11 replies to this topic

[Robert Giacometti]

It has been interesting watching this campaign for City Council unfold. I do appreciate all candidates for their willingness to seek seats for this thankless job!

Another election is upon us and the Library issue still has not been resolved. All candidates support building a library. Why hasn't the city council adopted impact fees for development that pay their share of the cost of a new Library? If we had done this 8 years ago, the library would be built and not an issue!

The affordable housing issue has been mishandled from the day it surfaced! Why wasn't the citizens of Folsom allowed to participate in recommendations prior to the settlement agreement? Unfortunately our city council has been forced to make an unacceptable solution work with the citizens Folsom. There are other ways to resolve this issue, BUT WE NEVER GOT THE CHANCE TO DO SO! Mr Starsky and Mr King need to recognize why they are in this predicament and then the citizens will support you in a solution! Mr Miklos and Ms Howell have been " Bill Clintoning" the residents of Folsom during this campaign by insuenating this issue was caused by previous city councils' actions. The facts are many of the remaining developer agreements have been renegoitated during the last 4 years. You both either ignored enforcing this requirement or you both didn't know to do it during these reopenings of the existing developer agreements. You both had chances to correct this deficiency and neither one did. We need leadership who will be accountable for their actions instead of trying to blame previous councils! Credible leadership can overcome some errors in decison making.

It is most definitely time to make a change with those making decisions on our city council! Only informed, knowledgeable and experienced candidates who have an understanding of the issues will be able bring about change. You also have to WIN an election to make a change! It takes electable candidates who work hard, who have established networks and MONEY to mount a campaign to beat incumbants. Mr Fairchild and Mr Cable don't have the knowledge or the experience or have the established networks or the MONEY to get elected. Bob, Ed and Val need to put their big thinking caps on and stop trying get people to vote for the 2 candidates who are going to come in 6th or 7th and 8th in this election. Bob, Ed and Val by supporting candidates who won't win, all you are accomplishing is to take away votes from candidates who could win. The incumbants have their established base that will support them irregardless of how many candidates there are in the race. To get elected in this race you have to beat the incumbants base and the more candidates there are diluting votes of those who want a change, the greater the chance the challengers will not accumulate enough votes to beat an established base. Irronically, Bob, Ed and Val you are actually helping ensure the incumbants get relected by supporting candidates who are diluting votes! I urge you to rethink your support! Please support Nancy Mitchell, Andy Morin and Doug Udell.

Now I know I am appearing to be very presumptious about this election. I usually despise people who are, but I am more interested in making a change and this message needs to be discussed. I have no personal agenda against Mr. Fairchild or Mr Cable and actually admire their courage to run for city council, rather than sit on the sidelines. You both are to be commended for your convictions!

I urge everyone who wants to bring about change to support Nancy Mitchell, Andy Morin and Doug Udell for city council!

Robert Giacometti

[EDF]

Robert...

Doug Udel is fine with me...

Anybody but Steve Miklos and Kerry Howell..

As for Nancy Mitchell... I dont' trust her... and she knows that... she stalled the split of the district... It wasn't until Sara and Jim got in there did things start to move...

She could have had the school bonds she wanted years ago.. but didn't because she wouldn't move the split forward... she was always worried about the money aspect of it... she is a person that doesn't follow through with her convictions... in my opinion...

don't get me wrong... She is a nice person... a wonderful mother etc... but i am not going to vote for her for the reasons I stated... and I have not commented either way on her until now...

Nancy would rather "get along by going along"... I have not seen Nancy stand up to staff... not really... She has taken developer money... and she talks about how she likes to be a team bulder... or something along those lines...

She is a moderate that will go with the path of least resistance... Maybe if she gets in she would prove me wrong... but I don't want to take the chance with her....

I am voting for Andy because he has not taken any developer money..

I have campaigned for Doug Udell...

I think you underestimate Steve Fairchild...

Jantzen is a plant by the developers.. she hardly has any "life experiences"... so she's out...

Regards..

Ed

[klsx2]

Robert,

You have an interesting point of view. However, I do disagree with the fact that people are not electable and that we should give up on voting for someone who we feel best represents us. Unfortunately, this is how most people vote today, either by who has the biggest signs, most adds, or highest profile. If people would become informed on the issues, talk with the candidates, and actually do some research I think you would be amazed at who could be elected. However, most people that even exercise their opportunity to vote do so in a very negligent manner. Most only read limited campaign material or just go in and vote for whomever's name they can recall seeing the most.

As for not having prior experience. I think that is what makes these candidates the best. They don't know the game, haven't been in the game, and actually just want to represent us as Folsom citizens. What a novel idea. As for Ms. Mitchell I have to take issue with the fact that she believes that she has done enough on the school board and now wants to be on the council. My opinion and only my opinion, take it for what it cost you, is that our schools are still in dire need of representation and that the job is not finished.

Just my thoughts, and I want to let everyone know that it is great to see everyone getting involved. I would like to see the fact that people have differences of opinion be more respected than taking personal pot-shots.

[valdossjoyce]

When Bob, Ed and I selected candidates, we selected them on the basis of who we thought would best represent the families of Folsom. We, too, were alarmed when so many candidates entered the race, knowing this gives incumbents a huge advantage by diliuting the anti-incumbent votes. But until recently, nobody was talking about the election. Prior websites, old community groups, associations were dormant. I hadn't discovered this forum. Had we gotten our act together as a community a month ago, we might have agreed on three. Let's go forward and vote our conscience. But think of the great opportunities for the next election. This forum and each of our computers' e-mail are powerful tools that we should harness in the first few weeks after candidates announce. It can and should revolutionize elections by leveling the playing field between the "grasssroots" and the "establishment". Next time around, we'll form a coalition of sorts, to elect the best candidates. That's assuming all doesn't go well on Tuesday, of course.

[Jim McGowan]

I have known Nancy Mitchell for about nine years now. I first worked with her on the Measure O Campaign. I can tell you there were few on the committee who worked as hard as Nancy did to get petition signatures and to get the finished product submitted. She was a driving force behind the measure. I then worked with her as a fellow board member on the Folsom Cordova Unified School District Board (FCUSD). Although things didn't move on reorganization as quickly as I would have liked, there were good reasons why a petition was delayed. Much of it had to do with the fact that we couldn't demonstrate the residents of Folsom had the financial will to finance its schools until a school bond was passed. A bond was passed and, voila!, a petition is now before the County Office of Education for review. Nancy worked hard on that petition as well and was one of the four votes we got for approval. The "no" vote came from Roger Benton, the sole Rancho Cordova FCUSD board member.

I am supporting Nancy for City Council because I believe she has integrity, has a good sense of what the residents want in this community and the direction the community should go. She also has a proven record of leadership as a board member of FCUSD for eight years. There are few opportunities for one to learn the skill of "boardsmanship" like a school board. In the last four years working with Nancy on FCUSD Board, we've had many very difficult choices to make, many of them accompanied by a great deal of public protest and threats of dire consequences. But Nancy has proven she is able to focus on what needs to be done and will make the tough choices.

Nancy has become very adept at working in concert with others in the task of governance. One can have all the great ideas and plans in the world, but unless they have the skill to work in committee with others, those ideas and plans are for not. Nancy can and has workly effectively with others in governance and I believe she'll prove to be effective in governance at the city council.

I urge you to vote for Nancy Mitchell for City Council

Jim McGowan
Trustee, Folsom Cordova Unified School District

[Robert Giacometti]

Interesting responses! I will try and add my 2 cents to your responses.

#1. Ed, do you remember back 8 years ago, the attitude of the school district administration officials then. Compare that attitude then, to what we have now. Don't you think we have a more responses administration at the district now? If we hold our district Trustees accountable when things go bad, shouldn't we also give them credit when things are improving! Nancy Mitchell, deserves some of that credit for the improvements with our Schools! ED, if you could replace either Mr. Miklos or Ms. Howell current council members, with Nancy Mitchell would you do it?

#2. KLSX2, I agree all candidates are electable. However, reality is only those candidates who campaign hard, attend all forums to meet people, understand the issues, can communicate effectly with residents, have experience, have established networks and are able to raise money, will be the ones who will be elected. You have expressed an idealistic goal of having people involved and researching candidates views and issues. I agree with you and again this isn't the reality today, so candidates have to deal with reality to get elected. Remember 2 years ago, the Telegraph did a question on the street interview with Folsom residents asking about candidates. The people they interviewed couldn't name who was running or who was up for election, that is the reality!

#3. One simple fact some people are ignoring, TO REPRESENT ANYBODY, ONE HAS TO FIRST GET ELECTED! My opinion is this going to be a very close election. Many people in Folsom, including myself, believe this is a great city to live in. I also believe we can do better! The people who are pleased to be living in Folsom may vote for the incumbants and they deserve some of the credit for some of the good things in Folsom. The incumbants are going to generate a sizable vote totals for themselves. If you are one who wants to make a change in leadership, you have to vote for candidates who will make changes and most importantly vote for candidates who can possibly win! AGAIN IF YOU CAN'T WIN YOU CAN'T MAKE CHANGES!

#4. Folsom Families First is supporting candidates who are going to come in the lower half of the vote totals. By encouraging people to support candidates who won't win all you are doing is taking away votes from candidates who may be able to unseat the incumbants. Nancy Mitchell, Andy Morin and Doug Udell represent the best chance to unseat the incumbants.
It has been stated that I may be underestimating Mr Fairchild. The reality is, Mr Fairchild has not attended all candidate forums and those he has attended he has not distinguished himself. Remember, the "Ditto" answer? His failure to file campaign finance disclosure statements has raised questions about his credibility. Mr Fairchild had the potential to be front running candidate, unfortunately his missteps have reduced that potential.

Folsom Families First may have admirable intentions with their support of candidates. You should be renouncing your support for Mr Fairchild for his failure to file reports. By supporting candidates who fail to file reports, you are loosing some of the credibility you have tried to establish. All you are going to accomplish is to dilute the vote of those residents who want to make changes and probably then enable the incumbants to get relected.

We will know tommorrow night!

Robert Giacometti

[EDF]

To my good friend Robert...

Yes... I do think that the administration of the school district has become more responsive...

However... while I like Nancy Mitchell personally... she did not move the district split forward until Sara and Jim were elected.... she kind of let them run with it... and gave a "me too"...

Since she has been on the board... I think the "in-service" days have ballooned to what now... 8 or 10 days... plus the vacation time... come on... We've also caved to the Teacher's Union on salaries... and now look at what that gets you... a campaign piece that is just despicable that was PAID FOR BY THE TEACHERS UNION.....

and you will recall that if it wasn't for the constant pressure on the school board to get the split moving forward, nothing would have gotten done... It costs them two bond elections... because Nancy is more about getting along than she is about leadership... This is my opinion...

The first thing she did when she got on the school board was declare her position on the "split" to be "nuetral"... this would be the same as if Newt Ginrich was to declare that he was nuetral about tax cuts after he came to power in 1994....

While I agree with you that Steve Fairchild failed to report as provided by law is disturbing... I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt because he is new at this.... I don't think most people know how difficult it is to get elected... and the one thing about Nancy I agree with.... is that she walked the precints... and you have to respect her for that... but I won't vote for her...

Regards....

[bettyemahan]

The new names and faces running for City Council seem a good bet to vote for since:

They have not yet had the chance to deceive us,

Outright lie to us (water meters),

Spend large amounts of (future) tax money to pay $2 million for a bridge (historic or not) without a vote from us,

Used the same for trips to China and Italy,

NOT kept the sewer system and water treatment facilities upgraded to accomodte all the new and future building,

etc., etc., etc.!!!!!

New faces and names are a chance AND HOPE for honesty and integrety to help Eric King fulfill the long ignored coucnil duties and promises!!!!!

[valdossjoyce]

We're right down to the wire. Tomorrow we exercise our right to vote on important issues affecting how we are governed, at the local level, state level and in Washington.

I strongly urge everyone to vote and urge your friends and neighbors to vote. This right is not something to be squandered. It's an essential part of our freedom as Americans.

My family immigrated from a country where you had to be a party member to vote, and dissenters were taken away in the wee hours of the night. We are blessed with a government forged from the wisdom of our founding fathers, who wrote a U.S. Constitution, a document like nothing anywhere else. OurConstitution guarantee our right to vote and our right to speak openly. Our courts are charged with enforcing and protecting those rights.

We b!tch and moan about the lousy choices we have at the polls. Yet, by getting involved and not giving up, we can change things so that we get better choices. The very minimum of participation requires voting. The next step is to be informed--read, listen & debate. If we expect excellence in our leaders, we might just get it. After the election, we should remain diligent. After election, we must hold the officeholders' feet to the fire. If they're the ones we wanted, we still need to watch to make sure they keep their promises. If the other guys win, we must watch even more closely. Politicians who know they are being watched will do a much better job. Finally, we must remember what they do while in office so that the next they run for office, we can hold them accountable.

God bless America!

[Bob]

Dear Mr. Giacometti,

Campaign Funding Disclosure:
I cannot blame you for being skeptical of Steve Fairchild. You have brought up a valid concern regarding Fairchild's lack of compliance with the campaign funding disclosure deadline. However, I urge you to read the following and reconsider him as a viable candidate who will place the health and welfare of residents before all other concerns.

As a previous post indicates, he is new at this. The bottom line is that he is an honorable man who has raised his families in Folsom over the past 12 years and feels he has something to offer back to the Families of Folsom.

Campaign contribution filling:
You are right that he missed Mondays filling but it should now be available at City Hall. Is there an excuse for missing this date? Probably not a very good one. He does take full responsibility for his campaign and refuses to blame his campaign manager. (I proposed that as a possibility, but he would not accept it).

You will find that he has nothing to hide. Total contributions to date are about $3,100 or about 1/6 to 1/8 collected by each of Miklos, Jantzen and Howell, which does not even account for the numerous $10,000 donations kicked in by the larger members of the development community via political action committees. These large donations constitute the “soft” money, which is not directly claimed by a candidate, and not limited to the $150 that can be made directly to a candidate. From the past elections, the disclosure of these large donations will not be available until after the election.

Please also see my post under "Can Developers "buy" Our City Hall?" for more details regarding campaign contributions.

By the way, Fairchild has one developer contribution of $150 from Parker of the Parkway development. I believe that he gives to each candidate and does not funnel money through PAC's as his peers do.

In addition, Fairchild has put in about $4,000 of his own money. You will also find that much (most?) of the $3,100 is in the lump sum non-itemized category for individual donations under $100. This usually indicates the smaller donations from individual residents, which is the kind of financial support you would like to see for all candidates.



A mistake? Yes. But as the saying goes, "Do not through out the baby with the bath water."

Our Goal:
I believe that we are after the same thing, which is a truly representative Council. Our number one goal is for the residents of Folsom to win back our City from developer interests.

This can only be accomplished by keeping out the incumbents, Miklos and Howell, and Jantzen who also heavily supports the status quo of uncontrolled development.

Our criteria was that the candidates were not seeking developer campaign money and support the right of Folsom Residents to vote on any development issue south of 50.

Morin, Fairchild, Cable, Udell, and Mitchell all fall into this category. Our choices were based on numerous meetings and discussions with these candidates. We were looking for a combination that would best serve our City. We would be the first to agree that other combinations of these five would be great. A vote for any of them will mean one less for Miklos, Howell and Jantzen.

Summary:
1. Miklos and Howell must go,
2. Jantzen must not get in,
3. and three of the five remaining candidates, all of who would be a vast improvement by putting Folsom Families ahead of developer interests, must be elected.

I urge you not to put down a good candidate just to increase the chance of getting in the candidate you believe is the best. This is a dangerous two-edged sword that could drive more votes to the incumbents rather than your intended purpose, which is to gain more support for your three.

As you may recall, I began an effort over one year ago to consolidate the efforts of those involved in our community to band together for this election. The proposal was to seek out three good candidates and heavily support them. This fell on deaf ears as so many were immersed in other issues such as the school bond, library, rezoning for affordable housing, over flight noise, sewer spills, etc. It has been a busy year. Folsom Families First was the first community group to formally endorse three candidates. Yet we were quite pleased when your group came out with your recommendations. Though we overlap on only one candidate, Andy Morin, we have both drawn from the same pool of good candidates who all will put Folsom Families First.

This is why I have never said a negative thing about any of the good five choices. Yes we endorse only three, which we believe are the best combination to represent Folsom Families, but, since number 1. above is our top priority; we would be thrilled if the election of candidates endorsed by your group results in an incumbent being left out.


We support Andy Morin, Steve Fairchild, and Keith Cable for Council.
I encourage all residents to look for candidates who will support YOUR best interests. You will not find this quality in the incumbents Miklos and Howell or in Ms. Jantzen. Whichever three you choose from the other five (Morin, Fairchild, Cable, Mitchell or Udell), you will be taking a step in the right direction to winning back our City.


Regards,
Bob Fish
Folsom Families First