107 replies to this topic

[Inwit]

I'm just an average citizen who is concerned...

Also, for the record, I'm not against lingerie shops.

For the record, you blasted Kerri for her approval of an "Adult" store in the Historic district which was essentially, a Lingerie shop.

Your claim of being average, I question. You seem to be more prudish than the average joe schmo that I meet.

Tattoo parlors aren't what they used to be, I might not prefer tattoos as a means of decorating my body, but I don't object to having establishments in town that cater to those that do.

I'm pretty conservative when it comes to financial decisions, but when the Moral Minority tries legislating personal behavior, I cry FOUL. Government should stay out of people's personal lives, banning establishments that cater to society's "vices" is Government interfering with people's personal lives.

[Steve Heard]

There was NOTHING illegal done. If you want to sell your $400,000 house for $200,000 that is your right and not illegal.

It was CITY owned land, so the City could have easily given itself the entitelments and sold it directly to any builder who wanted to bid on it with entitlements.

We the taxpaying citizens lost out on $14 million dollars by dealing with a middleman when we didn't have to! There is ONLY ONE council member who is trying to sweep this under the rug.

Everyone should ask this question, if A council member doesn't understand the difference between the value of land with entitlements and one without, then there is NO WAY they should be on the city Council voting on any S50 issue!

If you are happy that we didn't get the best we could have gotten on this deal, I guess that is your right!

I didn't say I was right, I asked what you believed were the issues.

If Kerri is the ONE council member sweeping it under the rug, does that mean the other 4 are investigating or even talking about it? She surely wasn't the only one who approved the sale.

I am no expert on land entitlements, and I don't know what the city's plans were for that land, but if the issue is that the city should have done the entitlements first, thus increasing the value of the land, and it is a simple and easy process, then I agree that it should have been considered.

I remember a few years back there was the story of a family, I think they were in Hayward or Fremont, who sold their late grandfather's grazing land to a buyer who then went to the city and got the land re-zoned for from rural to residential use and sold it to a developer for a profit. The family was pretty upset that they hadn't thought to get that land re-zoned prior to them selling it.

How far do we go, though? Land has more value when utilities and sewers are in place. Should they have had that done? It has even more value with homes built on it.

There may indeed have been mistakes made. Why is Kerri the only one you are holding accountable, though? Why doesn't it disqualify all of those who were in office at the time, or who are in office today but not making a stink about it?

Aren't you the one always calling people out for perceived double standards?

[JRudi]

For the record, you blasted Kerri for her approval of an "Adult" store in the Historic district which was essentially, a Lingerie shop.

Your claim of being average, I question. You seem to be more prudish than the average joe schmo that I meet.

Tattoo parlors aren't what they used to be, I might not prefer tattoos as a means of decorating my body, but I don't object to having establishments in town that cater to those that do.

I'm pretty conservative when it comes to financial decisions, but when the Moral Minority tries legislating personal behavior, I cry FOUL. Government should stay out of people's personal lives, banning establishments that cater to society's "vices" is Government interfering with people's personal lives.

Correction.


Her vote was not to approve a lingerie shop. It was in opposition of strengthening the city's adult business ordinance to prevent the display of sexually explicit material in plain view of the public. Now, if you don't mind your kids walking down Sutter Street, peering in the windows of one of the shops and seeing sexual aids being displayed on a counter, then you share the same views as Ms. Howell. Call me a prude if you want, but I don't like the idea of this at all.

There is a time and a place for this kind of stuff, but don't put it in areas where children and families frequent. Keep it along the Hwy 50 corridor in Rancho Cordova, or in seedy areas of West Sacramento. But not here.

Again, I think Ms. Howell would be perfectly suited as a council member is Las Vegas, but not in Folsom.

[old soldier]

old soldier after focusing his powers on jrudi thinks sometime he wanted to be friends with Kerri and was turned down. she may have been ready to go out with a smoke. I think the whole council is too tight with the developers and its part of a 20 year pattern. I think if the big developers announced an a.. kissing party Miklos, Starsky, Morin and even Kerri would be speeding to the party. This Sheldon guy would want to speed but would get lost on the way

old jrudy though does hint about where some bones are burried, but I think he is probably somebody hiding under an assumed name. he could come up in my book if he tossed out some dirt on the other council folks

[JRudi]

I didn't say I was right, I asked what you believed were the issues.

If Kerri is the ONE council member sweeping it under the rug, does that mean the other 4 are investigating or even talking about it? She surely wasn't the only one who approved the sale.

I am no expert on land entitlements, and I don't know what the city's plans were for that land, but if the issue is that the city should have done the entitlements first, thus increasing the value of the land, and it is a simple and easy process, then I agree that it should have been considered.

I remember a few years back there was the story of a family, I think they were in Hayward or Fremont, who sold their late grandfather's grazing land to a buyer who then went to the city and got the land re-zoned for from rural to residential use and sold it to a developer for a profit. The family was pretty upset that they hadn't thought to get that land re-zoned prior to them selling it.

How far do we go, though? Land has more value when utilities and sewers are in place. Should they have had that done? It has even more value with homes built on it.

There may indeed have been mistakes made. Why is Kerri the only one you are holding accountable, though? Why doesn't it disqualify all of those who were in office at the time, or who are in office today but not making a stink about it?

Aren't you the one always calling people out for perceived double standards?

stevethedad: The crux of the issue is just as you indicated - the city allowed this developer to purchase the property before the entitlements were granted at a value based on it not being entitled. On the surface, it doesn't sound as though there is anything wrong with this, other than the city sounded stupid for not selling the property after it was entitled for a greater amount. The real problem is that this particular developer prearranged (through his personal ties with council members) to have essentially exclusive right to secure purchase of the property (and I'll get to this detail in a second), and to receive entitlements from the city. He secured the purchase upfront, but did not actually purchase the land until the entitlements were in place. (This was a condition of the sale.) After the city granted the entitlements, he then transferred funds to the city to complete the purchase, and then turned right around within days and sold the property to a home builder for a quick 300% profit. He technically purchased the property at a value that didn't reflect the property being entitled when it actually was at the time.

Governmental agencies are required to sell assets at fair market value. In the case of land, they are required to have an appraisal done to determine this value. Standard practice (and it may be law as well) is to value the property not based on potential value in the future but current value. The pre-arranged price was based on the current value at the time (unentitled and undeveloped), but the purchase actually occurred when the property was entitled. If assets are sold at less than fair market value, which occurred in this case, then it is considered a "gift of public funds," which is illegal.

This whole deal reeks of corruption. The first developer was able to secure purchase of the property without going through a legitimate competitive process. Then, he was allowed to purchase it for 1/3 of its fair market value at the time. Sure he had to invest some money to prepare tentative maps and prelimiary grading and utility plans (not final plans), but it was nowhere near $14 million, which is what his profit reportedly was. And, he was able to accomplish all this through his close personal ties with at least three of the council members at the time. Out of fairness to Ms. Howell, three of the other four current council members voted on this, and I believe it was a unanimous vote. However, she was certainly part of this.

Again, this all occurred because some of the current council members, including Ms. Howell, have far too many close personal ties with developers. And, if you think this was borderline criminal, wait until you see what happens with the SOI (unless changes occur on the council as a result of this upcoming election). This is just another good reason why Folsom needs term limits.

[JRudi]

old soldier after focusing his powers on jrudi thinks sometime he wanted to be friends with Kerri and was turned down. she may have been ready to go out with a smoke. I think the whole council is too tight with the developers and its part of a 20 year pattern. I think if the big developers announced an a.. kissing party Miklos, Starsky, Morin and even Kerri would be speeding to the party. This Sheldon guy would want to speed but would get lost on the way

old jrudy though does hint about where some bones are burried, but I think he is probably somebody hiding under an assumed name. he could come up in my book if he tossed out some dirt on the other council folks

oldsoldier: I'll have to do some digging on the others to find out as much as I know about Ms. Howell. Frankly, Kerri's past indiscretions were more blatant - she didn't cover her tracks very well. But, finding stuff on Mr. Starsky shouldn't be too tough. He's pretty slimy, and my understanding is he generally leaves a fairly obvious trail behind him.

I'll ask around and get back to you (via this forum).

[Robert Giacometti]

I didn't say I was right, I asked what you believed were the issues.

If Kerri is the ONE council member sweeping it under the rug, does that mean the other 4 are investigating or even talking about it? She surely wasn't the only one who approved the sale.

How far do we go, though? Land has more value when utilities and sewers are in place. Should they have had that done? It has even more value with homes built on it.

There may indeed have been mistakes made. Why is Kerri the only one you are holding accountable, though? Why doesn't it disqualify all of those who were in office at the time, or who are in office today but not making a stink about it?

Aren't you the one always calling people out for perceived double standards?

What part of not supporting any of the incumbants is a double standard?

Have you ever heard or seen any of the other council members defending what happened with that sale? Did any of the other council members write a letter on behalf of the former City Manager describing them as the best ever, after negoitiating this deal? I can't very well call them out on something they didn't do can I?

The other Council Members know this was a bad deal for the City of Folsom, but are smart enough NOT to try and defend it. ONLY Kerri is trying to defend it, when as you said mistakes may have been made.

Why are you asking me questions when mistakes were made and only one Council Member is trying sweep it under the rug? It seems you and everyone else on this forum should be calling out the person who is tryin to cover up the mistake, rather than questioning the person who is asking the questions.

If Andy or Steve did what Kerri is doing I'd call tham out as well, They aren't saying anything so I can't! I won't be voting for any of them for this.

There is NO DOUBLE standard.

I can't very well chastise Steve or Andy for Kerri's letter can I?

Think about this, wasn't there a significant sudden change at City hall after this land was sold? Its so obvious, just add 2 plus and 2 and you will get 4...then you and everyone on here will realize who has been misleading you all along on here. This is whay I keep bringing it up!

If you are OK with one of your elected officials misleading you, I guess that is your right.

[Robert Giacometti]

old soldier after focusing his powers on jrudi thinks sometime he wanted to be friends with Kerri and was turned down. she may have been ready to go out with a smoke. I think the whole council is too tight with the developers and its part of a 20 year pattern. I think if the big developers announced an a.. kissing party Miklos, Starsky, Morin and even Kerri would be speeding to the party. This Sheldon guy would want to speed but would get lost on the way

old jrudy though does hint about where some bones are burried, but I think he is probably somebody hiding under an assumed name. he could come up in my book if he tossed out some dirt on the other council folks

Ernie wouldn't speed, he'd take his time to get there and then demand a fair trade for residents before any kissing. Heck, even the developers admire him for that!

There is plenty of dirt to go around, the problem is most of it is word of mouth and would be traced back to staff and they would suffer the repurcussions from those on the Council.

If you all want to see where all the bones are buried, get rid of the 3 incumbants!

[camay2327]

Correction dimwit.


Her vote was not to approve a lingerie shop. It was in opposition of strengthening the city's adult business ordinance to prevent the display of sexually explicit material in plain view of the public. Now, if you don't mind your kids walking down Sutter Street, peering in the windows of one of the shops and seeing sexual aids being displayed on a counter, then you share the same views as Ms. Howell. Call me a prude if you want, but I don't like the idea of this at all.

There is a time and a place for this kind of stuff, but don't put it in areas where children and families frequent. Keep it along the Hwy 50 corridor in Rancho Cordova, or in seedy areas of West Sacramento. But not here.

Again, I think Ms. Howell would be perfectly suited as a council member is Las Vegas, but not in Folsom.

JRudi, we are not going to have name calling here. I deleted your dimwit comment.

[Robert Giacometti]

Of course you agree, its your writing! It's amazing that all these years Kerri's been running the entire city by herself and the rest of the city council was just there to fill empty spaces. The eyes of the blind can see that your focus should be on Miklos but yet you always give him a free pass, interesting.



So how many times have you asked Miklos for this information or did Kerri go sell the land all by herself?


Don't forget to also check on your buddy Miklos. If you can dig up this much dirt on Kerri you should be able to find truckloads of dirt on Miklos



you're full of crap, you haven't asked anyone else besides Kerri and if you ever did ask, you know damn well none of them would come on here and answer

You are right, to the best of my knowledge Miklos has never made any public comments about the sale of the surplus land next to the HS.

Being the bright guy you are, can you explain to me what am I supposed to ask Miklos about? He isn't making any misleading comments on this forum, nor did he write the Article calling the Former city manager the best the city's ever had.

Let me remind you, I'm NOT voting for any incumbants, including Miklos, because he voted for this deal the same as Kerri did.

[JRudi]

Quit making up lies, there was never once anything sexual on display in plain view at that shop

Dude: The ordinance passed, and it controlled the display of material. My understanding is that some adult-type material was displayed, at least for a while, in a back area, but not in clear view of the public. I seem to recall someone telling me that it was behind a curtain or door, but still within the store itself. I never visited the store (honestly).

Again, Ms. Howell was the lone vote in opposition to the ordinance, but the ordinance still passed. To my knowledge, it is still in effect. It does not prohibit adult businesses. It just establishes controls on them.

[gottasmile]

A side discussion that comes from the primary discussion of this thread. If no one votes for any of the current incumbents (there are three open positions), than who would everyone vote for?

Without incumbents, the list of City Council candidates are: Lindsey Woodward, Alex Munoz, Jaya Badiga and Michael Kozlowski. There are four candidates left if you eliminate incumbents. I would like to hear more about THESE candidates too!

So, question out there to "those who know"....who would you vote for? Why?

[ducky]

A side discussion that comes from the primary discussion of this thread. If no one votes for any of the current incumbents (there are three open positions), than who would everyone vote for?

Without incumbents, the list of City Council candidates are: Lindsey Woodward, Alex Munoz, Jaya Badiga and Michael Kozlowski. There are four candidates left if you eliminate incumbents. I would like to hear more about THESE candidates too!

So, question out there to "those who know"....who would you vote for? Why?

I agree. I would really like to hear more about and from all the first-time candidates. Besides the questions John is gathering, I wonder if The Folsom Telegraph will also do an article?