I thought the New York Times article made our city look very reckless, and the comments I received when I posted it on Facebook seemed to take a similar view. The article makes one imagine news stories 10 years from now, featuring dejected residents standing in front of dry kitchen taps: "Folsom's city leaders made the decision to allow development despite all the warning signs that there wouldn't be enough water to go around..."
Embarrassing to see Folsom painted in this light.
WATER GUARDIAN AGENCY DID not APPROVE CITY'S EIS:
I'd like to remind the world that when the city council approved its "Environmental Impact Statement" for the S of 50 area, it was NOT acceptable to the Bureau of Reclamation which manages our only water source. Mike Finnegan, USBR CCAO Manager wrote 43 pages about the city's "environmental statement" of 600 pages. He said the water claims were not valid. He punctuated his problems with the city by sending his USBR Response to USACE, Army Corps of Engineers, and NOT to the city itself. The Corps had oversight because of the required US 404 Permits, but USBR has no enforcement powers.
What this means is simple: Reclamation DID NOT accept the water portion of the city council's "EIS" as valid. If Reclamation had any enforcement powers, they would have asked the city council why city chose to violate Measure W. Guess federal agents who enforce had better things to do than chase after the council, but we certainly asked them to enforce and stop this train wreck. The city manager tells us the city has "water rights" -- but the water is NOT THERE. He can say how great the council is forever, but it won't save lives and provide REAL WATER.
SACOG & region neighbors CANNOT STOP CITY:
http://www.sacbee.co...le31525607.html
Sac Bee article Aug. 20, stated Folsom violated the local agreement 2004 Blueprint to restrain sprawl. Illinois study finds some city is really violating this plan...... guess who.
DOCUMENTS are public:
If you like it simple, stop reading now you know Reclamation did NOT approve the city council's water claims as correct and real. If you wish more to chew on, try this. Many people knew a single owner had all of the FPA land in the S of 50 growth area. Did you know that suddenly, all at once last year, the single owner sold all his vacant speculative land holdings in three counties -- including all his land in the FPA South of 50, part of Folsom.
Both these documents are public record, which I've shared with SACOG. The FPA "environmental statement" is huge and online, with all the Responses from agencies and people who know there's nuts in the city air. The sale of the parcels composing the FPA South of 50 and parcels in two other counties, which were sold at once to one buyer, --- that's all public record. The one owner sold out all at once. No one talks about his city land anymore, because he sold it all at once.
Does anyone on the east coast know about this? Yup. They probably don't think it is worth dealing with a state dying of drought, heat, fires, lack of water regulations & enforcement; especially since they can't stop it, even if their fruit and vegetable baskets disappear.
.