67 replies to this topic

[giacomo]

Here are the final results with 100 % of precincts. From the KCRA website

Miklos 8269
Morin 7508
Howell 7244
Kozlowski 5838 (great showing, 2012 maybe?)
Munoz 3110 (never would've guessed he'd get this many)
Woodward 3034 (hope he runs again in a couple of years)
Badiga 2328 (surprised she didn't get more votes)

There you have it, the voters have spoken and we'll have more of the same....they bucked the trend of getting incumbents out.

[nomad]

I guess he who has the most signs does win.

[2kids4me]

The school board is the same darned people, too. Apparently Folsom residents are happy with the status quo.

[Rich_T]

It's not a question of "they must be doing something right", or "voters must be happy with the incumbents". This is the standard expected outcome when you have 3 incumbents and 4 challengers on the ballot, with no truly compelling reason to vote for any of the 7. In the end, lots of people probably voted by choosing two incumbents and then picked one challenger, to be "daring". But they didn't all focus on the *same* challenger. Mike K. got some votes with signs and all his other publicity efforts, but couldn't compete with the name recognition of incumbents, thanks to their tenure and their developer-bought and developer-placed signs.

So the developers got their return on investment. But if there had only been one challenger instead of four, then I think that challenger would have gained a seat. Instead, it's more of the same, for better and for worse. Let's see what all that experience has to show for us, when issues come up that matter to residents. Will residents continue to be effectively shut out from those decisions? That is the real question for me.

[JoAnne Reinking]

The school board is the same darned people, too. Apparently Folsom residents are happy with the status quo.

There is one new Board member ~ Zak Ford.
Richard Shaw and Ed Short were re-elected.

[Steve Heard]

I guess he who has the most signs does win.

You mean, like Meg Whitman, who spent $160 million on her campaign?

Never Underestimate the Power of Stupid People in Large Groups.
They voted for more of the same failures all across the state beyond just Folsom, including Boxer and Brown, Pelosi and Reid (NV).
~ We Are So Screwed

There's a reason why we're 49th in Education! We are incredibly stupid.

Could it be that the people weren't happy with the alternatives?

It's not a question of "they must be doing something right", or "voters must be happy with the incumbents". This is the standard expected outcome when you have 3 incumbents and 4 challengers on the ballot, with no truly compelling reason to vote for any of the 7. Mike K. got some votes with signs and all his other publicity efforts, but couldn't compete with the name recognition of incumbents, thanks to their tenure and their developer-bought and developer-placed signs.

So the developers got their return on investment. But if there had only been one challenger instead of four, then I think that challenger would have gained a seat. Instead, it's more of the same, for better and for worse. Let's see what all that experience has to show for us, when issues come up that matter to residents. Will residents continue to be effectively shut out from those decisions? That is the real question for me.

It's funny, all across the country, where incumbents were voted out 'the people have spoken'. Where incumbents were returned, 'the people are stupid', or 'those with the most signs win', or in this case 'the developers got their return on investment'.

Wasn't one of the complaints against Kozlowski that he was pro-development and supported by developers, receiving over $12,000 from a developer group?

The way I see it is that the majority of people in Folsom are happy with Folsom. It is a clean, safe, town with higher property values than most towns in the region, has more amenities than most communities and more coming. This majority sees no compelling reason to vote the incumbents out.

[old soldier]

one way to look at the new folks would be to say they had no experience, line being on planning commission...do you think the current council will reach out say to kowalski and ask him to be on a commission to add experience to his old resume.

probably not, cause it would make them more competitive...the one thing the new folks did was not answer any of the questions to them that had yes or no answers. again you could say that showed they had good political instincts

folks finding out kowalswki had a bunch of developer money could have scared folks away..

some folks think the developers want the same folks to stay on the council till the spoils are distributed south of 50 and it might be funny if a council person was really tired of the job, but has to stay on and on for years cause the economy is down and there is no real reason for building lots of buildings and houses to stay vacant like the mall where the new movie theater is...

[the_professor]

Meg and Carly (it's so cute how they use their first names on signs)poured over $200,000,000 into the economy. That's a great stimulus package/redistribution of wealth.

[nomad]

[quote name='stevethedad' timestamp='1288804727' post='401675']
You mean, like Meg Whitman, who spent $160 million on her campaign?


I was referring to the local election. Meg spent most of her coin on media blitz and TV ads. I can't recall seeing more than a few MEG signs around town and they were on front lawns.

[Robert Giacometti]

Could it be that the people weren't happy with the alternatives?

The way I see it is that the majority of people in Folsom are happy with Folsom. It is a clean, safe, town with higher property values than most towns in the region, has more amenities than most communities and more coming. This majority sees no compelling reason to vote the incumbents out.

CORRECTION, the incumbants got the MOST votes NOT a majority! I wondered how long it would be until you came on here trying to spin things. Stick to facts!

Most people, in town can't even name who serves on our City Council. Most people in town aren't aware of that land sale next to the HS, most people in town aren't aware of that water deal with Aerojet and most people aren't aware of how much we are charging for all the planning costs to the Landowners S50. When one sits down with people and explains all these things very few would vote for the incumbants, unless you are friends or on the inside with them.

Our open election system is designed to keep the incumbants in power, so there is NO WAy they are going to want to change anything.

IN addition, we have some in the community who keep sharing partial information in an attempt to spin doubt on anyone who asks questions or tries to expose what has been going on.

The best government happens when a majority of people are choosing their elected officials. I've been exploring different options on how to implement something like this in Folsom and am convinced it starts with a recall against the 4 longest serving members forcing them into another election where they have to get 50% plus one votes to keep their seats.

If 50% plus 1 in the community decides that they want to keep these 4 members on the council, then I'll spend more time with my family, including my sweetie and spend more time fishing. I'm OK with a majority NOT agreeing with me, but I'm NOT Ok with our current rigged system that is contributing to the demise of our communuity, being controlled by a few!

Steve would you be opposed to having system that requires our elected Council Members to have a majority votes to represent us? Would anyone?

[Barb J]

I like the idea of having to pick a seat you are running for and having to get 51% to "win." I also LOVE the idea of term limits There is no way that these seats should be occupied for such a long time by the same people, NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE! Ideas get stale, fresh blood is needed whether I agree with them or not. That's just common sense. Yes Folsom is a great place to live but who's to say it can't be better? Change does not always equal malcontent. Change for the sake of change is sometimes a good thing!

That said, I am strongly encouraging my husband to run for council in 2 years. He has great ideas and a great support system if I say so myself I'm going to start saving my extra grocery money to set aside for signage purchases. Never to early to start! He who has the most signs wins!

Barb J

[Robert Giacometti]

I like the idea of having to pick a seat you are running for and having to get 51% to "win." I also LOVE the idea of term limits There is no way that these seats should be occupied for such a long time by the same people, NO MATTER WHO THEY ARE! Ideas get stale, fresh blood is needed whether I agree with them or not. That's just common sense. Yes Folsom is a great place to live but who's to say it can't be better? Change does not always equal malcontent. Change for the sake of change is sometimes a good thing!

That said, I am strongly encouraging my husband to run for council in 2 years. He has great ideas and a great support system if I say so myself I'm going to start saving my extra grocery money to set aside for signage purchases. Never to early to start! He who has the most signs wins!

Barb J

Encourage your husband to think about running in the recall next spring. In the recall he gets to pick what ever seat he wants to campaign for and it should be a low budget campaign and a very good experience. I'll help him with any issues he has questions with or anything he needs.

We have term limits for the President and Governor, but not our City Council.

[Barb J]

Who is being recalled and why? Would love more info regarding this issue!

Barb