. I heard today about the law they are putting on the Nov. 5th ballot to allocate billions in taxes towards building shelters for the homeless and the low income houses here in the Sacramento County and almost lost my dinner. You know if they build them, more will come. Drive downtown some time and see all the homeless on "K" street. Then ask yourself, how it would be if it was twice that much. When it gets cold the homeless and poor come here from all over the nation, and it's like their winter vacation spot. Don't be surprised if that law passes. Isn't California generous with OUR tax money?

if you move out of Sacramento county, it will get a little better.

you get a strong democratic state that is full of liberals and of course it will get more expensive to live. They fill find every which way possible to tax you to pay for the rest. For example, I came here from Florida and was shocked when I register my car here. It's $120 here vs. $10 in Florida.

We have a middleclass disease, because everyone will pick on the middleclass people. We have to pay more taxes than the rest of the country to feed everyone else. From the homeless to the low-income people etc.

.....

read this article below and it will give you an example of one of the problems of liberal politics:
http://www.csmonitor...01s02-uspo.html

Homeless haven rethinks tolerance

By Mark Sappenfield | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

SAN FRANCISCO - It takes only a few blocks to realize that street people and panhandlers are as much a part of this gilded hill city as the Golden Gate, the Presidio, or the striking views of Alcatraz from Russian Hill.
San Francisco belongs to them as much as it does to the scions of Pacific Heights or former dotcomers now working in temp jobs. In this tolerant city, politicians who have sought to remove them from street corners have long been labeled callous - and often rousted from office. Here, urinating in public is a cherished right.

As the problem grows, however, San Francisco appears to be reaching its breaking point. According to some estimates, it has roughly the same number of homeless people as New York, even though it has one-tenth the population. Two years ago, nearly 200 people died on the streets - twice as many as in the state of Florida.

Now, a city politician is again attacking the issue - but this time, people are listening. While his proposals may not be as hard-edged as those of former New York Mayor Rudolph Giuliani, they represent the most serious attempt at reform in more than a decade, and San Franciscans' receptiveness is telling.

This issue, perhaps more than any other, has in recent years defined San Francisco's sense of itself as a liberal-minded haven for all humanity - from immigrants to anarchists, homosexuals to the homeless. Yet as the scope of the problem becomes overwhelming, this culture of tolerance is being tested by a practical desire for peace and safety.

"The homeless problem has become cataclysmic in San Francisco," says Gray Brechin, a historian at the University of California in Berkeley. "Now, people really want something done about it."

Where the problem abounds

Since 2000, the homeless population of San Francisco has grown by more than a third, totaling some 7,300 people. In places such as the Tenderloin district, streets seem little more than galleries of "Checks Cashed" signs, strip clubs, and wobbly shopping carts packed with worn clothes, trinkets, and trash. Sidewalks double as sleeping quarters, and the smell of stale urine is rarely far away.

Mr. Brechin says he won't come into San Francisco, because he "can't take it anymore." Six-year resident Sonja Brandjes is sometimes afraid to walk the streets in certain parts of town. "It's worse than it has ever been," she says. "We just accept it because it has always been there, but I don't think it's safe."

Such complaints are not unusual. Yet, for the most part, these are not people calling for street sweeps and jail time. This is a city conflicted, and for many here, Supervisor Gavin Newsom has provided a way out.

In his office, he displays two conspicuous piles of letters for and against his plan to help solve the homeless problem. The "support" pile teeters at least 10 times taller, but what is amazing, Mr. Newsom says, "is how much they apologize. They say, 'I'm a progressive, and I can't believe I'm writing about this subject, but I support you.... Please don't use my name.' "

"People are questioning their beliefs," he adds. The response has indeed been surprising. Part of the plan is to expand a ban on panhandling to places such as median strips and transit stations. In the mid-1990s, Mayor Frank Jordan tried to take a hard stand on homelessness, too. Voters canned him in the next election.

Yet several things are notably different this time around. Foremost among them is a growing sense that the old way is just not working. As San Francisco's tourism-based economy sours in a post-Sept. 11 world of less travel, many are wondering if their tax money is being used in the most effective way. The county spends some $100 million a year on homelessness.

"It's analogous to where New York was in 1993 - reeling from recession," says Newsom. "People started focusing on the problems and got fed up with the soft ineffectual symbolism."

For example, while most municipalities offer benefits to the homeless in the form of a small cash stipend and other benefits such as vouchers or shelter beds, San Francisco still gives about one-third of its homeless population its benefits all in cash - as much as $395 a month. At the same time, the number of deaths among the homeless has increased recently - from 103 in 1995 to 183 in 2000.

That disconnect has resulted in a new willingness to consider new solutions, such as Newsom's proposal to take most of that cash and apply it to improving shelters and other homeless services. "It's difficult to deal with this issue without betraying progressive principles," says Richard DeLeon, a political scientist at San Francisco State University. "But Newsom's proposal has opened up a space in the public discourse."

Getting to the heart of the matter

To some observers, however, the shifts in policy still completely miss the mark. They say homelessness is a problem greater than any shelter or stipend, created by San Francisco's chronic lack of affordable housing and its decision decades ago to shutter mental institutions. These measures, then, are simply punishing the destitute, with only the thinnest suggestion of actually fixing what is wrong.

"All we ever get is the punitive, and we never get the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow," says Paul Boden of San Francisco's Coalition on Homelessness. "Until they address the needs of the mentally ill, people will have a sleeping situation that is totally inappropriate for them."

Standing on a downtown corner, looking at a panhandler wrapped in a tattered and filthy blanket, Matt Beard agrees. "This guy here, you can't get him to follow somebody else's rules," he says.

Mr. Beard isn't sure that Newsom's new proposals are the answer. He feels the situation goes beyond improving shelters. Still, the shaven-headed and goateed San Franciscan is glad to see someone try.

[NRB]

KLSx2 and I live on the same street in Willow Springs and all but one of the homes (there have been 5 for sale in the past few months) went up for sale before this rezoning issue came to light. The one that is up for sale now, they are moving because they want a one story home instead of the two story they have now. So none of them moved because of the rezone! I think we have just been lucky enough to see our homes value go up by almost $200,000 and they are taking advantage of the opportunity to sell and move on to greener pastures or closer to family as is the case on our street! By the way, it's nice to hear from a neighbor on this site. KLSx2, I hope you are doing well!
Nicole

[April]

Dear Outta Here,

I understand just how you feel and have been amazed at how those of us who wish to keep the investment dollars they've put into their homes, are put down by others, who think this "Low Income, High Density" housing is just fine and should be built here! They make us who protest it, sound like a bunch of miserly, tightwads, just because we don't want to lose what we've worked so hard to achieve. Most of us have put thousands of dollars into our landscaping and other improvements and that money has been hard earned!

Most professional people put in a lot of overtime...much more than most workers. I know for a fact that the employees at Intel work more hours than most people WOULD work! Even if they could!
That place is open for workers, 24/7! An 8 hour day is not the common work hours for those who own a business or work at one of the high tech companies. So while the low income families will be able to live and work here right along side of us, WE won't be able to have the leizure time to spend with our families that they do! Is THIS the American Dream, or the American Nightmare? I always thought that the people who put forth the most effort and was the most responsible, got the biggest pay check, house, car and lived in a better neighorhood. But this gives very little incentive to our children to do the things we did, ( like go to college and save money ), when they see that the low income can move right next door!

I've found that most of the people who would like to move into these Low Income Houses have very little respect for the many years of education and hard work it takes to acquire these high paying jobs, to pay for the houses we live in. It's like they think our "Daddies" bought the house for us or something! They feel a sense of entitlement, that I personally can not identify with. My husband and I would have loved to have 4 children, instead of 2, but we knew we could not afford more. So now, the single mother who has had maybe 3 or 4 children, gets to move here, because she has a low income. How is THAT anyone's problem but hers?
She alone made that choice, not you or I.

I'm also amazed that this so called "Law" is in effect. Where is this law, and why can't we read it? Our leaders come along and told us about it, but didn't bother to print it out and place it on any web site that I know of.
We are supposed to be content to allow them to explain it to us, in their words only. How very convenient for them.

I too would love to live by the ocean in the area of Carmel, so maybe if I sue that county, I could get them to build some homes that are in my income range! I should be able to move next door to those mansions, right? Maybe we can get together can contact an attorney! ha! ha!

But seriously, what about those who can't sell their house? They will still move, but rent the house they have here. Our first rental has just popped up across the street...Oh, joy!
A neighorhood with a lot of rental properties is not a very desirable place to buy a house...so the values will go down. Been there seen that.

I hate to say this, but because of the money that the City of Folsom will get by the government for their special projects, like the (multi-million dollar library), when they build these Low Income properties, I don't think they can see anything but that MONEY!
Then of course there are the developers who will make BILLIONS in building the Low Income Housing, that are now drooling over those profits that will soon be in their pockets , so, it doesn't look too good in regards to getting this turned around.

I don't know how long you have lived here, but did you know that the homeless numbers here have gone way up over the last five or six years?
( Folsom is also planning to build a Homeless Shelter in our city....where at, is the question.)
The fact is, California has been a "Welfare State" for many years and where better to live than in the warm sunny climate of California?
That's why we have had a very high rate of people on Welfare in this State.
With the recent laws that have been passed to put forth 3 Billion towards building Homeless shelters and Low Income housing here, the word will spread across the nation and soon we will have a lot of new comers here to get on the gravey train.
But, sadly, the government of Califonia does not see that they are adding to the problem, by giving an incentive for the low income and the homeless, to come here to live. If you check into it, you will learn that very few states are as liberal in giving to the homeless and low income as we are here. In fact, many other states will make sure to print this information in their news papers, in hopes that THEIR homeless move here!
No state wants to admit to high unemployment, or a big debt to the state fund by a high Welfare count or the cost of keeping homeless shelters running. Except our state government, which seems to have lost it's mind.
Many groups have formed to represent the homeless and the very low income, and they have set up shop right here in our state....and it looks like they plan to stay! So I guess that after this go round, the numbers will increase in the homeless and low income, and then our wise leaders will tell us we need even MORE Low Income Housing!

Gee, I wonder what kind of income those representive groups for the poor earn?
I also wonder who in the world will want to live in Califronia after they are through messing it up?????

Now, I full well expect to get slammed by those who feel I am grossly being unfair, but before any of you start in on me, you should know it will not make me change my opinions, nor will it give me incentives to keep on giving to the poor as I have in the past. In fact, I have been rethinking my habits in regards to the donations that I have been giving.
The food locker and the soup kitchen may not be as full this Christmas, as it has in the past. I'm sure thousands of people are pretty mad about this situation of the state making us home owners lose thousands in our property values. Because, it seems this is happening all over California.

So, go ahead, hit me with your best shot! Whatever you say, it sure won't keep my property from losing value if those low income housing units are built, no matter how you may rave about the needs and rights of the poor!
Many, including my husband and I have lost thousands of dollars in the stocks that were going to be our retirement. Now we are facing the loss of much of our home value too.
You CAN NOT SAY ANYTHING that could possible hurt us more than that!!!!
We may just have to work for the rest of our lives now, and I wonder who will be there to give help to us, because of our now much smaller retirement fund?
Notice the time of this posting.....I've not had a good night's sleep since this crap started, but still must work tommorrow.

[cybertrano]

QUOTE (April @ Nov 11 2002, 01:45 AM)

Dear Outta Here, I understand just how you feel and have been amazed at how those of us who wish to keep the investment dollars they've put into their homes, are put down by others, who think this "Low Income, High Density" housing is just fine and should be built here! They make us who protest it, sound like a bunch of miserly, tightwads, just because we don't want to lose what we've worked so hard to achieve. Most of us have put ..........

agreed 100%. It's all liberal politic crap. This country, or at least California, has become a socialist society slowly.