502 replies to this topic

[cw68]

SLATE SLATE SLATE...

[maestro]

Sandra,

 

How the H___ then can we support development South of 50, on the same water supply?

 

All,

 

This is extremely serious and hopefully more of you will finally realize this. The City is locking us in to a permanent state of drought, that will lead to the next time (if we ever end this one) we are in a real drought of extremely severe shortages.

 

 

Phoenix,

 

FYI, "Pre 1914 Water Rights"   is nothing more than a fiction because the water DOES NOT EXIST.

 

You forgot the city council signed into the "Water Forum Agreement" -- which is a basis for courtroom battles over "Senior Water Rights."    The city agreed to 17,000 Acre Feet in a Multi-Year Drought.     You are quoting a 30,000+ acre feet number -- but that will never hold water.    The water does NOT exist, so RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPERS must be told to stop thinking they can build, build, build, build.        Speculative housing is a thing of the past in CA.       The Bay-Delta tunnels were for housing in Riverside and San Berdu County -- leaving northern CA dry as a desert.     This whole "fight" over the council doubling the size of the city and giving American River water to south of 50 landowner --  is b.s. IMO.     The water does not exist -- except in the words of crooks.

 

Yes, crooks.    So guess how this must eventually end.   The sole question is how much of the crookery will become full public knowledge.   Or, will this quietly disappear like the Bay Delta Tunnel and the refusal to legislate Ground-WAter rules?     Did you notice those huge projects and fights just blew away?      No muss, no fuss.   

[Sandra Lunceford]

I spoke to Marcus again.  The plan is a 2010 plan and isn't up for renewal for another year.  Because it is a 2010 plan, it really doesn't hold the information we need.  It is neither something that holds answers, nor confirmation of recovered water.  What is uncertain then is, whether the best use of recovered water would be to sustain the north of 50 users or to reliably build south of 50.  With so much uncertainty, it is pretty much a no brainer.  

 

Because our city's expenses are beginning to exceed our revenues, we need to develop another revenue source rather than depending on the same old business as usual, which is largely dependence on property tax and development.  My plan to create a stay and play historic destination is just that -  new revenue streams.  It doesn't take a lot of investment...just commitment.

 

I would like to hear concrete ways the other candidates plan to tackle our city's bills. 

[maestro]

I would like to hear concrete ways the other candidates plan to tackle our city's bills. 

Do you think they will tell you they saved the south of 50 owner i.e. FPA     ONE QUARTER BILLION DOLLARS by excusing him from piping water from a source NOT the American River?

 

Do you think they will admit Ord. 1181 made our GENERAL FUND and/or    OUR   CREDIT   liable for constructing the public infrastructure SOUTH of 50  FPA?       I got that straight from the Bond Rating agencies!   

 

Will they admit OUR current BUDGET has sewer and water tunnels under Highway 50?   That is OUR MONEY building those tunnels to put raw sewage from 5,000 acres into our lousy 27" diameter pipe.    That's our money constructing the fresh water tunnels to go south of 50?   

 

Do you think they'll admit the reason the coffers are empty because they gave away the farm, the desert, and the non-existent water to Mr. south 50 and Aerojet -- in exchange for something I imagine.

 

Do you think they'll admit businesses are fleeing because they hate the uncertainty, the crappy infrastructure, the constant gifting to home builders?

 

OMG, does anyone else out there get it???    jANYONE, WHERE R U ?

 

Here's an idea:   city council, you four sat for over 100 years combined, lining everyone's pockets but mine.    You'd really help balance the budget by disappearing into the desert south of 50.... ..

[TruthSeeker]

 

 

Looks like they did away with the maximum combined sign size on commercial property regulation. During the last election, Starsky violated that at Quick Quack, but even with numerous complaints to the city, none of his signs were taken down. Now it appears as if anyone can put up as many big signs as they want, as long as it's on commercial property.

 

Residential Property: One or more signs are permitted on any parcel of land with a maximum combined sign size of 10 square feet and a maximum height of 6 feet. (FMC 17.59.030© (13)(a))

 

Commercial Property: One or more signs are permitted with a maximum sign size per sign of 32 square feet (FMC 17.59.030©(13)(b))

 

Anyone on this forum have commercial property on which they would be willing for non-incumbents to plaster?

 

 

It would be great if all 3 new candidates went on one slate, and then made a few hundred 10 foot by 6 foot signs to setup at supporters residences so people could see there are actually OTHER OPTIONS besides the same old same OLD.  (quite the tall task, but not impossible with lots of funds and lots of time)

[TruthSeeker]

Do you think they will tell you they saved the south of 50 owner i.e. FPA     ONE QUARTER BILLION DOLLARS by excusing him from piping water from a source NOT the American River?

 

Do you think they will admit Ord. 1181 made our GENERAL FUND and/or    OUR   CREDIT   liable for constructing the public infrastructure SOUTH of 50  FPA?       I got that straight from the Bond Rating agencies!   

 

Will they admit OUR current BUDGET has sewer and water tunnels under Highway 50?   That is OUR MONEY building those tunnels to put raw sewage from 5,000 acres into our lousy 27" diameter pipe.    That's our money constructing the fresh water tunnels to go south of 50?   

 

Do you think they'll admit the reason the coffers are empty because they gave away the farm, the desert, and the non-existent water to Mr. south 50 and Aerojet -- in exchange for something I imagine.

 

Do you think they'll admit businesses are fleeing because they hate the uncertainty, the crappy infrastructure, the constant gifting to home builders?

 

OMG, does anyone else out there get it???    jANYONE, WHERE R U ?

 

Here's an idea:   city council, you four sat for over 100 years combined, lining everyone's pockets but mine.    You'd really help balance the budget by disappearing into the desert south of 50.... ..

 

 

^ If anyone ever wonders why I rally so much against the sitting city council members - it's because of the above and all the other things these shysters are doing to our city's future behind our backs to grease their palms.

[Rich_T]

Sandra, you wrote "What is uncertain then is, whether the best use of recovered water would be to sustain the north of 50 users or to reliably build south of 50."

 

When it comes to the water source, there's nothing uncertain about what was in Measure W (the City's own measure) or in Measure T (the residents' measure that the City had tossed out).  Without any room for doubt, the N50 water, real or imagined, was NOT to be used for S50.

 

P.S.  I will vote for you, and think you're great, however you probably don't stand a chance of getting elected unless you form a slate with Chad and Roger.  I sense that all three of you are taken aback by the concept, since it's not what you signed up for.  But you all need to realize that you are otherwise running as individuals against a slate of incumbents - a losing proposition.  Much better to make it an "either/or" election, as much as possible, i.e. either the incumbent slate or the challenger slate.  Plus, even if one of you somehow unseats one incumbent, which I doubt would happen, would it really change any outcomes in the future, as far as residents could tell?  (Although it WOULD make for an interesting sign strategy next time around:  would the developers and Chamber still support all incumbents, or just some?)

[ducky]

May I ask why Jennifer Lane isn't mentioned whenever a slate is proposed?  It seems like her platform is more in line with parks vs. development, "conserved water" shouldn't go South of 50,  and voted against the 350-unit housing on Parkshore,  Is there something I'm missing?

[SacKen]

 

 

Sacken, don't get me started.    Just last year the Folsom Telegraph had a front page story about all the roads coming into the city being posted with 55mph signage.     The count is now 16 innocent people killed on Folsom "55mph city streets".     The 100+ mph accidents made all the news.

 

Last year the city was sued by advocates for keeping city crap out of the American River.   

The city is currently under investigation by state water board -- and you can VERIFY that with a single phone call.

 

Great place to live?    How could you miss all the angry residents screaming at the council in front of all the TV cameras last year?    Sutter St is so degraded the Park n Ride lots ALWAYS have empty spaces because commuters avoid problems in this city.   Newspapers have been loaded with stories about problems on unregulated trails in the city, and the people who frequent them.   Empire Ranch people three times raised bloody-hell about city proposed rezones.

 

Google News has covered these stories.    Sacramento Business Journal covers the city's developments -- whether the city told you about them or not.   Sac Bee has done stories on neighborhoods with HUGE problems CREATED by the council.    TV has covered some horrific problems here.    The expensive bike race however, cost us over $1Million, and there was NO TV coverage at all.

 

None is so blind as those who will not see;   none so deaf as those who will not hear.

 

You want to know what realtors know:    my neighborhood is punished by city council's improper actions.   Just since they approved a bogus rezone on Leidesdorff,  9 houses went on the market and three more houses changed tenants.    That is   11% turnover.       Do you think people don't notice?  11%.

 

That happens when a bunch of _____  (name for city council four)  give development rights to a huge commercial-multi residential project -- connecting to your areas 4" sewer line --   the same sewer 4" line that serves the ENTIRE 20 acre Folsom Industrial Zone at the river.   I won't even go into the traffic issues because of huge commercial & industrial usages of a half-street in Residential Zone.    Two pets were killed a year ago.    Now the school bus doesn't even come here because the families with kids have all moved away.     How perfect is that?   This council IS HOSTILE to children and families.   The zoo was the first item cut to the bare bones.

 

Don't get me started........     

The only way a person could believe this place is NOT hostile to humans and environment is to NOT DRIVE, NOT WALK, NOT READ media,  NO TV,  No Google NEWS alerts, No Sac Biz Journal, no watching the screwy projects messing up Blue Ravine Rd., Parkshore, Folsom Blvd.  and that god-awful horrific 111 foot wide bridge screwing up the American River.     What should be a place of beauty is a damn wanna-be freeway where people DIE!

 

Here's more about the perfect place:    they changed the city voting process so that 100% of the local elections happens from, in, around, and under the control of city hall.    How perfect is that?    Read the city council agenda very often????   Have you noticed all the small businesses drive away from this place?    Have you noticed Intel doesn't seem to acknowledge their location?

 

There must be some cubbyhole where this city is perfect  for you....... where is it?

 

I'm sorry, but your views of this city are not shared by the vast majority of people that live here.  That's why our housing prices did much better than surrounding areas during the downturn and quickly recovered in the last couple of years.  It is a clean place with nice facilities, great schools, awesome parks, and a low crime rate.

 

I mean, seriously... have you ever lived anywhere else?

 

In general, I honestly don't know WTF you are talking about in most of that rant, and I do pay attention.  Degraded Sutter St. that most people that don't live in the Historic District think is pretty great?  God-awful horrific 111 foot wide bridge that saved us from some truly god-awful traffic nightmares?  Streets of death where *gasp* vehicle accidents happen once in a while where things other than a 55 MPH speed limit can be blamed, compared to all the other perfectly safe streets we drive on elsewhere?  Expensive bike race that most people seem to have enjoyed and thought was pretty cool for our city?

 

A couple hundred people angry about Sutter St. isn't a large percentage and to many people actually looks like NIMBY issues, not problems with City Hall.  And I doubt you'd find more than those couple hundred that think Sutter St. is degraded.  Most people I know in the City love the changes Sutter St. has seen in the last few years from a sleepy street filled with antiques shops, decaying infrastructure, and hole-in-the-wall spots to a clean place with some nice facilities and great places to spend an evening out with friends.  Again, most are not aware of the things that might happen on the residential streets at 2am or that the sewer line is only 4".  And what we did see in the news is the City Council making some new rules to assist with the late night problems on Sutter St.

 

Folsom Telegraph? You mean that thing most people didn't subscribe to that they sigh at as they pick it up from their driveway and place it in the recycling bin?  Again, I don't think enough people actually read those stories and the ones that do don't make a link to City Hall.

 

There are State laws that put a process in place to determine road speeds... so why would the City Council be the problem?  Maybe they are for some reason, but most people won't make that connection.

 

Newspapers loaded with stories about problems on the trails?  Even I can only think of a handful of issues we've had on what most people consider to be one of the best city trail systems in the country.

 

Residents unhappy with rezoning? Welcome to America.  You will find that it any city and to be honest, a very small minority even know that it is happening, even when it is in their neighborhood.

 

I think the problem is the other way around. You seem to be stuck in some festering cubbyhole that is not indicative of the rest of the city.

 

Much of what you stated is not what most residents would consider a problem with the City Council.  They need to be made aware of the problems that are directly related to the City Council and their actions.  The problems that have or could cause a degradation in services.  The problems that aren't obvious right now but will become more evident in the years to come after it is too late.

[SCA]

Anybody go to the debate this week?

[Steve Heard]

Agreed, Ken. Most people in Folsom seem to love the Historic District and find it an outstanding place to visit, and most businesses seem to like it, too.

 

Rather than businesses being driven away, more are opening all the time.

 

The Bag Lady relocated to Sutter and says business has never been better. Southern Kissed moved there from East Bidwell, as did Star Light Star Bright. We Olive moved there from El Dorado Hills. Q'Bole moved there from their old location by Lake Natoma Inn. 

 

The owners of Sam Horne's invested in the Fat Rabbit because they believe in the Historic District.

 

Sutter Street is alive and well and prospering.

 

As for the bars, Folsom's always had bars. They used to have brothels, too. 

 

Today's Sutter Street is a clean, safe, family-friendly jewel. 

 

Does the occasional bum come into town via light rail? Yes, but there's always been drifters drifting in. It's what they do. At the great Jim 'Digger' Williams' funeral, one guy spoke about the fact that Digger would sometimes bring home homeless people, as far back as the 60's, for a shower and a bite to eat.

 

Do people who consume alcohol occasionally behave badly? Sure, but the vast majority do not.

[Rich_T]

SacKen to maestro:  <<I'm sorry, but your views of this city are not shared by the vast majority of people that live here.>>

 

How about each of us just represents our own view, and not try to speak for the rest of residents?  My personal guess is that the "vast majority" simply either (1) do not know or (2) do not care about the types of issues that are covered on this forum, but maybe they do know and do care.  Americans are a cheerful bunch in general, no less so in Folsom, but I would hope that anyone with a little common sense has the capacity to become incensed about political shenanigans.  On the other hand, there's a reason why the word "sheeple" has caught on.  Let's just never confuse uninformed go-along-with-the-status-quo attitudes with approval,contentment, or satisfaction.

[Phoenix2014]

Sandra,

I am impressed by your continued optimism in wanting to trust the City. But why? Marcus lied to you and now he has done so again.

From your post above that you quoted Marcus (City engineer) as saying:

“The plan is a 2010 plan and isn't up for renewal for another year. Because it is a 2010 plan, it really doesn't hold the information we need. It is neither something that holds answers, nor confirmation of recovered water.

But it does hold information we need. It very clearly shows there is not any extra water.

The Report clearly shows that:

• Our current water supply < than our demand for water north of 50 alone.

But he would have you believe that the upcoming 2015 Report (these reports are due to the Department of Water Resources every 5 years) will show that:

• Our current water supply > than our demand for water north of 50 AND for development south of 50?

Wow! Seriously Sandra, what will it take to get you angry regarding being repeatedly lied too?

He claims the 2010 Report is outdated. He told you it does “not hold the answers”. Yet they are still moving forward claiming we have enough excess water that they can steal from us and give it to the land speculators south of 50.

It would seem, that through the typical discourse of explaining this to you, that he would have said, “Sorry Sandra, that Report is outdated. Here are the verified reports and data we are basing our decision on.”

 

But he did not offer such data. Why do you think that is?

 

You are the most experienced candidate running, particularly in understanding these documents - more so than all the incumbents combined. That is why I push you so hard on this issue. Please consider this as only a compliment, with any animosity regarding the water lies aimed only at the City. You had my vote the minute I heard you were running.

[Sandra Lunceford]

Dear Phoenix,

 

I could see that the 2010 issue did not hold answers.  Marcus only told me it was time to be updated. 

 

There are only two choices for water salvaged from fixing leaks:  1) save it to enhance sustainability into the current residents water supply or 2) build more homes with the yet unconfirmed amount of recovered water.  Unregulated groundwater use downstream makes the availability of water even more uncertain.  Documents, smoke and mirrors, nor talk make it any different.  The Mayor says there will be homes built...

 

I prefer not to walk such a precarious line.  I also believe that all potential home buyers should be given full, truthful disclosure about where the water is coming from, if the homes are actually built.  The disclosure will have to disclose the source of the water and the reliability of its supply.  

 

More importantly....We have got to wean ourselves from building homes to pay our bills!  This business as usual has got to end.

Please let me correct my second statement.  Marcus told me it was not yet time to be updated.

[Phoenix2014]

Sandra, (and Chad and Roger)

 

Thanks for the clarification regarding what Marcus told you. I am more interested in what he did not tell you. What documents is he using to prove we have enough water for development south of 50? This is not predicated on the next revision of the water plan. They have already said they are going to steal our water. So they must have valid documents. I mean the City would never put us at such a risk if they did not, right? (yes, that was tongue in cheek)

 

Also, you must realize that the continuous stream of lies that has come from the council over the last decade in order to get THEIR way and develop south of 50, has little to do with tax base.

 

As you have noted, we can increase our tax base within our current city limits. Many cities, including San Francisco, are geographically constrained (water, adjacent city boundaries, etc) from expanding the size of their city. They do just fine without additional sprawl. It is hard to believe that the current council has pure motives behind their actions ("pure motives" does not usually involve rampant and persistent lies). This is about greed, and only about greed.

 

Again, I am not against development south of 50, just the way they have gone about it and what it will lead to:

• They have already stolen our water putting us in a permanent state of drought (ignoring their own Measure W and the EIR)
• They have already stated they want to reduce the 30% open space (ignoring their own Measure W, and likely the EIR)
• They have already indicated they will be going after the $700 million school bond to make sure WE share in the cost to build the new schools
• They have already indicated they have no plans for mitigating the severe traffic impacts that will hit north of 50 streets and intersections ( the traffic analysis and EIR indicate Level of service F ( gridlock) at many locations.
• We already have the worst smog in the valley - factual, look it up - and are the main reason the region cannot meet air quality standards - the Air Resources Board stated that with development South of 50, their plans to reach regional air quality standards are shot since Folsom will not be able to get there.

Development south of 50 could take place without all of this. But it will not with the current morally and ethically corrupt council. That is why you must be successful

 

Please call Chad today. He indicated he is open to a slate. Then call Roger.

 

4 weeks left - massive social media drive, door to door, media by putting out a strong message, etc.

 

 

Save 0uR City