502 replies to this topic

[Rich_T]

Great commentary as always, Phoenix2014.  I'll take one of your bullet points even further: <<•Saving 30% for open space?>>  The way I see it, there still has never been a consensus of Folsom residents that there should not be 100% open space.  Rather, the City Council has simply TOLD us that the land will be developed.  The last City-conducted poll of which I am aware (thanks to information posted on this website) found that 70% of Folsom residents didn't want the land developed at all, which means that the Council is not representing what residents want.  Instead, they have successfully implemented a strategy of just doing it anyway, to make their planning dream a reality, and then pretending that residents supported it (e.g. because of the Measure W ruse, etc).  As I've written before, it's their "baby" - but we will all be the ones who end up paying to raise the child.

 

For me, this is indeed a single-issue election.  That issue is "ethics".

[TruthSeeker]

 

For me, this is indeed a single-issue election.  That issue is "ethics".

 

Bingo!  Ethics has indeed become an issue - look at what that boob Starsky has done lately. He is on a power trip and his actions are unacceptable, he should have been fired. It's too bad his seat is not up for re-election now because he's the one who really needs to go.  But really, isn't 10-15-20 years too long for any politician to keep taking developer dollars and giving them every demand they make?  I don't see the advantage of keeping stale people on board who were more in touch with the last decade then they are with the current one.

 

I know there are some here who say "why do we need new leadership?", everything is great and Folsom is a great town.  They prefer the status quo and maybe they cannot see past the end of this week? While the sitting council members may have made better decisions 10 years ago, they currently are leading our city down the wrong path now with their developer backed deals that ensure they re-elected.  For example the Chamber giving the current candidates $50,000 in campaign funds to existing council members and allowing them to post large signs on developer lands that every other candidate is not allowed to use - that ain't right in my book - that is cheating and sleeping with the devil. The future resources of our city are in jeopardy because of their shady back door deals.

 

Personally I am sick and tired of politicians who take bribes (donations) from corporations to help ensure they stay in office for decades as long as they do everything the corporations demand, even at the cost of the future safety and well being of the city.  These are not the type of shady people we want running our city.  I want an honest politician who cannot be bought and owned and controlled.

 

The sitting council members are too set in their ways.  They are old and outdated and their good ol' boy club will no longer be tolerated. It's time to change and get some new people on board who care about the future of the city more then their developer backed re-elections.

[Roger Gaylord]

 

Bingo!  Ethics has indeed become an issue - look at what that boob Starsky has done lately. He is on a power trip and his actions are unacceptable, he should have been fired. It's too bad his seat is not up for re-election now because he's the one who really needs to go.  But really, isn't 10-15-20 years too long for any politician to keep taking developer dollars and giving them every demand they make?  I don't see the advantage of keeping stale people on board who were more in touch with the last decade then they are with the current one.

 

I know there are some here who say "why do we need new leadership?", everything is great and Folsom is a great town.  They prefer the status quo and maybe they cannot see past the end of this week? While the sitting council members may have made better decisions 10 years ago, they currently are leading our city down the wrong path now with their developer backed deals that ensure they re-elected.  For example the Chamber giving the current candidates $50,000 in campaign funds to existing council members and allowing them to post large signs on developer lands that every other candidate is not allowed to use - that ain't right in my book - that is cheating and sleeping with the devil. The future resources of our city are in jeopardy because of their shady back door deals.

 

Personally I am sick and tired of politicians who take bribes (donations) from corporations to help ensure they stay in office for decades as long as they do everything the corporations demand, even at the cost of the future safety and well being of the city.  These are not the type of shady people we want running our city.  I want an honest politician who cannot be bought and owned and controlled.

 

The sitting council members are too set in their ways.  They are old and outdated and their good ol' boy club will no longer be tolerated. It's time to change and get some new people on board who care about the future of the city more then their developer backed re-elections.

 

Well said! FYI- Not sure if anyone has read this yet but 8/20 edition of the Folsom Telegraph.

 

http://www.folsomtel...nst-term-limits

[cw68]

Link is broken. FYI

[Karen]

I attended the Planning Commission meeting where the City of Folsom contract to provide water for development S of 50 was discussed and voted on by the Commissioners.  Planning Commissioner Jennifer Lane was the ONLY Planning Commissioner that voted NO saying that as we are in a state wide drought, why would the City want to add thousands of new homes and contract to the provide water when we (residents) are being asked to conserve water.  

[Roger Gaylord]

Try it again. Sorry about that. http://www.folsomtelegraph.com/article/8/19/14/letter-editor-folsom-voters-against-term-limits 

I attended the Planning Commission meeting where the City of Folsom contract to provide water for development S of 50 was discussed and voted on by the Commissioners.  Planning Commissioner Jennifer Lane was the ONLY Planning Commissioner that voted NO saying that as we are in a state wide drought, why would the City want to add thousands of new homes and contract to the provide water when we (residents) are being asked to conserve water.  

 

This is true. Jenifer Lane has been the only no vote against S050. If you review the meeting minutes you can confirm this. She is a good candidate. 

[SCA]

Roger,
Do you realize that the letter writer was advocating against term limits?

[Roger Gaylord]

Roger,
Do you realize that the letter writer was advocating against term limits?

 

Yes- I thought it was funny. Brings to light exactly what everyone is discussing, a blind commitment to the incumbents. The same edition of the Telegraph has a huge article regarding "Chamber endorses incumbents in council race." (Page A2, very top) No mention of challengers. 

[Chad Vander Veen]

 

Bingo!  Ethics has indeed become an issue - look at what that boob Starsky has done lately. He is on a power trip and his actions are unacceptable, he should have been fired. It's too bad his seat is not up for re-election now because he's the one who really needs to go.  But really, isn't 10-15-20 years too long for any politician to keep taking developer dollars and giving them every demand they make?  I don't see the advantage of keeping stale people on board who were more in touch with the last decade then they are with the current one.

 

I know there are some here who say "why do we need new leadership?", everything is great and Folsom is a great town.  They prefer the status quo and maybe they cannot see past the end of this week? While the sitting council members may have made better decisions 10 years ago, they currently are leading our city down the wrong path now with their developer backed deals that ensure they re-elected.  For example the Chamber giving the current candidates $50,000 in campaign funds to existing council members and allowing them to post large signs on developer lands that every other candidate is not allowed to use - that ain't right in my book - that is cheating and sleeping with the devil. The future resources of our city are in jeopardy because of their shady back door deals.

 

Personally I am sick and tired of politicians who take bribes (donations) from corporations to help ensure they stay in office for decades as long as they do everything the corporations demand, even at the cost of the future safety and well being of the city.  These are not the type of shady people we want running our city.  I want an honest politician who cannot be bought and owned and controlled.

 

The sitting council members are too set in their ways.  They are old and outdated and their good ol' boy club will no longer be tolerated. It's time to change and get some new people on board who care about the future of the city more then their developer backed re-elections.

 

Saw this the other day - thought it relevant.

 

The Age of Incumbency:

 

Americans end up electing the same people time after time in many states and districts, even if some part of them tells them not to.

http://www.politico....ml#.U_ZT_2OVA0y

 

[TruthSeeker]

I attended the Planning Commission meeting where the City of Folsom contract to provide water for development S of 50 was discussed and voted on by the Commissioners.  Planning Commissioner Jennifer Lane was the ONLY Planning Commissioner that voted NO saying that as we are in a state wide drought, why would the City want to add thousands of new homes and contract to the provide water when we (residents) are being asked to conserve water.  

 

 

Thanks for this post and 1000 points to Jennifer Lane.

 

Why the heck did the rest of the commission vote yes? Were they told too (influenced) by order of a city council member?

[TruthSeeker]

 

Saw this the other day - thought it relevant.

 

The Age of Incumbency:

 

Americans end up electing the same people time after time in many states and districts, even if some part of them tells them not to.

http://www.politico....ml#.U_ZT_2OVA0y

 

 

The Age of Incumbency leads to the Age of Idiocracy

[cw68]

So yesterday I posted on Folsom BizPAC's FB post regarding their endorsements. I asked if they had interviewed all of the candidates before deciding. They didn't answer but went on about how they provided good leadership during the economic downturn. Again, I asked if they had interviewed all of the candidates. Again, they didn't answer and said that A+ student don't get flunked out and deserved another term. Then they banned me commenting and deleted my posts. I wasn't rude, wasn't negative. Then they deleted the entire thread.

Someone doesn't know how social media works. This is going to get a lot of coverage now.

[ducky]

So yesterday I posted on Folsom BizPAC's FB post regarding their endorsements. I asked if they had interviewed all of the candidates before deciding. They didn't answer but went on about how they provided good leadership during the economic downturn. Again, I asked if they had interviewed all of the candidates. Again, they didn't answer and said that A+ student don't get flunked out and deserved another term. Then they banned me commenting and deleted my posts. I wasn't rude, wasn't negative. Then they deleted the entire thread.

Someone doesn't know how social media works. This is going to get a lot of coverage now.

 

Yikes!  I know Folsom has done pretty well during a tough time, but what's wrong with giving someone with new ideas a chance.

[cw68]

 
Yikes!  I know Folsom has done pretty well during a tough time, but what's wrong with giving someone with new ideas a chance.

Apparently no one is supposed to question the Chamber - not even to ask if they interviewed all candidates.

[Roger Gaylord]

So yesterday I posted on Folsom BizPAC's FB post regarding their endorsements. I asked if they had interviewed all of the candidates before deciding. They didn't answer but went on about how they provided good leadership during the economic downturn. Again, I asked if they had interviewed all of the candidates. Again, they didn't answer and said that A+ student don't get flunked out and deserved another term. Then they banned me commenting and deleted my posts. I wasn't rude, wasn't negative. Then they deleted the entire thread.

Someone doesn't know how social media works. This is going to get a lot of coverage now.

 

I too was watching that thread; several residents raised the question of whether or not the Chamber or BizPAC interviewed the challengers prior to or even after making their "unanimous" decision to endorse the incumbents. Out of 18 comments all asking the same- BizPAC deleted 15 of them only leaving they're own comments. They've also now deleted the whole thread entirely.

 

I also noticed a few things while looking through the BizPAC Facebook. Did you know Folsom has a 2014 Voters Guide? It's very informative.... well on the incumbents. Absolutely no information or mention on any challengers at all. Check it out at http://www.folsombizpac.com/