502 replies to this topic

[tony]

Do you wonder how government agencies think of our incumbents?   How about the south of 50 plan, the FPA, which council gave our water?    There was even a govt agency (EID) telling the city they were not correct in claiming the city has 32,000 acre feet of water rights.  Yes, the south plan has its own topic, but who but me would review 735 pages -- objections and Folsom b.s. replies?

 

Do you want to know federal, state, county, city, and other agencies think of the south of 50 plan?

 

http://www.saclafco..../sac_030873.pdf

 

Reclamation did not even write to Folsom, but to the Army Corps, which let the city avoid all 404 compliance for water features.    The Reclamation letter says it all:   page 248 of 735 (mostly objections from other agencies)

 

"The City may desire to certify the current document. However, for purposes of National Environment Protection Act compliance, a supplemental EIS would need to be developed to adequately address the impacts of water supply and water assignment."

Gotta love it;   Go Reclamation!

 

If you wish to read hundreds of pages of Federal, State, Counties, Cities, and their agencies OBJECTING to the sole documentation for the south of 50, check out this document.   

Reclamation listed 111 solid objections to the city's b.s. for the FPA south of 50 plans.

 

  The city's replies to hundreds of such objections fall into several categories:   dePardo calls them "errata", "no specific objection", "noted", or calls them liars in other words.

 

The entire governmental world expressed opposition to south of 50 documents, but our grand city council said:  "noted."   We do our own thing.     Especially good were the Reclamation letters, Sac County Utilities, and the CA PUC letter on page 380 "..key element of the environment.... is not disclosed .... what does that say for the integrity & transparency of the environment process"  (of Folsom for south of 50).

 

 

Maestro:

 

This is some good digging. I must say the most telling thing I saw is the city's response to USBR comment No. 10, which asks why the city did not consider "the option of reducing existing water supplies".  See below (my emphasis). So, in the EIR, the city said that it could not use conservation of existing water because it would violate Measure W.

 

 

 

The comment states that the alternative water supply analysis is narrow in scope and 

does not present any reasonable alternatives to the proposed assignment, including the 

option of reducing existing water supplies. 

 

See Master Response 20 – Formulation of Off-site Water Facility Alternatives and Water 

Supply Options. NEPA requires an evaluation of a reasonable range of alternatives. The 

alternatives evaluated in the DEIR/DEIS were developed based on the USACE and the

City’s project purpose and need, as well as the comments received on the Notice of 

Intent/Notice of Preparation (NOI/NOP). Because one of the requirements of Measure W 

is that the City, before applying to annex the SPA to the City, “[i]dentify and secure the 

source of water supply(ies) to serve the [SPA, which] new water supply shall not cause a 

reduction in the water supplies designated to serve existing water users north of Highway 

50 . . . .” (City Charter, Section 7.08.A), it was determined that reducing water supplies 

north of U.S. 50 is not a reasonable alternative. The DEIR/DEIS considered and 

eliminated numerous water-supply alternatives (DEIR/DEIS, pages 2-97 to 2-103). In 

addition, the DEIR/DEIS also considered several water supply options under CEQA 

(DEIR/DEIS, pages 3A.18-23 to 3A.18-52). 

 

 

[ducky]

It is good digging, but that document is dated 2011.  Even as late as August 20, 2013, in Utility Commission meeting minutes they were saying:

 

"Miklos requested clarification as to whether the 1994 acquisition of So-Cal water (5,000 AF) was earmarked for the Folsom Plan Area.  Yasutake stated that is not the case; the water for the FPA will come from other sources."

 

There was a letter to the editor online that seems to think what really happened is the 5,000 AF Golden State water that everybody in the East Area had been paying a surcharge on was actually traded with the 20 percent water that was conserved by residents so that now the East Area is dependent on 20 percent water conservation.  The Golden State contract  will be used S50 and that's why that surcharge disappeared from the East Area residents' bills.

 

That seems to be completely different than the story about conservation and fixing leaks and the conserved water now must be used somewhere or the city will lose it through some law that has never been adequately named and is different than what is stated in the meeting minutes above.  Granted, it was just a letter to the editor and not from an official city source. (The letter was written by a Beth Kelly.  Quick Google search shows a Beth Kelly at Burleson Consulting - Environmental Puzzle Masters, a Folsom company)

 

My question is, was N50 Folsom really ever using that 5,000 AF of Golden State water?  If not, then did all those East Area residents pay to keep a water supply they never used and is now going S50?  Shouldn't they be reimbursed for the surcharges?

Also, which contract is the water we sold to Aerojet coming from?

 

There's so many versions of how this is all supposed to work.  I just figure I'll never be able to wash my porch again unless I accidentally spill something on it that would constitute healthy & safety or something.

[maestro]

Ducky:   It is good digging, but that document is dated 2011.  Even as late as August 20, 2013, in Utility Commission meeting minutes they were saying:     "Miklos (mayor's relative) requested clarification as to whether the 1994 acquisition of So-Cal water (5,000 AF) was earmarked for the Folsom Plan Area.  Yasutake stated that is not the case; the water for the FPA will come from other sources."

 

These studies are NOT dated:  they are the reason Reclamation will never give water thieves American River Public Water.     The documents are never circulated by the city, so the lies remain hidden.   See exposure of the Environmental Impact Statement b.s., by comparing it to Attachment to the city's WATER AGREEMENT LAWSUIT, Exhibit A.     It shows the city is lying.     Many governmental agencies have known for years the crook-ery  -- but the public has no idea.    Especially the people paying the prices:   they know nothing.   East Area,  Broadstone folks should be on top of this water theft in the Agreement.   

 

City council four have a real interest in keeping FPA attached to the city's Water Treatment Plant -- so the city can mix up all the water -- and give FPA the 20,000 + acre feet required to do FPA Start-Up.      Ernie told the truth:  FPA Zoning entitlements are being made more dense constantly.   Right now, FPA should expect an absolute minimum of 40,000 more residents, and the number of daily water users for the city exceed the 150,000 mark within a few years.

 

Until you read the Water AGreement, Exhibit A, you have no idea how many oxen have been gored and left dying of thirst & bleeding.     

 

 

[maestro]

http://www.folsomtel...

 

A young Mom wrote to the Telegraph, saying she woke up, and is telling about it.

 

After I read Ernie Sheldon's article "Wake up, Folsom; take your town back," I am inspired to speak up now. My daughter is a resident of Folsom and should be able to swim in her community and know that adults will not bring harm to her. So I am asking residents like yourself to take a second look at our town.

Are our social needs being addressed?  My family says "no."  I am hoping you will make sure that what happened to my daughter and other families does not happen again in our town. When I read that “this is one of the best places to live in California to raise a family,” I say, “Sure, when we deal with our social issues; then yes, this statement is true.”

 

 

Eleven families moved out of my small community since August 1, 2014

We are all very sorry for her pain, and her courage to speak up now.

[SCA]

The mom who wrote to the Telegraph was talking about her daughter's negative experience on a swim team. It's a private organization that just happens to rent the city's pool. The mom's beef should be with the swim team, not the city. Why is the city council even involved? It reminds me of the congressional hearings that were held to discuss steroids in baseball. In my opinion, that is not the role of government.

[maestro]

The mom who wrote to the Telegraph was talking about her daughter's negative experience on a swim team. It's a private organization that just happens to rent the city's pool. The mom's beef should be with the swim team, not the city. Why is the city council even involved? It reminds me of the congressional hearings that were held to discuss steroids in baseball. In my opinion, that is not the role of government.

 

Unfortunately not everyone wants to wake up.    Her reasons for addressing the council are clearly stated -- and correct.

 

Families and children are NOT well treated, as all of us old timers on this forum know for a fact.     Guess you won't be marching in any childrens' parades like Ernie Sheldon did --    they sought better treatment for children in this city.

[SCA]

I've got two kids who play sports, take music lessons and have taken classes through the parks and rec. Our experiences with the parks and rec department have all been excellent. My daughter has been on a swim team for five years (not the same team as was referenced in the article). The swim team is a private, non-profit organization with a governing board. If I have a problem with the swim team, I go to the swim team board, not the city council.

[Rich_T]

I dislike the city council's Big Three on a purely visceral level, and recognize their political power plays.  That being said, I will defend them against any charges of being any less friendly toward or supportive of families/children than any of us are.  There is no call to make that claim, as far as I know.  That is not my problem with them.

 

As for maestro's sentence "Eleven families moved out of my small community since August 1, 2014", that is quite something.  In three months, during a school year, eleven families moved out?  Did they remain in Folsom, I wonder?  Are there any special problems in your community that would drive them out?

[ducky]

 

Unfortunately not everyone wants to wake up.    Her reasons for addressing the council are clearly stated -- and correct.

 

Families and children are NOT well treated, as all of us old timers on this forum know for a fact.     Guess you won't be marching in any childrens' parades like Ernie Sheldon did --    they sought better treatment for children in this city.

 

 

Unfortunately not everyone wants to wake up.    Her reasons for addressing the council are clearly stated -- and correct.

 

Families and children are NOT well treated, as all of us old timers on this forum know for a fact.     Guess you won't be marching in any childrens' parades like Ernie Sheldon did --    they sought better treatment for children in this city.

 

I can't agree with this.  I think Folsom is a great place to raise children.  

I am truly sorry to hear about the pain the family must be in, but I don't see what it has to do with a city council decision.

 

I might have a difference of opinion with the direction the council takes on certain actions, especially about water, planning, & traffic matters, but I don't see how that applies to this incident.

[maestro]

As for maestro's sentence "Eleven families moved out of my small community since August 1, 2014", that is quite something.  In three months, during a school year, eleven families moved out?  Did they remain in Folsom, I wonder?  Are there any special problems in your community that would drive them out?

 

Yes, despite years of fighting the incumbent four council, they continue to put heavy Industrial Zone Vehicles and Commercial Vehicles on our tiny alley-sized lanes.    They also have a huge Commercial hall using our tiny lanes as sole access for up to 2,000 visitors and alcohol and dining place.    Council also allows the entire 20 acre Industrial Zone and Commercial usages on it to connect to our 4" sewage pipe.     Yes it is true:   all that sewage is trying to fit into a 4" diameter line.   If it does not fit, it goes directly into the river, and it can back up into our lateral pipes.     The traffic problems caused families to keep their kids from playing on our small lanes because the outsiders and huge trucks are too dangerous.

 

Families really began to leave when those four council voted to rezone the D&S Leidesdorff 4 acres next to the city's garbage truck & sewer truck parking.    Instead of developing according to the Historic District Plan, this council approved a dense multi-residential and mixed Commercial where there is now a forest and cliff above the river.    City council passed Ordinance 1210, permitting a dense "planned development", even though zero plans were drawn and submitted.     Council four said D&S could also connect all their multi-housing to our same 4" sewer line.     Without any plans, and with the opposition of hundreds of residents, the council 4 approved changing this beautiful four acres from "passive, walking area, with artist studios" to tens of thousands of feet of multi-housing and commercial.     

 

Families were already sick of 10 years of fighting this stuff, and when the state water boards verified the city is has all the city 20 acres of Industrial connected to our 4" pipe, it just tipped the scales.    Three families spoke with me about their happiness of getting away from the huge trucks in their front yards, the accidents, the drunk drivers, the sewage back-up worries, and the council's continuing disregard for property rights, pets (2 killed), families' safety, and childrens' safety.    One Mom told me she is ecstatic to be safe and able to let her kids play in their own front yard.    Another said she was very sad to leave, but safety first for children.    Now the school bus doesn't even need to ever enter our area.   How sad is that?   

 

What kind of city council keeps that up for years?     This is the major reason the northern CA cities self-insurance group kicked this city out -- years ago.      This forum has opinions, but the sales and the move-outs are facts.   Ord. 1210 is a fact.    20 acres of raw sewage & a new big development aimed at one single 4" diameter sewer line is a fact --- although  obviously excess raw sewage can also go into the old pipes at this riverside location, and into land.    Haven't you ever noticed Folsom Reservoir water is clear and bright, while below the dam (and city's small pipes), the river is fetid, thick, and odiferous?    The joke is "Reclamation must be adding sewage as water goes through the dam."   But Reclamation knows the truth, and so does the state water quality board.

 

If all that is not enough, we take a lot of direct retaliation in terms of noise, industrial operations, gangs, late-night disturbances, and name calling.     If you doubt any of this, Google   4sewerdogs videos.     you too can watch huge industrial trucks backing up at our bodies as they bring in chemicals, sulfuric acid ingredients, hot tar, into our front yards.   You can also see the industrial yard fire spewing chemicals and exploded crap into the air.     Ours may be the most dangerous of all places to live in this city, but it is not the only one with dangerous conditions caused by the elected "too long-ers.    Check out the crime stats near the new city apartments in N. city, Sibley, Bidwell area.     Check out the homes sales listings in the papers.      Learn why Ernie says "wake up."

 

Google  "4sewerdogs videos"   

Check out the video 'hey, truck driver, don't run over a child

 

 

[mac_convert]

The "mom" didn't include her name. For all we know this could be someone who is disgruntled making up a story to fill up the news channels.

http://www.folsomtel...

 

A young Mom wrote to the Telegraph, saying she woke up, and is telling about it.

 

After I read Ernie Sheldon's article "Wake up, Folsom; take your town back," I am inspired to speak up now. My daughter is a resident of Folsom and should be able to swim in her community and know that adults will not bring harm to her. So I am asking residents like yourself to take a second look at our town.

Are our social needs being addressed?  My family says "no."  I am hoping you will make sure that what happened to my daughter and other families does not happen again in our town. When I read that “this is one of the best places to live in California to raise a family,” I say, “Sure, when we deal with our social issues; then yes, this statement is true.”

 

 

Eleven families moved out of my small community since August 1, 2014

We are all very sorry for her pain, and her courage to speak up now.

[Steve Heard]

As one who has been helping people buy and sell homes in Folsom for many years, I can tell you that I've never had anyone tell me they were leaving the community for any reasons other than an opportunity somewhere else (job transfer, more land), and the occasional family event (divorce, death, birth of a grand child). No one has ever complained about the way kids are treated.

 

When I sell homes to people who are relocating to Folsom, many already have family or friends here, and are attracted by the facts that the commuinty is clean, safe, has great schools, recreational opportunities and lots of focus on families.

 

I've found that with sports leagues and teams, there often comes ego and power issues, but those are with individuals and not a reflection on the city or city council.

[Barb J]

Tuesday is a VERY important day for Folsom! Time to clean house and dust off the cobweb-ridden City Council! Our Mayor Kerri Howell has sent out a call to action to her supporters. She clearly is worried about one candidate - Roger Gaylord. Check out her post below! So did she have her friends "like" and "friend" Roger so they could keep tabs on him for her??? It will be interesting to see what her minions post on his page in the next few days! This is the kind of leadership We have in Folsom!! The equivalent of a high school girl telling her clique not to like someone! My high school girl behaves better than this!

 

I'm curious what her supporters have to say in her defense?

 

Barb J

 

Attached Files

•  Kerri Howell post.jpg   58.71K   37 downloads

[Rich_T]

Tuesday is a VERY important day for Folsom! Time to clean house and dust off the cobweb-ridden City Council! Our Mayor Kerri Howell has sent out a call to action to her supporters. She clearly is worried about one candidate - Roger Gaylord. Check out her post below! So did she have her friends "like" and "friend" Roger so they could keep tabs on him for her??? It will be interesting to see what her minions post on his page in the next few days! This is the kind of leadership We have in Folsom!! The equivalent of a high school girl telling her clique not to like someone! My high school girl behaves better than this!

 

I'm curious what her supporters have to say in her defense?

 

Barb J

 

 

Please let that be fake.

 

Otherwise it makes me want to puke.

[Barb J]

Not fake, sorry! This is our "Leadership" in action!

 

Barb J