Indexes
February 9th, 2010
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Will terrorists be given Miranda warnings? (75)
- Lodi Unified School District president issues warning to speakers over cuts (64)
- President Obama's first year (45)
- Many reject the politics of 'no' (45)
- Islamic symbol in mosaic — what is all the fuss? (44)
- Writer comments on Neely column (42)
- The Home Depot hopes to join Costco at Reynolds Ranch (41)
- Time to shed the convenient sham of 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy (34)
- We need to conduct respectful conversations (30)
- Tasered suspect claims he is Yosemite Sam (25)
ADVERTISEMENT
Why I'll be voting 'yes' on Measure W
Tuesday, February 3, 2009 6:02 AM PST
This March 3, Lodians will be going to the polls for the fourth time in 13 months. This special election ballot will have a grand total of one measure/question on it, Measure W, which states:
"Shall Ordinance 1812 of the City of Lodi, an ordinance Approving and Adopting the Redevelopment Plan for the Lodi Community Improvement Project be Adopted?"
Ordinance 1812 was voted on and passed by the Lodi City Council on a 3-1 vote. Council members Larry Hansen, Bob Johnson and Phil Katzakian voted in the affirmitive, and council member JoAnne Mounce was the lone dissenting vote.
Council member Susan Hitchcock was forced to be a nonparticipant in the voting due to her and her husband Jerry Glenn's ownership of property(s) in the purview of the proposed RDA. Hitchcock has, however, cosigned/authored legal documents supporting Measure W and should be considered a strong vote in favor of redevelopment. These documents are openly available at the city clerks' office.
Out of 163 cities in California with populations over 50,000, Lodi is just one of eight that does not have an active redevelopment agency. According to the paperwork filed at city hall, if Lodi had implemented an RDA the 10-20 years ago when it was first proposed, Lodi would have benefited by an average of $1,700,000 every year since.
Of course, whatever money is borrowed to make the projected water, sewer, street, sidewalk and sound wall improvements — as well as what is put toward expanding the sales tax base in these areas — will eventually have to be paid back. The increased tax revenue generated by the RDA is predicted to be sufficient to retire this debt. I mean, who can predict what the city's, state's or country's economy may be like in the year 2040? The people of Lodi should worry more about the futures of Social Security and Medicare, as they both by that time are expected to be well past the point of insolvency without drastic intervention no matter what relatively tiny amount of debt that the city of Lodi may incur via an RDA.
The March 3 election will not exactly be an election that will see Lodians casting ballots in record numbers. Turnout, I expect, will probably be at record lows.
Redevelopment opponents claim that an RDA will make the city of Lodi incur mountains of debt that will have to be paid back by future generations, and will only profit rich developers. The people actually being put to work, paying income tax and not collecting unemployment is apparently of little relevance.
RDA proponents say that redevelopment is a tool that will reinvigorate many somewhat blighted areas in mainly East Lodi, create many new jobs and let Lodi retain upwards of 64 percent of its property taxes that would otherwise be sent to Sacramento. The 64 percent number is according to the Lodi Chamber of Commerce Jan. 12 e-newsletter. Measure W is also supported by Scott Bratton, President of the Lodi Police Officers Association; Pete Iturrraran, President of the Lodi Firefighters Association; and the LUSD school board.
The main opponents of Measure W are a group of local residents calling themselves "Smart Lodi." This group deserves credit for obtaining the necessary 10 percent of registered voters needed to force the special election. The fundraisng efforts by the group, however, are expected to be anemic. Their path of reaching voters appears to be relying heavily on letters to the editor to this paper, the Sentinel, to make their case to the people of Lodi.
The "Yes on W" group is headed by Lodi Chamber of Commerce CEO Pat Patrick who is no stranger to political battles. Patrick also headed the successful "No on Measure R" campaign in 2004. This campaign committee is expected to be well-financed, and will probably raise as much money as needed to make sure that pre-election polling keeps their group well ahead.
While I have in the past disagreed with some of the Lodi Chamber stances on issues, I will be supporting this one. The State of California is NOT going to be generous with whatever meager funds it can secure in the foreseeable future. It just makes sense for the city of Lodi to hold onto its property taxes and make improvements to our fair city rather than let that money go into the black hole that is the State Capitol in Sacramento. It has become abundantly clear that there is virtually no amount of tax dollars that our Los Angelesand San Francisco-dominated state legislature cannot fritter away.
Vote "yes" on Measure W this March 3.
J. Kurt Roberts can be reached at jkurtroberts@sbcglobal.net.
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
danielH wrote on Feb 10, 2009 10:08 AM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 9, 2009 9:10 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 9, 2009 9:08 PM:
danielh wrote on Feb 9, 2009 8:01 PM:
Apparently you don't get that. "
El Rushbo wrote on Feb 9, 2009 7:09 PM:
danielH wrote on Feb 9, 2009 9:02 AM:
Measure U doubled the salary of the mayor with the added job description of managing Freedom-of-information-act public releases.
Then we accused him of not doing his job when information was requested. especially, the mayor was concealing the Enterprise Zone contract that was awarded to Stockton, because of its poverty, and the ambitious proposals to improve that poverty. "
danielH wrote on Feb 9, 2009 9:00 AM:
We brought up how Stockton favors favorite pet projects at the expense of small business. "
danielH wrote on Feb 9, 2009 8:57 AM:
In Stockton, I guarantee public opinion letters are screened in favor of the advertisers, and the newspaper only allows a certain number of opinions, because they claim there are other "popular" issues that need to be covered also.
If a letter-to-the-editor gets into Stockton, most likely it gets edited first.
In Stockton, they dropped 9 out of 10 of my every attempt to get in a letter.
In Stockton, they had Mayor Podesto and Chavez, who led the movement into RDA, and they steam-rolled their opposition. "
danielH wrote on Feb 9, 2009 8:51 AM:
Lodi is special because of the fact that it only has a population of 60,000 (?), and because of the math, only about 1,500 (?) signatures were required. This means that a small group of 10 like-minded people can organize, and mobilize on foot to gather the signatures that are required. "
danielH wrote on Feb 9, 2009 8:44 AM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 8, 2009 11:15 AM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 8, 2009 11:09 AM:
campking wrote on Feb 7, 2009 10:39 PM:
Interesting take on RDA. "
loadeye wrote on Feb 6, 2009 2:43 PM:
Observer wrote on Feb 6, 2009 6:47 AM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 5, 2009 1:32 PM:
Observer wrote on Feb 5, 2009 7:30 AM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 4, 2009 10:19 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 4, 2009 10:01 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 4, 2009 3:30 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 4, 2009 2:25 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 4, 2009 2:23 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 4, 2009 1:34 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 4, 2009 12:55 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 4, 2009 12:50 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 4, 2009 9:53 AM:
16925 wrote on Feb 4, 2009 8:51 AM:
You are welcome Mayor Hanson "
Observer wrote on Feb 4, 2009 6:16 AM:
El Rushbo wrote on Feb 3, 2009 8:49 PM:
El Rushbo wrote on Feb 3, 2009 8:42 PM:
16925 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 8:34 PM:
The San Joaquin Republican Assembly, a chapter of the California Republican Assembly, a conservative activist group, has come out against Lodi's Measure W.
The group prefers Lodi and other cities take advantage of their county's state-approved enterprise zone, which is a special district that receive job-creating tax breaks.
Here's what group President Nancy Cochran had to say in a written statement:
San Joaquin Republican Assembly members voted unanimously to endorse a NO vote for Proposition W, a measure to appear on the ballot at a special election called by City of Lodi on March 3.
As a chapter of California Republican Assembly, described by President Ronald Reagan as the conscience of the Republican Party, our members believe strongly in individual freedom and the entrepreneurial spirit. These principles have proven through time to be essential elements for success in business and in the community at large. Government interference thwarts business development. Measure W would place a burden on our financial future, instead of encouraging free enterprise.
The Enterprise Zone concept is the real answer for the blighted areas of our communities to thrive. "
loadeye wrote on Feb 3, 2009 8:25 PM:
El Rushbo wrote on Feb 3, 2009 8:20 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 3, 2009 8:19 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 3, 2009 8:11 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 3, 2009 7:53 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 3, 2009 7:39 PM:
http://seelodi.groupee.net/groupee_files/attachments/1/9/2/1921061682/1921061682_Warning_letter_to_CC_from_State_of_CA.pdf?ts=49890CCC&key=7692254A7869D5AED0A0678DC83DE785&referrer=http%3A%2F%2Fseelodi.groupee.net%2Feve%2Fforums%2Fa%2Fga%2Ful%2F2921061682%2FWarning_letter_to_CC_from_State_of_CA.pdf "
OTH wrote on Feb 3, 2009 7:36 PM:
Do you realize how chidish and downright stupid it is to say that because people disagree with you they lack civic pride and patriotism? Do you drink? "
loadeye wrote on Feb 3, 2009 7:27 PM:
El Rushbo wrote on Feb 3, 2009 5:34 PM:
Whoa Nellie! wrote on Feb 3, 2009 5:06 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 3, 2009 4:14 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 2:25 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 3, 2009 1:51 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 3, 2009 1:19 PM:
Oxford Street and its redevelopment problems
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Article Information:
Title: Oxford Street and its redevelopment problems
Author(s): Russell Schiller
Journal: International Journal of Retail & Distribution Management
Year: 1984
Volume: 12
Issue: 6
Page: 34 - 36
ISSN: 0307-2363
DOI: 10.1108/eb018252
Publisher: MCB UP Ltd
Document Access:
Existing customers:
Abstract: Oxford Street is one of the best-known shopping streets in the world, but it suffers from serious problems. Investors are cautious about it; many of the buildings are of poor physical quality, and new developments pose technical difficulties. Russell Schiller offers several solutions to these problems. Oxford Street could be better managed, as are some of our better quality covered shopping centres. But in itself this would not be sufficient: what is also needed is a courageous decision to reduce traffic and introduce more pedestrianisation. Another possibility is to increase the physical depth of Oxford Street. This article is based on a talk given by Russell Schiller at a conference in September on the future of Oxford Street, organised by Westminster City Council. "
mp wrote on Feb 3, 2009 1:17 PM:
Great link to an article about abuse.
Read have way down. "
mp wrote on Feb 3, 2009 1:11 PM:
Just a truth sayer!
One who desires to stop out of control government spending!
No on Measure W Please!
I LOVE THESE BLOGS!!!!! "
mp wrote on Feb 3, 2009 1:10 PM:
" Your agruement that "the money goes to the State" is getting REALLY old.
If you take from the State, the State will ask the taxpayers for more...
Come on.
I don't support Measure W becuase there is ZERO accountability.
You ask me to trust me council people with more money?
They can't manage the money that have.
My electric rate are higher that then they have ever been.
My water and sewer rates are out of control.
They can't get my Walmart.
And they want more... " "
commonsense1 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 12:58 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 12:43 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 12:42 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 12:41 PM:
El Rushbo wrote on Feb 3, 2009 12:40 PM:
El Rushbo wrote on Feb 3, 2009 12:36 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 3, 2009 11:03 AM:
mp wrote on Feb 3, 2009 11:01 AM:
Just tell the truth and let people make up their own minds. "
mp wrote on Feb 3, 2009 10:57 AM:
" mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:46 PM:
" Your agruement that "the money goes to the State" is getting REALLY old.
If you take from the State, the State will ask the taxpayers for more...
Come on.
I don't support Measure W becuase there is ZERO accountability.
You ask me to trust me council people with more money?
They can't manage the money that have.
My electric rate are higher that then they have ever been.
My water and sewer rates are out of control.
They can't get my Walmart.
And they want more... "
patton1 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 10:34 AM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 10:32 AM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 3, 2009 10:31 AM:
OTH wrote on Feb 2, 2009 11:27 PM:
You state "Mounce has never done a thing for the eastside. She is just beholden to a small group of not in my backyarders."
Can you tell me which of the esteemed listed far westside dwellers has done anything for the eastside? It's been there for years while each and everyone of the people mentioned have avoided it like the plague. It may as well have been a different planet.
However now that the visions of dollar signs dance in the wanters heads it's all they've thought about for years.
How much money have taxpayers paid to replace rotting infra structure that has been diverted to something else? "
blossom wrote on Feb 2, 2009 7:51 PM:
Sick sick sick of it!!
I am voting NO!
NO WAY! "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 5:15 PM:
That is no reason for Lodi to go into millions of debt to benefit a bunch a developers. "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 5:14 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:39 PM:
" Not nuts overnight! I didn't make that claim. Simply, don't lie to the votes and say eminate domain is outlawed when is only take a vote of three council members and thiry days to repeal the
ordinance.
No scare tactics - just facts.
Just be honest and say you "could" use eminate domain and explain the cases where it would apply.
Don't lie and say outlawed!
That's giving people a faults sense of secuity. " "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 5:13 PM:
" Your agruement that "the money goes to the State" is getting REALLY old.
If you take from the State, the State will ask the taxpayers for more...
Come on.
I don't support Measure W becuase there is ZERO accountability.
You ask me to trust me council people with more money?
They can't manage the money that have.
My electric rate are higher that then they have ever been.
My water and sewer rates are out of control.
They can't get my Walmart.
And they want more...
NO DEAL! " "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 5:12 PM:
Lets talk facts since you are so full of them! "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 5:11 PM:
Speak with fork tongue patton/commonsense1/patrick/all-in-one!
The general fund can not and will not be funded through redevelopment. All RDA can do is provide tax breaks on the eastside.
It can not pay for salaries or operations. "
patton1 wrote on Feb 2, 2009 4:34 PM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 2, 2009 4:31 PM:
commonsense1 wrote on Feb 2, 2009 4:06 PM:
loadeye wrote on Feb 2, 2009 2:04 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:46 PM:
If you take from the State, the State will ask the taxpayers for more...
Come on.
I don't support Measure W becuase there is ZERO accountability.
You ask me to trust me council people with more money?
They can't manage the money that have.
My electric rate are higher that then they have ever been.
My water and sewer rates are out of control.
They can't get my Walmart.
And they want more...
NO DEAL! "
loadeye wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:45 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:42 PM:
On Adminastration?
On Water lines? (taxpayers already paying)
On ground water contamination? (Taxpayers already paying)
DOUBLE DIPPING? "
loadeye wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:41 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:40 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:39 PM:
ordinance.
No scare tactics - just facts.
Just be honest and say you "could" use eminate domain and explain the cases where it would apply.
Don't lie and say outlawed!
That's giving people a faults sense of secuity. "
patton1 wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:35 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:35 PM:
They are facts.
Which should have been answered a long time ago.
Instead this cc tries to shove more debt down the taxpayer throats without upfront accountability. "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:33 PM:
Not to think in terms of scare tactics, but interest rate on RDA bonds can be as high as 25%.
What about the debt the current has? Do you think $148 million dollars on the LEUD is good debt?
Do you think the city will every be able to pay that down in your life time?
What about the bonds the city HAS TO go out for.... Lodi Energy Center and Water Treatment Plant?
I think RDA on top of everything else is just way to much power handed to local officials that do not have the kinds of experience necessary to over see millions in debt.
The last thing Lodi needs is another sink hole of spending. "
reality wrote on Feb 2, 2009 1:17 PM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 11:14 AM:
Any answers? "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 11:11 AM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 2, 2009 11:05 AM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 10:24 AM:
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 10:22 AM:
So far we have only heard from the people how will receive kick-backs or do not understand the long term problems surrounding RDA. "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 10:20 AM:
What is wrong with this picture? "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 10:18 AM:
It seems that all the developers are the one who will come out on top and all the poor people on the eastside will get the shaft - again. "
mp wrote on Feb 2, 2009 10:16 AM:
16925 wrote on Jan 31, 2009 11:00 AM:
" LNS failed to mention that the only council member who lives in the project area, the council member who has faught for 18 years for eastside improve does not support Measure W or the current redevelopment plan. JoAnne Mounce has concerns that the plan does not protect the eastside residents and small business owners from the city council members and staff.
Eminate Domain can not be used for private use but it can and will be used for public use. Example: if the grape bowl renovation needs a parking lot there goes all the houses!
If an sports complex goes in on the eastside - where - a city block full of houses.
Not to mention what the eastside really needs: sidewalk repair, new sewer and water lines, road repair. That is what this plan should be insuring.
The plan calls for infrastructure and TCP clean up. The citizens are already paying for that. Will the city refund the money to the taxpayers or double dip? " "
reality wrote on Feb 2, 2009 10:10 AM:
loadeye is ajerk who will say anything to cloud the issue no matter how much of a lie it is "
patton1 wrote on Feb 2, 2009 9:46 AM:
patton1 wrote on Feb 2, 2009 9:44 AM:
In favor..
Susan Hitchcock Principle/cc member
Scott Bratton Lodi police association
Bo Katzakian retired former Mayor
Ivan Suess for Loel Center
Pete Iturren Lodi Firfighters Union
tracy Williams Ceo of Loel Center
Doctor Mullen
Larry Hansen
Russ Munson
Sara Herbele "
loadeye wrote on Feb 2, 2009 8:42 AM:
Comments on this story are now closed.