Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Story Tools

Email this story | Print this story

Indexes

December 1st, 2008
November 30th, 2008
November 29th, 2008
November 28th, 2008
November 27th, 2008
November 26th, 2008
November 25th, 2008
November 24th, 2008
ADVERTISEMENT
This property is included in the Reynolds Ranch project. It is located off Harney Lane just easy of the Southern Pacific railroad tracks. (Jennifer M. Howell/News-Sentinel)

Reynolds Ranch wins 3-2 approval

By Rebecca Adler
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
Updated: Thursday, August 31, 2006 9:53 AM PDT

Reynolds Ranch was approved in a 3-2 vote Wednesday night after more than five hours of discussion by the Lodi City Council.

In each of five matters of business — approving the final Environmental Impact Report, making a general plan amendment to include Reynolds Ranch, accepting the development agreement between the city and San Joaquin Valley Development, annexing the land the project will be built upon and rezoning the area for development — both Mayor Susan Hitchcock and Councilwoman JoAnne Mounce voted to deny approval.

Hitchcock had some points of contention with the plan, in particular with the housing density proposals because she said it broke from the general plan guidelines of 65 percent low-density housing, 10 percent medium-density and 25 percent high density.

"When the general plan was formed these were figures the public embraced," Hithcock said. "I realize we can amend the general plan but with this proposal we're wholesaling it."

In the proposal, the low-density housing figure was lowered from 65 percent to 11 percent, however the plan still fulfills the second part of the guideline of only 7 housing units per acre.

Mounce, meanwhile, was concerned that development fees would not be used to enhance the Eastside and downtown as proposed, but instead go to other projects already waiting for funding.

Several members of the public also spoke at the meeting, including a number of employees from Blue Shield of California — a major stakeholder in the project.

While Blue Shield employees were united in their opinion on Reynolds Ranch, farmers were divided about whether the project should be approved.

The Lodi City Council had still made no decision by midnight, after a more than five-hour meeting had been under way.

One after one, Blue Shield employees stood and echoed the mantra, "We need our jobs," in response to comments made earlier in the meeting by Hitchcock.

Meanwhile, farmers in the audience stood carrying signs that read, "If you fed your child today hug a farmer," and "Save the family farm."

Rosemary Atkinson, a representative of Campaign for Common Ground, made the trip from Stockton to voice her opinion about the project.

Next step

The annexation proposal for Reynolds Ranch must now be reviewed by the Local Agency Formation Commission, which has been established to discourage urban sprawl, preserve agricultural land and encourage orderly development.
LAFCO will hold a special meeting on Sept. 22 at 10 a.m. to vote whether to approve the project, but must first decide whether the plan demonstrates an ability to provide municipal services, meets LAFCO guidelines and is a logical annexation.
Source: Bruce Baracco, LAFCO executive officer.

"For years Lodi has been concerned about Stockton deciding to make a move north into the city and has supported a greenbelt," she said. "So I'm surprised and sad to see that Lodi is now making the first move out of city boundaries."

Others who said they disapproved of the project upon arrival, like Mike Manna, owner of Manna Farms and member of the Lodi-Woodbridge Winegrape Commission, said they had changed their minds during the course of the meeting.

An effort by the San Joaquin Land Company, the developers behind Reynolds Ranch, to include agricultural buffers in the project plans was largely responsible for the change of perspective, Manna said.

"As soon as I heard about this project I told myself 'That's not gonna fly,'" Manna said, "But I've come to agree with the project because of the buffer zones discussed. If more projects were thought out in this way I don't think you'd see so much resistance from farmers."

Reynolds Ranch consists of 1,084 homes of various densities, 350,000 square feet of commercial space on 40 acres, public areas and buildings, and a 20-acre office complex for Blue Shield.

The health insurer, whose participation is key to the success of the project, employs about 600 people in three locations in Lodi and has plans to add hundreds of new jobs at the new location.

The adoption and development agreement, which includes developer investments in other parts of the community like the Eastside, downtown and a one to one agricultural mitigation area, was also approved by Citizens for Open Government. The group mounted an unsuccessful lawsuit against the Wal-Mart Supercenter proposal and sought to include agricultural mitigation in the Reynolds Ranch project to avoid another court battle.

The approval by City Council means the project will now move to the Local Agency Formation Commission for approval of the annexation proposal. LAFCO will meet Sept. 22 to discuss the merits of the plan.

Contact reporter Rebecca Adler at rebeccaa@lodinews.com.

First published: Thursday, August 31, 2006

Reader Feedback

well wrote on Sep 13, 2006 9:52 PM:

" Patton-You are getting the attention from people because We know your theories are Goverment Control theories and have proven not to work!So you better think of something else! "

well wrote on Sep 13, 2006 9:42 PM:

" Patton- You are in some kind of dream world!We all would like to think it works that easy but it dosen't!The system is chokeing the average person to death!!Your answer are just theories that don't work!That is why we always are being TAXED more!Contenually over and over!MORE&MORE "

patton wrote on Sep 13, 2006 5:53 PM:

" No, I checked with the city. Also, at the council meeting a while back they said that they were again going to raise the fees. It seems that we are less than average in terms of the other cities in our county. We has so little development over the years compared to every other city, I think keeping pace just got overlooked. "

To Patton wrote on Sep 13, 2006 3:39 PM:

" And where did you get all this experience and knowledge. Were you at one time associated with the City. "

patton wrote on Sep 13, 2006 12:01 PM:

" Fees were raised at the start of 06'. They are also slated to go up in the nexr few months. All you negative people would feel beter if you did your homework. Blogger, stop typing and start getting the facts. "

blogger: wrote on Sep 12, 2006 5:01 PM:

" Patton: you really are naieve if you think the fees developers pay covers the costs of things. You mention schools. The amount of fees for schools is far below what it costs to build schools. The City impact fees have not been adjusted for ages, because the City Manager did not want to raise any fees. Now look who is holding the bag. John Q Public, you and me and not the developers. "

patton wrote on Sep 12, 2006 2:51 PM:

" I never gues who a blogger is, it doesnt really matter. What counts is the facts that either do or do not support a persons assertions. I dont work for the city nor am I on the council. I do however have the experience in this area that others are clearly lacking. "

OTH wrote on Sep 12, 2006 10:59 AM:

" patton.....Only if you made the post at 3:37 p.m. on 9/11. "

T & C wrote on Sep 12, 2006 10:29 AM:

" Patton, my guess is that you're either council, management, city staff or a partner in Johnson Realty. "

T & C wrote on Sep 12, 2006 10:08 AM:

" Just a Question, I read and respect your opinion whether you think so or not. I just don't comprehend why more Lodi taxpayers don't demand some kind of accountability from their CC and management team. We need more younger, intelligent and ambitious leaders. And should demand that the certain "cliquish" people in Lodi let the CC be comprised of people of different ethnicities, wage levels, and mainly by the district of town they live in. Only then will we know what Lodians truly want. "

patton wrote on Sep 12, 2006 8:35 AM:

" OTH, did I blog that you said those things? I think I was responding to some bs by T& C "

patton wrote on Sep 12, 2006 8:31 AM:

" Hey Guess, Heck, I dont like a lot of things the city buys either. Pensions are too high, power buys have been at to high a rate, new AV equipment for carnigie forum ect ect ect. I think however, that what we will receive from the RR development will be a net positive for Lodi. "

OTH wrote on Sep 12, 2006 8:15 AM:

" guess....It's not that Patton can't say where he gets his info, it's WON'T. Patton is one of the good ol boyz. "

guess wrote on Sep 11, 2006 11:03 PM:

" I'am sick of paying for things I do not want!Think about that Patton!I think you work for the City.That is why you see things the way you do! "

guess wrote on Sep 11, 2006 10:58 PM:

" Patton- you still can't say how you get all your facts,about everything!you seam to defend any and every thing goverment!pretty tired of it?YES everyone pays for the new development in some form or another way!it's hiden with all the other cost of things!others pay for there profit. the (DEVELOPERS) "

Just a question... wrote on Sep 11, 2006 8:47 PM:

" I seem to have offended Mr/Mrs/Miss T&C. I wasn't trying to be a smarty, I was simply asking a question. Forgive me for being young and not fully understanding how cities work. And I dont work for the city, but maybe I should try for a job there. "

OTH wrote on Sep 11, 2006 7:00 PM:

" Thanks Patton.....I don't believe anywhere on this blog you have seen me post that new homeowners should pay for freeway improvements, or stop lights or any other moronic thing you want to tack onto me. "

THANKS PATTON wrote on Sep 11, 2006 6:56 PM:

" Did you pay for them when you bought yours? "

T & C wrote on Sep 11, 2006 6:42 PM:

" Citizens' taxes pay for these developers freebies! "

Caspian wrote on Sep 11, 2006 5:37 PM:

" Developers will be backing Hansen. It will be the biggest purse ever (for Lodi). "

Thanks Patton wrote on Sep 11, 2006 3:37 PM:

" Thanks Patton for that clarification. The widening of a freeway, offramps, etc. are a benefit to everyone. Why would just the new homeowners be responsible for the enitre improvement? It's the old "I've got mine, to hell with the rest of you" attitude that is being expressed here. I guarantee T&C, OTH didn't pay for those improvements when they bought their home but it sure is OK for someone else to pay. "

patton wrote on Sep 11, 2006 11:55 AM:

" City doesnt pay to widen freeways of overpasses, thats caltrans. Lodi doesnt pay for schools thats LUSD.Monies are avaible to pay for thosw things, monies already collected through fees etc. "

T & C wrote on Sep 11, 2006 10:06 AM:

" To just a question: You'll never see the real figures. If you did, you'd probably faint to see just what little the developer pays for. RR will entail hundreds of millions of dollars. in freeway widening, a new overpass, and two new on-off ramps just for starters. That doesn't count the other hundred million for 2 new schools for their residents. You really think the developer pays any of this? Go back to your city desk and solve the problem, not add to it. "

To Just a Question wrote on Sep 11, 2006 8:36 AM:

" That is what Hitchcock was saying when she asked for a moratorium. How much does development cost. I do not think the council really wants to know. The ones that know are the developers and they will do anything to make sure this answer does not come out. In the upcoming campaign follow the money and you will see who the developers are supporting. "

Just a question... wrote on Sep 10, 2006 9:17 PM:

" Isn't the fees the devlopers pay supposed to help pay for the city's expenses such as stop lights and road work? If the city isn't charging enough...then that's the city's fault. "

Lodi Businessperson wrote on Sep 10, 2006 6:57 PM:

" T&C, OTH, etal...why is making a profit such a bad thing? Businesses making a profit is what makes this country run? I don't care if its a developer's profit, a jewelry stores profit or McDonald's. These people pay wages, generate sales taxes, property taxes, income taxes, etc. I don't fault anyone who doesn't want to take the risk of running their own business. It's much easier to be an employee and pick your check up weekly. There is a tremendous risk in being a developer. "

patton wrote on Sep 10, 2006 6:42 PM:

" If Sam is going to be impacted by RR, it would be interesting to see if his property were actually abutting the project. "

patton wrote on Sep 10, 2006 6:41 PM:

" Chilis and lowes etc. pump more money into our city than some improevements like a signal. By the way, the developer might of had to help pay for that. OTH, look into the slaes tax lodi gets form lowes and I think you will see that they are worth having. "

Sam wrote on Sep 10, 2006 3:16 PM:

" patton, when Lodi grew west in the 50s' it really hurt my farming and destroyed my vineyards. I was forced to become a developer. Happened again in the late 60's and 70's. I prefer farming, but RR is nothing new to me. It will destroy more of my vineyards that I will be forced to develop. That is called GROWTH! "

Sam wrote on Sep 10, 2006 3:02 PM:

" With RR jumping Harney...watch them all jump now!!!! Grow Lodi GROW!!! "

Sam wrote on Sep 10, 2006 3:00 PM:

" I have several parcels affected by RR, patton... and quite a few that are not. Not a problem. I had several effected when Lodi grew west in the 70 & 80's. I sold them for a tidy profit! I will do the same when (NOT IF, but WHEN) Lodi and Stockton encroaches on my farmland. By jumping Harney, Lodi has made it's view quite clear. Lodi prefers costco, Walmart, and Borders to a greenbelt. "

OTH wrote on Sep 10, 2006 1:10 PM:

" patton....Are you saying Sam is making false statements about his property ? Or you just want to be able to tell him it's no big deal? "

T & C wrote on Sep 10, 2006 9:40 AM:

" letstalksense: Did Chili's pay for that private traffic signal out on Kettleman? Did Lowe's pay for the widening of Kettleman up to the newest development and did Walmart or Target pay for the new roads and traffic signals that lead to their corners? No. Us taxpayers paid every penny giving those developers more of our money. And we'll pay dearly for Reynolds for a long time. "

Let's talk some sense wrote on Sep 9, 2006 2:26 PM:

" Is it the developer's fault for buying the land and building on it or is it the farmer's fault for selling the land knowing something will be built? "

Let's talk some sense wrote on Sep 9, 2006 2:25 PM:

" We have a city that is out of money - we have a development (RR) that will not only provide an influx of cash to the city, but also bring in a retail establishment that will keep Lodians shopping in Lodi, thus providing more money to the city. How many of us no longer drive to Elk Grove or Stockton to go to Lowes? How many of us no longer drive to Stockton to eat at Applebees or Chilis? "

guess wrote on Sep 9, 2006 1:24 AM:

" Patton-What makes you qualified for your in puts?You seam to think you know everything!Inlighten us with your reply! "

patton wrote on Sep 8, 2006 9:53 PM:

" No its simple, Sam lamenst that his parcel i going to be impacted by RR, I thought it would be nice to see where is parcel actaully is. "

Caspian wrote on Sep 8, 2006 9:40 PM:

" "you can't see me": you should reconsider your reasoning. It was a done deal before it made it to the meeting. "

OTH wrote on Sep 8, 2006 6:54 PM:

" patton....I don't remember asking you to blog less and you haven't seen much of me lately. I may have made an error in spelling like you did when I said she. Just an innocent slip of the keyboard. But your phishing expeditions are quite humorous. "

patton wrote on Sep 8, 2006 4:39 PM:

" Sam is a she? hum....I think I asked where his parcel was. As much as yoy blog OTH, funny how you want me to blog less. "

blogger wrote on Sep 8, 2006 4:14 PM:

" OTH: patton does not want answers to questions. He wants to stir the pot. "

OTH wrote on Sep 8, 2006 3:41 PM:

" patton...Perhaps if you just asked Sam for the information you want you could ask fewer questions. Particularly since she has answered them before on other blogs. Is there something in particular you would like to know? "

T & C wrote on Sep 7, 2006 7:06 PM:

" What's going to happen to the buildings that BS is presently using? That area is in itself a blighted industrial area with unkempt buildings and fields of weeds. The new super warehouses have hardly any landscaping and look like rows of cloned tilt-ups. Are we going to end up with more vacant industrial space while creating more new? "

Sam wrote on Sep 7, 2006 5:33 PM:

" patton, we have farmed grapes, cherries, alphalfa, corn, cattle, beans, chickens,..what ever makes money. We are now looking into hemp and planting even solar panels. When we no longer can make a living off our land, due to Lodi and stockton's encroachment. we ARE planting houses! We have done this in the past, and will do it again! This is nothing new to us!!! "

LodiCitizen wrote on Sep 7, 2006 4:46 PM:

" PATTON...you didn't upset me...I also know people in the same situation as SAM. I hope you are right and that things work out for the landowners in the proposed greenbelt.Hitchcock's continued attempts to control/steal the land on Armstrong is shameful...I hope the citizens of Lodi have enough brains to vote her out of office come November. "

LodiCitizen wrote on Sep 7, 2006 12:43 PM:

" IKE...well said. Hitchcock has worn out her welcome in OUR town. Come November...VOTE HITCHOCK OUT OF OFFICE! "

patton wrote on Sep 7, 2006 12:38 PM:

" Lodicitizen, did I upset you? I have freinds that are in the same situation as Sam. As I said, I think these will work out for him. "

Ike wrote on Sep 7, 2006 12:20 PM:

" As Hitchcock is bad mouthing the RR project the proponents are discussing a way to help preserve our grape bowl with their own money. This isn't the way I want my town to look she rants. This politician must be stamped with an experation date that has long since passed. "

LodiCitizen wrote on Sep 7, 2006 11:56 AM:

" PATTON...you sure ask SAM a lot of questions. How about you...what do you do for a living and how many acres and what do you have on your land south of Harney Lane? Also, why are you so concerned about the land in the proposed greenbelt? "

T & C wrote on Sep 7, 2006 10:21 AM:

" I'm disappointed they even spent time dwelling on RR last night with so many other matters pressing here in Lodi. RR is a done deal and now let's proceed and figure how we can get this city out of debt. If CC can't find 40 thousand or so to get a start on the Grape Bowl, we're really that broke. The Grape Bowl is Lodi. But, of course, the aquatic center and indoor sports arena are more important. Where are those new people from RR going to swim? "

patton wrote on Sep 7, 2006 9:24 AM:

" SAm, how many acres do you farm? What do you farm? "

patton wrote on Sep 7, 2006 9:22 AM:

" To Sam, I dont support a greenbelt, I would just prefer that Lodi doesnt annex and that zoning remain the same out there. The county will never allow development out there so I dont understand the rush. "

wiley wrote on Sep 7, 2006 9:19 AM:

" Our mayor is a joke. For a city in as bad a shape financially as ours, how could she risk the best employer in town. If she is re-elected, our taxes are going to go way up! "

Sam wrote on Sep 7, 2006 8:30 AM:

" Guess.. I don't have to GO TO STOCKTON.. It is coming to me. Holman Rd is going to connect to Micke Grove Rd within a year or two... which in turn is suppose to connect to Stockton Street. Where have you been??? "

LodiCitizen wrote on Sep 7, 2006 8:28 AM:

" IKE...forget the recall...just make sure you and the rest of the citizens of Lodi vote Hitchcock out of office come November. "

Ike wrote on Sep 7, 2006 7:02 AM:

" Quotes from our challenged mayor. "Do we really need these jobs" and "this isn't how I want my town to look" This poor councilperson thinks she not only owns Lodi but the surrounding farmland she has contrived into her own greenbelt. Lets start a recall! "

Ike wrote on Sep 7, 2006 6:34 AM:

" Did you hear Hitchcock rant on last night about the RR project? She brings up one of her minions who she hopes will validate her skewed opinions only to hear thar she has reached an agreement with SJVLC. This isn't the way I want my town to look like spouts the mayor! "

patton wrote on Sep 6, 2006 11:35 PM:

" Yes SAm, you have mentioned being in the greenbelt study area. I have a feeling thing will work out for you! "

Guess wrote on Sep 6, 2006 9:11 PM:

" Post my blogs LNS!! "

guess wrote on Sep 6, 2006 9:10 PM:

" Sam-How about a AM-PM,Mcdonlds,Dennes-etc.So we can improve Lodi's quality of life.Go to Stockton and to very North of Holman Lane.Where do you think that will end?We need these things for all the new people comeing here to get the quality of life here!Or should I say that was here! "

guess wrote on Sep 6, 2006 8:46 PM:

" Sam-I Guess you better go down town and find out what they have planed for you and your property!Patton says they do that long before they tell the people that owned the land!Like I said before you will know when it's done. "

Ashamed Of wrote on Sep 6, 2006 5:37 PM:

" Our Mayor! She was rude to staff, fanatical in her arguments and over the top in how she controlled the Planning Commission. As she posed the question: Do we really need these jobs? The answer is yes! "

You Can't See Me wrote on Sep 6, 2006 5:33 PM:

" I was there and didn't see a mall in any of the renderings. Just a well constructed presentation, a real opportunity for Lodi, credible statistics from the Partnership and City staff that made me proud of our community. "

Sam wrote on Sep 6, 2006 4:55 PM:

" patton..surprise... a lot of our land is!!! "

patton wrote on Sep 6, 2006 3:01 PM:

" Beckman, Johnson and Hansen are experienced in matters of land. They were not fooled by a trojan horse of BS. They want to keep and grow those jobs and they want additional commercial and residential development. You may disagree, but they are not greedy, they have no land south of Harney. "

Caveman wrote on Sep 6, 2006 12:28 PM:

" T&C,I know, I was there. As long as we focus on BS we fall into Gillespie's hands. I'm afraid like RR and Delta, development is going to continue to be the trojan horse variety, taking the focus off the real issue. "

T & C wrote on Sep 6, 2006 10:33 AM:

" Caveman, don't get me wrong. I'm all for BS and any good paying jobs. I'm just laughing because Gillespie wants everyone to think that this is about BS, when in all reality it's about Reynolds Ranch and the mall. When asked if he would continue the project with ONLY BS, he snapped no. Gillespie used BS as the carrot to push the deal through. And the 3 councilmembers that voted yes showed their greed and stupidity. "

blogger wrote on Sep 6, 2006 10:31 AM:

" guess, you are going off half-cocked. The general plan requires many many public hearings both before it is completded and when it is adopted by the Council. That is precisely why a General Plan is so important, because it does capture the peoples views and opinions. "

patton wrote on Sep 6, 2006 9:30 AM:

" Most of the land between our cities is not optioned. Also, PRR designation is a GP holding catagory that is meant to include housing and everything that supports housing. It typically excludes only industrial. "

Caspian wrote on Sep 6, 2006 7:50 AM:

" Most of the land between Stockton and Lodi is already optioned. Americans are so shortsighted...paving-over this land is cutting our own throats. "

guess wrote on Sep 6, 2006 12:44 AM:

" By the way me and some of the boys where thinking, we should put an Indian Casino over by Victor Road at least 15 or 20 years ago.Will that be considered part of the general plan?We thought about it long time ago.Just think of the (MONEY)it will bring for the City's quality of life. "

guess wrote on Sep 6, 2006 12:30 AM:

" To GuessWhat-General plan is that something that is drumed up behind the peoples back?I whould say YES!that is the primary reason no one trust government councels.cont. "

guess wrote on Sep 6, 2006 12:23 AM:

" To GuessWhat-Don't make me laugh it's not City Hall that makes quality of Life here or any where!It's the Size& People!City Hall+City Employees work for the people you are Twisted in your thinking! "

Attorney wrote on Sep 5, 2006 9:02 PM:

" Sam, I've just observed that the landowners don't seem to have much of a consensus on the matter. Some want to sell, some want to farm the rest of their lives, some want a greenbelt, some want to be governed by the County, some want to be governed by the City. Whatever YOU decide their needs to be some sort of consensus. If not, the old divide and conquer theory will prevail. "

Caveman wrote on Sep 5, 2006 7:17 PM:

" T&C-Front line call center jobs and claims processor jobs generally start in the low 20K to high 40k per year. Not many make the high end though as these jobs tend to have the highest turnover rate no matter where they work. I know this because I work for a company that's profile is almost identical to BS. I'm on your side as far as RR goes, but BS growth is important to Lodi. "

ARZ wrote on Sep 5, 2006 4:46 PM:

" Also, as far as our wages go, the starting wages depend on the position but I can tell you they're all in the double digits and more than double the minimum wage! I don't know exactly what they are anymore because they've changed several times since I started with the company. And no, we're not going to tell you what our wages are because that's personal info, some people like to share it (or brag) as you did, others don't. "

ARZ wrote on Sep 5, 2006 4:43 PM:

" T&C, give it a rest already! There aren't a whole lot of jobs listed on our site yet because the bloody building hasn't even been built yet! We've just gone though our last hiring wave where 40+ people were hired for the Claims dept alone and I don't even know how many people the Customer Service dept hired, there were several big job fairs advertised in the paper for them. Just because YOU don't see jobs right now doesn't mean there won't be any in the future. Why would we post for jobs that won't be available till 2007? "

Sam wrote on Sep 5, 2006 3:52 PM:

" To attorney...WHY? Why do I have to decide HOW to give you my land rights. Lodi wants to ruin our wells and our vineyards .... our family's livilihood...and make us run scared giving you our land??? It is not going to happen! AND we have a GREAT land attorney! "

Sam wrote on Sep 5, 2006 3:47 PM:

" To Guesswhat...it is in the current general plan as residential reserve...NOT commercial! Commercial and high density housing destroys neighboring farmland. But you are all knowing, so I should not have to add that comment! "

rv wrote on Sep 5, 2006 3:28 PM:

" when there's money at stake, the outcome is never in doubt. councilman hansen knows (or should know) how high-density apartments will impact the crime rate. maybe he's already earmarking that much needed revenue he's talking about for added police coverage? "

Attorney wrote on Sep 5, 2006 2:12 PM:

" Sounds like the land owners need to get their acts together. Doesn't sound like their is much consensus. Just an observation. "

LodiCitizen wrote on Sep 5, 2006 12:24 PM:

" SAM...don't forget about about the other large landowners whoes land are out of the greenbelt...The majority of the landowners in the proposed greenbelt own small parcels.The large landowners have made sure their land is out of the greenbelt or most of it.How convenient. "

HELLO wrote on Sep 5, 2006 12:09 PM:

" To lodicitizen, SJVL may have most of land lined up,But to leave others out is mean spirited and calculating. I am sure they tied up those with the largest acres and have forgotten everyone is important. They take months to contact anyone and a friendly hello do you have an questions would be the right thing to do. "

T & C wrote on Sep 5, 2006 9:06 AM:

" Thanks, Guess. I retired from the bay in 2001 in construction and my wage at that time was 37.54 hour plus benefits. 58 dollar an hour package with 2 pensions and health plan including dental and eyecare. When I worked the Valley, I made 25+ in 1998. Those were "good wages". Different people have a varied definition of "good wages". I am just trying to find out what that "good wage" is at BS. That's the subject everyone seems to be avoiding. Please inform us. "

GuessWhat wrote on Sep 5, 2006 8:56 AM:

" Guess.. is another fine example of someone who doesn't have a clue, as to how we pay for Lodi's quality of life. Lodi desperately needs revenue and this was a perfect fit for our community. Plus it was put in an area already addressed in the EXISTING General Plan. It's not in the proposed greenbelt. Winegrapes, not food planted there. Willing sellers. Go Big Blue. "

Sam wrote on Sep 5, 2006 8:15 AM:

" patton, ask BF how many acres of his were taken OUT of your proposed greenbelt, "

wiley wrote on Sep 5, 2006 7:39 AM:

" The fact that some of you always over look is that developing south of harney begining in 2007 has been in the works for 10 years. The fact that we get to keep and grow BS is just a bonus. "

guess wrote on Sep 5, 2006 12:04 AM:

" Meanie-T&C is right with his blogs!He is just stating things that you people need to be awear of.If these jobs where so valuable to them and are community, they could of found a better way to stay here.Then to disrupt are quality of life.These developments do disrupt and change things wheather you think so or not!BS Empolyees were used as (chumps)by these developers!!!! "

LoveIt wrote on Sep 4, 2006 9:55 PM:

" Lodi Girl. Very well said. Ignore OTH, Capt. Armenia, etc. What you hear now is sour grapes and whimpering from being soundly whipped. Guaranteed, these will be the same people that complain about Delta College. You can bet a years wages, you will hear the same garbage. "

Sam wrote on Sep 4, 2006 6:14 PM:

" Patton, if you want a greenbelt separater so much, DONATE your land south of Harney!! Not mine! Enough said! "

Meanie wrote on Sep 4, 2006 4:08 PM:

" LodiGirl, please don't let T&C intimidate you. He/she is a very bitter and unfulfilled individual. He/she has not made a positive comment on any subject. I am also convince that T&C represents a very small minority in this community. T&C believes in the "big conspiracy" theory and eveyone is out to get him/her. You are an asset to this community and don't let anyone tell you differently. "

T & C wrote on Sep 4, 2006 3:57 PM:

" Lodi girl:And I can't find out the wages or hours offered as they aren't listed along with the job openings. I know there are some good paying jobs at BSC and more to come, but I'd like to know what you and BSC consider "good paying"? 10, 12 or 20 dollars per hour, or much lower than that if you're on salary? Please clue Lodi citizens in since that's the only reason the Reynolds project was approved, for the "good paying jobs". We're entitled to know. "

T & C wrote on Sep 4, 2006 3:49 PM:

" Lodi girl, I don't fault you at all. Nor BSC. It's great that they are building in Lodi and most envy you for your decent wages, especially here in Lodi, where more than 8 or 9 dollars an hour is a great wage here. You probably earn more than your spouse and that's what it takes today for a couple to afford a home. Two wage earners. Only 3 to 5 jobs available in Lodi at BSC, and they're through employment agencies, and 2 or 3 of those are for 2-5 years experienced supervisory. "

OTH wrote on Sep 4, 2006 3:17 PM:

" SAM....Patton considers visiting a vineyard the same as working in one. "

LodiCitizen wrote on Sep 4, 2006 1:46 PM:

" To HELLO...I don't know which landowners you have spoken to,but,the ones I know have signed options with SJVL.The developers are committed to this project and they do keep in touch.There is no way a developer would proceed this far with the project if he didn't have a majority of the land lined up. "

Lodi Girl: wrote on Sep 4, 2006 1:05 PM:

" ...(Cont) When I'm of retirement age I will enjoy it as Im sure you & your wife do. Its my choice if I want to work OT...sometimes I do, sometimes I dont. But I can assure you, I dont HAVE/NEED to. I dont feel like a pawn. I feel like a valued employee & I wont apologize for that either. "

Lodi Girl: wrote on Sep 4, 2006 1:05 PM:

" So many personal questions T&C! My financial worth is none or your, or anyone elses, business. I have no 2nd mortgage or refi & dont intend to. I'm a young person so of course Im buying my home. Both my husband & I work. Last time I checked working was an honorable thing so I dont think I need to apologize for having jobs & an income.... "

Employee wrote on Sep 4, 2006 12:43 PM:

" After attending my first City Counsel. I have lived in Lodi all my life, I have determine that we have alot of mean and insensitive Lodi people who say a whole lot of nothing. Help me understand WHY it's such a BIG deal not to have BSC here in Lodi?? Lodi is a bunch of big bullies that have a lot of time on their hands and a bunch of opininiated people. Make a point!! A valid point!! Regardless Lodi or Stockton, BSC employees still have jobs, who cares!! "

T & C wrote on Sep 4, 2006 11:51 AM:

" Lodi girl, tell me that this is all on one income from BSC? Your husband must surely work too. Are you buying your home or do you own it. Most people never own their own homes dues to second mortgages and refinancing. Do you get your healthcare free? How much is invested in your 401K? You need about $40,000 down on a home today. Can you save that much in even 3 years on BSC wages? Are you salary or wages? Just how many hours do you work a week? How much for overtime? Just a pawn for Reynolds Ranch. "

patton wrote on Sep 4, 2006 8:57 AM:

" to sam, I am fo a separator if thge farmers can agree on one. Mohr fry is still in the greenbelt, Bruce is on the committee. What are yoy talking about Bob L? "

Lodi Girl: wrote on Sep 3, 2006 8:45 PM:

" Cont...3) Just because an EE posts a comment during working hours doesn't mean they are at work using work time/computers. We do have vacations. 4) I've worked @ BSC for 20+ years and I can afford a home in, what did T&C call it, a "fashionable neighborhood" and I'm not upper managment or a supervisor. I'm just a worker who is employed by a good company. "

Lodi Girl: wrote on Sep 3, 2006 8:38 PM:

" It seems most of what I wanted to say has been said but I'll touch on a few points. 1) I dont need a union to know Ive got a good job. I've job searched & compared and BSC is the best. I make considerably more that $9 ph plus I have benefits, more than 3 wks vac per year & 401K with company contribution. 2)Telecommuting mean more people out of the office making room for more people in the office which means more jobs.... "

OTH wrote on Sep 3, 2006 8:10 PM:

" I'm sure certain CC members are quite happy with the greedy developers. A litle greed can be spread quite a bit. As they've said follow the money in the coming elections. "

ORT wrote on Sep 3, 2006 1:56 PM:

" T&C, I know a bunch of people who will help you pack your bags. When ya moving? "

HELLO Lodicitizen, MIMI wrote on Sep 2, 2006 8:22 PM:

" I personally approached many of the residents in the RR area, none have completely agreed to sell by signing or have come to terms with a finacial agreement. The developers have not committed and have not spoken to some of the owners in months. Whats up they don't even own the land they want and have paid thousands to get approved. "

to: lodicitizen2 wrote on Sep 2, 2006 8:12 PM:

" No contracts, no money thus far. SVLC better get on the wagon and ring some doorbells. Do you plan to make it to the LAFCO meeting? In support or not? I think they better start buying their future land, if they want it. "SHOW ME THE MONEY"! "

Sam wrote on Sep 2, 2006 7:56 PM:

" patton, you obviously were in a vineyard sampling the wine. Ask ANY FARMER on Armstrong if they like the greenbelt... and NOT while you are sipping their wine. You doing a days work in a field is funny!!!! Funny how every land owner on the greenbelt committee got their land taken OUT of your newly revised greenbelt. Dude... look in the mirror!!! "

LoveIt wrote on Sep 2, 2006 5:30 PM:

" T&C, HappyDays, OTH, Captain America.. What happened to all of the junk you have been talking. We have winner's and loser's. RR & BS win big. And just as we predicted, you lose again. You're still whiners and so out of touch as to what Lodi wants. It's fun to read your dribble. Thank you to those greedy developers and realtors. Happy Holiday. "

TO "TO" wrote on Sep 2, 2006 11:21 AM:

" No credibility. "

In Honor wrote on Sep 2, 2006 10:28 AM:

" As we enjoy our LABOR DAY weekend just remember the infamous words of Hitchcock: Do we really need these jobs? See you at the polls in November Susan! "

enough wrote on Sep 2, 2006 9:05 AM:

" T&C.........give it a rest. "

T & C wrote on Sep 2, 2006 8:40 AM:

" Good luck, Blue Shield. I further checked out your job website and see a few jobs available in Lodi, and I do welcome you. You are one of the very few employers that pay any kind of a decent wage. I do also apologize for my criticism and mostly facts with little or no documentation. I'm still angry that Gillespie and his greedy friends used you as pawns to get Reynolds Ranch this far. "

T & C wrote on Sep 1, 2006 10:36 PM:

" Just looking at the BS jobs on the internet and the first two positions require the knowledge and use of the Korean/Chinese language. Pretty interesting details. Most of the advertised jobs are in Woodland Hills. Just type in your search for blue shield lodi california, and there are many sites for different information. "

T & C wrote on Sep 1, 2006 10:14 PM:

" I paid $50,000 for my house, which was close to what they were going for at that time. And, by the way, I'm a retired construction worker and just happen to know what a hard days' physical work is. Do you? My wife and I are both retired and well off financially. We are ready to move to the Fort Bragg-Mendocino area to get away from this smoggy valley. Lodi is too expensive and more water and electric rate raises are coming real soon. "

patton wrote on Sep 1, 2006 9:32 PM:

" Actually Sam I was in the vinyard this afternoon.I was visiting a vineyard along Armstrong road in fact. The very same vineyard that will be happily farmed even after the dreaded RR project is completed. "

OTH wrote on Sep 1, 2006 6:21 PM:

" Patton.....Like I said, never trust a smiling dog. "

Roger wrote on Sep 1, 2006 5:44 PM:

" We can thank Hitchcock for our higher water and electric rates, our no growth policy and no job policy. We can thank Hansen for our higher water and elec