502 replies to this topic

[Rich_T]

I can totally believe it. When I called code enforcement a couole of times to report Starsky's violations, I received no response. A friend of mine, who doesn't work for the city, but is very knowledgable (not Steve!) sent me a note to lay off the poor guy, that the guy had to follow his orders from his boss to not remove any of the incumbent's signs.

 

This is much worse than sign removal or the lack thereof - it's a threat to those who would put up signs to support candidates of their choice.

[TruthSeeker]

 
Several landowners and small businesses have informed me that they've been warned not support any one besides the incumbents or they will make they're lives a living hell with future projects. One directly from the Chamber CEO himself. I have five 4x8 signs gone now. Elliot Homes advised they will only allow the incumbents to post signs, so much for the democratic process.
 
I guess i'll just keep wrapping the cars with graphics.... harder to steal. LOL

More scams from our sitting scumbag city council cretins.

[mac_convert]

 

Several landowners and small businesses have informed me that they've been warned not support any one besides the incumbents or they will make they're lives a living hell with future projects. One directly from the Chamber CEO himself. I have five 4x8 signs gone now. Elliot Homes advised they will only allow the incumbents to post signs, so much for the democratic process.

 

I guess i'll just keep wrapping the cars with graphics.... harder to steal. LOL

This is wrong! Who can we contact to change? I noticed a Los Rios sign was also removed on Iron Point. I find it sad the only signs I'm seeing are the incumbents.

[cw68]

This is much worse than sign removal or the lack thereof - it's a threat to those who would put up signs to support candidates of their choice.

I see it as pretty bad: an employee is intimidated, scared, and told not to enforce existing laws and rules for all because it might threaten the incumbent council?

[nomad]

So our city is being held hostage by the city council members that are elected....I foresee a French Revolution in the making!

[Rich_T]

I see it as pretty bad: an employee is intimidated, scared, and told not to enforce existing laws and rules for all because it might threaten the incumbent council?

 

It's all bad.

[Sandra Lunceford]

Sandra Lunceford here - another candidate for Folsom City Council.  You are all invited to check out my webpage at SandraLunceford.com.  I am excited for the opportunity to interact with this political forum.  I was checking out the city budget last night and noticed that we rely very heavily on property and sales tax to cover our city's expenses. One plank of my platform is to creatively bundle our historical assets (which are second to none in California) with our arts and recreational opportunities to create a world class tourist destination here in Folsom.  Creating a tourist destination will stimulate another source of revenue - the transient occupancy tax (TOT).  When tourists stay overnight, they leave behind TOT revenue.  This revenue stimulation can be used to reduce the pressure on using property tax and subsequent development to cover our city's expenses.  What we need is to develop other sources of revenue to reduce our reliance on property tax and development.  I am certain Folsom can become a destination city. We've got what it takes and will certainly cash in on its returns!  

Sandra Lunceford here again....I don't know why my profile says I'm male.  Just to set things straight....I'm female.

[ducky]

Sandra Lunceford here - another candidate for Folsom City Council.  You are all invited to check out my webpage at SandraLunceford.com.  I am excited for the opportunity to interact with this political forum.  I was checking out the city budget last night and noticed that we rely very heavily on property and sales tax to cover our city's expenses. One plank of my platform is to creatively bundle our historical assets (which are second to none in California) with our arts and recreational opportunities to create a world class tourist destination here in Folsom.  Creating a tourist destination will stimulate another source of revenue - the transient occupancy tax (TOT).  When tourists stay overnight, they leave behind TOT revenue.  This revenue stimulation can be used to reduce the pressure on using property tax and subsequent development to cover our city's expenses.  What we need is to develop other sources of revenue to reduce our reliance on property tax and development.  I am certain Folsom can become a destination city. We've got what it takes and will certainly cash in on its returns!  

Sandra Lunceford here again....I don't know why my profile says I'm male.  Just to set things straight....I'm female.

 

Hi Sandra,

 

Welcome to the forum.  

 

I have questions about exactly why tourism would be great for residents.  Where does the TOT revenue go now?  I was under the impression all that does is go to the tourism bureau (I forget the exact entity name)... to then fund more tourism.  How does that benefit residents?  I mean, if you own a restaurant, hotel, or gift shop it's great, but will there be enough TOT left over to help maintain city services and cover the impacts of tourism on those services?

[4thgenFolsomite]

Hi Sandra,
 
Welcome to the forum.  
 
I have questions about exactly why tourism would be great for residents.  Where does the TOT revenue go now?  I was under the impression all that does is go to the tourism bureau (I forget the exact entity name)... to then fund more tourism.  How does that benefit residents?  I mean, if you own a restaurant, hotel, or gift shop it's great, but will there be enough TOT left over to help maintain city services and cover the impacts of tourism on those services?

Tourism drives up sales tax, which benefits the city, not just the business owners. That's why cities everywhere try so hard to attract tourists. I can't think of how they burden city services though.

[ducky]

Tourism drives up sales tax, which benefits the city, not just the business owners. That's why cities everywhere try so hard to attract tourists. I can't think of how they burden city services though.

 

I was thinking of increased need for police services if events are large and more impact on water and sewer, as examples, because all those hotel rooms have showers and toilets.  More traffic and need for parking or shuttles.

I'm not saying there is anything wrong with tourism or keeping Sutter St. thriving.  I just don't see tourism helping to pay for the normal operating costs of the city.  TOT only seems to cover the cost to advertise and promote the city and maybe help pay for when things like AMGEN come to town.

[Sandra Lunceford]

Marin County does not specify what the TOT can be used for.  Please check out http://www.marincoun...sient-occupancy 

 

I checked Sacramento County's TOT use, and it is .11% of the budget.  I believe our whole region can more effectively market their history, including Sacramento.  While we are not Marin, we certainly have assets that can creatively market.

 

Another facet of focusing on our history is to more aggressively attract family-friendly businesses to the Historic District, such as folk art and art stores, hands on history opportunities, railroad centered business, etc.  My goal would be to keep the Historic District open longer to families.  My experience from knocking door to door is that families don't feel comfortable going to Sutter Street after 4 p.m.  If we can keep the doors open longer, perhaps we can even add to our sales tax revenue.  

 

Good conversation.

[Sandra Lunceford]

PS  If you want to hear about our history (I'll through in a little about Sacramento, too) come to my fundraiser on Saturday at my home at 121 Kennar Way, September 20th. I will give a 20 minute presentation on Folsom's historic gems, answer questions, and there will be a fountain of chocolate! For your convenience there will be two time slots: between 2:30 and 4 pm or between 5 and 6:30 pm. The cost is $40 per person or $70 a couple. Please respond by letting me know which time slot you are interested in attending. Look forward to seeing you there!  Details are on my facebook page at Sandra Lunceford for City Council, or you can contact me at LuncefordforCityCouncil@gmail.com.  

[Steve Heard]

Sandra Lunceford here - another candidate for Folsom City Council.  You are all invited to check out my webpage at SandraLunceford.com.  I am excited for the opportunity to interact with this political forum.  I was checking out the city budget last night and noticed that we rely very heavily on property and sales tax to cover our city's expenses. One plank of my platform is to creatively bundle our historical assets (which are second to none in California) with our arts and recreational opportunities to create a world class tourist destination here in Folsom.  Creating a tourist destination will stimulate another source of revenue - the transient occupancy tax (TOT).  When tourists stay overnight, they leave behind TOT revenue.  This revenue stimulation can be used to reduce the pressure on using property tax and subsequent development to cover our city's expenses.  What we need is to develop other sources of revenue to reduce our reliance on property tax and development.  I am certain Folsom can become a destination city. We've got what it takes and will certainly cash in on its returns!  

 

 

Hi Sandra - Welcome to the forum. I am in agreement with you. Folsom has so much to offer visitors, and when visitors come they spend money and some of that money goes into the pockets of our residents, some into the businesses and some into our city coffers.

 

With 2 lakes, miles of trails, the underutilized historic district assets, the prison (yes, tourist do come to see the prison), and Folsom events, Folsom can become a great place for tourists to explore and spend their time and money.

 

Be aware, however, that there are people out there who don't appreciate or share that perspective and they will fight to keep the Historic District quiet and lightly traveled. One recently wrote to the Telegraph 'shame on the city council for trying to bring in more tourists!' 

[Sandra Lunceford]

Thank you for the warning....However, that is why I emphasize family-friendly, history related businesses that attract not only locals, but tourists.  Family-friendly, history related businesses usually close around 9 or 10 p.m.  It would be nice to be able to bring our families and visitors to Sutter Street to experience Folsom's arts, recreation, and history after 4 p.m.  We have lots of empty space across from the Lake Natoma Inn that has been sitting empty for a LONG time.  

[maestro]

 

Be aware, however, that there are people out there who don't appreciate or share that perspective and they will fight to keep the Historic District quiet and lightly traveled. One recently wrote to the Telegraph 'shame on the city council for trying to bring in more tourists!' 

 

Do you realize how the historic area was destroyed by making Folsom Blvd. a freeway (without the safety features)?    The HD is nothing more than a 55mph "city street".      The 111 foot wide bridge over the American River will never have a commuter rail on it.    Look at videos at Youtube 4sewerdogs.    All streets into the old area have 55mph signage, and 16 innocent people have died on this freeway of a "city street".    

 

Why do I bring this up?     Because the folsom HD has the magnificence of the American River all along Folsom Blvd.     Instead of using the wetlands and making the beautiful river a feature --   some dumb mayor turned it into a 55mph freeway of a city street.   

 

Next time you drive Folsom Blvd., think how much natural beauty you are speeding past.        

 

As for the HD having 15,000 people on the 15 to 18 foot wide "streets" ---  that IS DANGEROUS!      In case of emergency no one is safe.    That is why the Code REQUIRE all commercial usages to have full wide pavements for EMERGENCY ACCESS.

 

The same guy who gave you the 111' wide highway-speed bridge wants you to accept having gigantic crowds in alleys where they are not safe.