Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Indexes


February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
February 1st, 2010
ADVERTISEMENT

No on Measure W

Redevelopment would do plenty for developers — and not enough for Eastside residents


Saturday, February 7, 2009 6:40 AM PST

Comments (69 comment(s))

Recently, there have been many letters to the editor about Measure W, the March 3 ballot measure that will put to rest the debate over redevelopment in Lodi. I question how many of the folks writing these letters live in the project area. I have lived on the Eastside for most of my life and feel well-qualified to provide my opinion.

For over 18 years, residents and activists, myself included, have fought long and hard for Eastside improvement. We have asked for — among other things — code enforcement, road repair, sidewalk repair, infrastructure upgrades, alley repairs and improved lighting.

We have made a lot of headway toward these improvements with the help of many, many folks in Lodi and funding through the Community Development Block Grant, but there is still much to accomplish. Thus, you can imagine the tremendous disappointment that the community and I are experiencing due to the fact that the current redevelopment plan fails to guarantee the residents of the Eastside the many services we have requested for so long.

There are a lot of proposals being made. We are told they may fix the road, they may build a library, they might clean up TCP pollution, and they could pay for water meters. All of these are wonderful projects, but there is no guarantee that any of them WILL be done. The plan does not say they MUST spend more than 20 percent on senior housing, or that they WILL fix sidewalks. If the plan guaranteed any reasonable project, I could support Measure W.

In studying the redevelopment plan, there are many provisions for developers and land owners to receive government subsidies. In fact, the council at a February meeting recently discussed that the city could reimburse costs to developers for construction expenses, architectural and design fees, off-site improvements, parking lots, equipment costs, fixtures and furnishings, facade improvements and land acquisition costs. If you believe in free enterprise, these are costs that a developer or land owner should be absorbing themselves. Such land owners or developers should not expect the poorest of homeowners to subsidize them through property taxes.

My core personal beliefs are pretty basic. I believe government was created to provide infrastructure and public safety to the people they govern. In the free enterprise society in which we live, I believe we should NOT ask government to do those things for us which we are capable of doing for ourselves. Government gifts and subsidies conflict with my core political beliefs. It is very difficult for me to contemplate the City Council granting millions of dollars to developers and land owners rather than using that money for projects that will benefit the inhabitants of Lodi.

There are limited requirements in the redevelopment plan for alleys, sidewalks, roads and basic infrastructure — the kind of upgrades which the Eastside desperately needs.

In a misguided attempt at economic development, Measure W provides handouts for developers rather than addressing the needs of the people of the Eastside.

If all the surrounding neighborhoods are in poor condition, businesses will not want to come to Lodi. People will not want to move their families to such an environment. The current redevelopment plan puts the cart before the horse.

It is clear that fixing the neighborhoods and putting people to work with public works infrastructure projects will have a much more favorable effect, and then the businesses will come to Lodi of their own accord. Government donations should not be required.

During the Great Depression, President Franklin D. Roosevelt, with congressional approval, created many public works projects such as the Hoover Dam and Lodi's own Grape Bowl. These projects were created through the Works Progress Administration (WPA), employing millions of people and helping to change the economy. Creating good-paying jobs will increase Lodi's sales tax base. Studies have shown that when an employee lives and works in the same community, they spend their money in that community.

The proposed redevelopment plan needs to guarantee that the Eastside infrastructure will be the first project completed with tax increment dollars. If the RDA plan did so, it would result in the creation of those good-paying jobs and directly increase our tax basis. We do not need to gift this money to the developers and the special interest groups, and hope that by doing so we will create successful businesses.

I have always been a strong supporter of our community. I love Lodi. I do not, however, support an ill-conceived plan to give our City Council a blank check to establish yet another layer of bureaucracy which will fail to provide the greatest benefit for the most number of people.

I urge the citizens of Lodi to join me and vote "no" on Measure W.

I would be delighted to speak with you about redevelopment. Please contact me at 333-2814.

JoAnne Mounce is a member of the Lodi City Council.

Reader Feedback

danielh wrote on Feb 16, 2009 1:39 AM:

" loadeye: I think one small part of the boundary is gerrymandered a little bit, to wrap around the private residence of one of the CC members, so that this one single voter won't have to recuse him/herself. I don't know where that is though.

What was Edumacation talking about? 2 years ago, I remember someone saying something about a magic decoder ring. I don't see anything disrespectful at all about that. I don't remember anything else disrespectful.

I had some problems with T&C, but if you're T&C, I'd be surprised.

I'll tell you where I was when they wanted me to walk the streets. I lost interest, because I was working to make some changes. That's a long story. This is why I have disappeared out of the comments and the letters. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 15, 2009 9:42 PM:

" DanielH, I think you're right about those boundaries. And they have no respect at all for a certain council person and I don't think they'd tolerate his/her intrusion into their stronghold, and I don't blame them a bit. "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 15, 2009 10:20 AM:

" Campaign slogan: Keep the money in Lodi!

Let me see if I get this right. They found a developer from Lodi to do the grape bowl. This developer is going to employ Lodi residents.

The employees are all going to reside on the east side.

If the construction equipment enters into the gang boundaries without their respective permissions, the gangs are going to send out their diplomatic envoys with spray paint cans in hand. "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 15, 2009 10:16 AM:

" If there ever was a need for any law enforcement on the east side, imagine what it would be like when the funding for police force goes over to the grape bowl.

That will definitely increase property values. "

Report Abuse

pooreastside wrote on Feb 14, 2009 11:41 PM:

" Better listen to Ms. Mounce. She knows what she is talking about, being an Eastsider herself.
Loadeye is sort of harsh with his expression, but his points are right on. "

Report Abuse

danielh wrote on Feb 14, 2009 11:35 PM:

" mp: That's right. I noticed the $$$ investment into this also. "

Report Abuse

danielh wrote on Feb 14, 2009 11:34 PM:

" loadeye: "DanielH, I know some of those organizers and I really expected to see you"

You must know me. Is this true? I don't know who you are.

I can tell you where I was, and why I'm dropping out of the blogs, what I'm working on, but I have a few questions first. Is this OK? "

Report Abuse

danielh wrote on Feb 14, 2009 11:32 PM:

" dyan: "What's the alternative to W?"

Attract business to Lodi.
Business investments promote jobs, which enhance the value of real estate, and justify real estate investment.

Conversely, when CC has secret relations, business investment is NOT attractive. "

Report Abuse

ra wrote on Feb 14, 2009 10:11 PM:

" I concede to those who question the effectiveness of redevelopment if the program is run by bumbling fools. That is my primary concern, but I believe a better option to keep extra tax dollars in Lodi than send them to the morons in Sacramento to be wasted on more social engineering. Redevelopment should be lean and mean focused on immediate results or disbanded. "

Report Abuse

mp wrote on Feb 14, 2009 11:15 AM:

" Vote NO on W and force this crazy city council to put checks and balances in place with private citizen (not developer or special interest groups) as oversight.
Write a plan that takes care of the eastside instead of the money all going to economic development.
Write a plan with specific goals not just a wish list.
Tie the hands of this council and future councils to do what they promise the people. "

Report Abuse

dyan wrote on Feb 14, 2009 8:19 AM:

" What's the alternative to W? If the East Side is allowed to continue its downward spiral into a getto, crime will continue to rise here - just like every other city. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 13, 2009 5:24 PM:

" DanielH, I know some of those organizers and I really expected to see you, but I noticed your lack of blogs and figured you were busy or maybe had that flu. I know how passionate you are about issues like this and you do your homework, unlike the cheerleaders on here that're afraid to tour the entire MORR website and see what a corrupt scam redevelopment is in the form Lodi and King are instituting it. Maybe that's why King came to Lodi. On his old turf, people are seeing the debt RDA brings without benefit to anyone but the already wealthy and their scabby contractors. They're also organizing to prevent RDA from spreading any further and robbing their cities general funds blind. I'll bet the city council isn't telling how much it's going to cost Lodi to mitigate this issue in court? Or how much they've spent already on King's associate consultants and lawyers from the bay area? Let's see a list of their projects and the numbers? Will Hotel Munson be one? Or how about Katzakian Printing and Spa? Don't laugh. If its a public building project, they'll even be able to take your home to build it. "

Report Abuse

mp wrote on Feb 13, 2009 4:56 PM:

" The no on Measure W will have a tuff time winning.

They are up against every the biggest money in town. RDA will let the rich get rich and the poor get the shaft. "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 13, 2009 1:56 PM:

" loadeye: I know the people that organized the petition. They were tracking the RDA schedule, and they had key milestones marked on the schedule, at which time they knew to begin circulating the petition.

State-wide, there is a non-profit organization whose sole chartered purpose in its existence is to educate Californians on the dangers of Redevelopment. They have good lawyers, and they might have had something to do with the petition that went around Lodi. I talked to one of their key members on the telephone one time. They are extremely devoted, and knowledgeable.

I tried to tell them that they needed to get a translation into Erdu for the Pakistani people, just like CC campaigned in Erdu. I guess I was wrong.

There were about 25 people that walked door-to-door in Lodi. I was asked to walk, but I was pretty much extremely busy at the time, so I can't claim credit for this one. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 13, 2009 9:42 AM:

" DanielH, our only council representative who does, and has lived, on the eastside for many years opposes redevelopment. We all know the other four council members stand to make large personal gains through RDA. What other reason would they have to sneak it through. They would've succeeded if it weren't for Lodi First and over 4000 petition signers, mostly eastsiders that'll tale it to the voting booth and cost Lodi more money for this special election. Only the corrupt hiding behind one another coul be so stupid to play a game like this with the economy the way it is. Hansen, Johnson and Hitchcock-Glenn, along with manager King, have Lodi deep in debt and no explanation where the funds have benn squandered, misappropriated, or even "borrowed". They need this RDA to be able to refill the government slop trough they've already depleted and transferred to the good ol' boys projects and non-profits. "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 12, 2009 11:26 PM:

" loadeye: I agree with everything you wrote there.

FYI: Virtually in every case of RDA in California, the RD project plan is snuck through CC without consent from the local citizens.

However, in a few rare instances where RDA went to the voters via a petition, almost always, RDA loses. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 12, 2009 9:25 PM:

" common, here's an even newer version showing the latest debt, failure figures, corrupted practices of your RDA scam:

http://www.coalitionforredevelopmentreform.org/references/morrreport.php

Then go to the links on the left hand margin and tell your corrupt little country yes bumpkins to read them, too. Good night! "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 12, 2009 9:03 PM:

" commonsense1, here's a must read for you and all of your yes ayemeegos:

http://www.redevelopment.com/norby/index.html

got the guts to read it all? "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 12, 2009 8:51 PM:

" commonsense1, when're you going to answer the questions from edumacation? Why do you keep changing the subject to insults toward me? Just answer the questions about your mind altering days and the motorcycle? How about the garage and realty company? And the smirk on your face? And then I'll tell you how many years I've been sober and straight. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Feb 12, 2009 8:18 PM:

" Scrutiny, "loaded" is suggesting you are trying to speak for me. That is shocking. I would never say anything like "Yes on cheeseburgers". I might have said something like "Yes on Double Cheese Whoppers". Of course if anybody knows anything about drinking, its old loadeye. Hic. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 12, 2009 10:07 AM:

" DanielH, I don't like rDA for the fact that every sharpie and money player and their wannabes are showing their names on the Yes on W contributors' list. The worse fact is the way that Hansen, Johnson and Katzakian tried to sneak it through without voters' approval and not even any kind of a public forum. That tells me there's enough dishonesty to go around, but not quite enough skullduggery for the grand jury to investigate. And the fact that last year at a council session, the documents for RDA prepared by MORR(Municipal Officials for Redevelopment Reform) were not allowed to be introduced by Hansen,Johnson, Katzakian and Hitchcock-Glenn to the public because they showed the real purpose of an RDA.A giveaway of government funds to themselves, wealthy, well-connected and pet projects.Lodi's wealthy economy in the 90's and early 2000 got too good to them and they were allowed to spend money freely.To this day,they are still spending the same way and now need this injection of RDA funding to keep up their own luxurious lifestyles while trying to convince Lodians they're still flush with money,but in all reality,just one step away from bankruptcy without this redevelopment money. "

Report Abuse

danielh wrote on Feb 11, 2009 11:24 PM:

" loadeye: That question isn't logical. If you are challenging me for opposing Measure W, uhh... it looks like your statement also opposes Measure W. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 11, 2009 9:05 PM:

" Scrutiny, where's your buddy, commonsense1? Or do you speak for him, too? You must be one wicked witch to make a comment like that? You certainly must be drinking that infamous MadDog 20/20. "

Report Abuse

Scrutiny wrote on Feb 11, 2009 5:40 PM:

" Ex-McMayor Mounce has spoken!!! No on W but YES on cheeseburgers!! "

Report Abuse

wtf wrote on Feb 11, 2009 3:54 PM:

" loadeye as far as I know, the dubious honor of being one of the most miserable cities in America belongs to Stockton alone....I didn't see Lodi mentioned; however, Modesto came in at #5. LOL! "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 11, 2009 11:17 AM:

" DanielH, I see on the channel 10 news at 11 last night that Lodi-Stockton has had a new honor bestowed upon them. The #1 city in the United States as the worst place to live. Foreclosures, crime, old goats running their little towns and bonds that no one will even touch. So how does that shoot that batch of lies by the Yes on W that say that RDA will work when everyone runs out to buy those worthless bonds to pay for these "projects"? What a bunch of hogwash. "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 11, 2009 8:57 AM:

" Observer: Here, I see both T&C and Loadeye are present at the same time, and Loadeye refers to T&C.

I think I remember the mentality of the other blog names 2 years ago, and I didn't commit any of them to memory. "

Report Abuse

Observer wrote on Feb 10, 2009 12:32 PM:

" By the way Load....when did you change your tune on religion? It wasn't too long ago your were ripping the churches as being "money grabbing" institutions. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 10, 2009 10:46 AM:

" T&C, have you seen Johnson's real spelling and grammar? Now that's absolutely terrible. And how do you know if maybe even the proofreader was the culprit? Did you see the picture of that tiny pump they're using? I posted a link with a picture of it for you. Here's the official documents T&C. Look at all the pages and see how large the plumes are and how widespread they are and the number of drinking water wells were shut down.
http://www.drycleancoalition.org/docs/2005_meeting/PCE_Contamination_Problem.pdf "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 10, 2009 10:29 AM:

" Observer, another one of your fine rantings. Why do I make you so angry? You surely must be one of those at the government pig trough and fingers in the city's cash drawer. We still paray for sinners like yourself. Bless you, brother observer. I miss your blogs on capital elector,rear admiral! "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 10, 2009 10:17 AM:

" T & C: Ditto wtf.

One of my recent letters suffered an editorial revision which was probably well-intentioned, but changed the meaning of the letter, and one very important point was actually left backwards.

Nobody got the point. "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 10, 2009 10:14 AM:

" ra: To wit, the East Side has already been affected, just by the plan.

Ever since the RDA boundaries were drawn what kind of fool would invest inside those boundaries? "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 10, 2009 10:13 AM:

" ra: If Lodi could attract private investment, there would be no problem, and that would be a no-brainer.

When RDA draws a project boundary, it is the kiss of death for all properties inside the boundary, because no fool investor is going to invest unless the RDA project plan agrees.

Consequently, the plague spreads. To wit, why would an investor put up their private funds if the neighbor is delapidated? "

Report Abuse

mp wrote on Feb 10, 2009 10:04 AM:

" Besides "I Expect" councilmembers to use common sense. I would pick that ability over spelling on a blog anyday. "

Report Abuse

mp wrote on Feb 10, 2009 10:03 AM:

" She is not the Mayor and how do you know if she was the one who blogged?
Beside, she writes a great opinion and you pick out some blog? WHAHT A LAOD?! "

Report Abuse

wtf wrote on Feb 10, 2009 8:51 AM:

" T&C before censuring JoAnne for her spelling, please keep in mind that she is not the one printing the Lodi News Sentinel - online or print edition - the incorrect spelling of the word "embrace" may have been spelled correctly by Ms. Mounce and "lost in translation" at the LNS. It appears that you read her letter and, from your post correcting her spelling, it also appears you were able to understand what Ms. Mounce was referring to from the context of her letter. "

Report Abuse

T & C wrote on Feb 10, 2009 7:52 AM:

" JoAnne wrote on Feb 8, 2009 11:50 AM:

"I embrass progress and change if done correctly."

As the Mayor of Lodi, I expect you to be able to know how to spell. It makes a better impression on myself and citizens of Lodi in general.

Embrace is not spelled embrass.

Thank you very much. "

Report Abuse

Observer wrote on Feb 10, 2009 7:49 AM:

" Loadeye, now that you've finally developed this "love fest" with Daniel will you finally meet with him at the Farmer's Market? Last time you blew him off and then bashed him on these blogs for weeks. "

Report Abuse

T & C wrote on Feb 10, 2009 7:41 AM:

" Because of the Cancer Risks of all the Lodi wells, "Across the Tracks" which are a clear health risk to babies, children, parents, and seniors, I feel Cleaning up the Contaminated Wells FIRST should be the priority..Above all else. Pumping out Contaminents with just (1) "Pump is Insanity"! We should not have our health placed on hold for 25 years before the contaminated wells are CERTIFIED as clean! 12 Pumps should be contracted and cleaning should be on a 24 hour basis seven days a week. Anyone knows with have a brain that few will survive long term with cancer. What about birth defects? Disabilities place an even greater drain on our Social Security System. I use a Brita Water Filter on my tap water. "

Report Abuse

wtf wrote on Feb 10, 2009 7:15 AM:

" ra says, "Yes on W....it's a no brainer."

No brainer? A no brainer is NO on W given the fact that many on the council members who would chair the RDA are the same "geniuses" (I use the term loosely) who got Lodi into the contamination mess that has COST us several MILLION dollars.

See Layla's article about the settlement in today's online edition of the LNS. "

Report Abuse

ra wrote on Feb 10, 2009 6:48 AM:

" Redevelopment will improve Lodi for everyone, not special interests on the east-side. Redevelopment will increase the property values downtown and eastside improving Lodi's core. YES on W! This is a no-brainer. "

Report Abuse

JustTheFacts wrote on Feb 9, 2009 4:33 PM:

" Palin/Mounce for 2012 "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 9, 2009 3:36 PM:

" DanielH, thank you for your input on this redevelopment scam. Those Lodi ayemeegos are aware that you're very kmowledgeable about the subject and your honest appraisal of this scam is truely appreciated. Just look at the 4 council reps pushing it. Some have themselves, relatives, friends and "ghost" companies and properties that will take a good majority of
RDA funds and put it in their own pockets. Hitchcock-Glenn wouldn't have excused herself from that RDA vote if she didn't own bunches of properties in the RDA area. Why is she one of the leaders for RDA? Money? Greed? I'm saying both. "

Report Abuse

edumacation wrote on Feb 9, 2009 2:28 PM:

" Good for you. Keep up the good work fighting corruption and cronyism. The "big boyz" of Lodi are attempting to take advantage of taxpayers by using the RDA to get more government business. We have to work for our money without government handouts and they should too. Who do they think they are, Wall Street bankers? LOL "

Report Abuse

mp wrote on Feb 9, 2009 12:34 PM:

" 4 a strong lodi must be a developer slated to receive all the bailout money Mounces is refering to. What a loaD! "

Report Abuse

mp wrote on Feb 9, 2009 12:27 PM:

" She got voted in by 40%!
She got voted in because she fights for the citizens!
She got voted in becuase she has common sense.
She got voted in because when she makes an promise she keeps it! "

Report Abuse

4AStrongLodi wrote on Feb 9, 2009 10:42 AM:

" Mounce doesn't know her head from her...foot.

She's inconsistent on her stances and seems to have trouble understanding whaT is going on.

I strongly urge you to support Measure W and to not vote for when she's up for re-election.

How she got voted in in the first place amazes me. "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 9, 2009 8:31 AM:

" 16925: I urge you to exercise caution on counting votes and saying Mounce was out-voted.

The fact that RDA votes go something like 4-1 means that 4 CC have relationships with developers unlike Mounce.

This also means that Mounce is in the lead. First place is always occupied by one party. "

Report Abuse

danielH wrote on Feb 9, 2009 8:28 AM:

" patton: 8 years ago?

I don't think this is the first time that Lodi RDA has lost a project. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 8, 2009 8:55 PM:

" patton1, rear admiral, Ms. Mounce requested a copy of those projects manager King professes he has and he could come up with neither a project list nor cost accounting for those "ghost" projects. It's in last Wednesday's meeting archives on the city website. Just shows you are nothing but an uninformed and paid cheerleader patton1, rear admiral. "

Report Abuse

16925 wrote on Feb 8, 2009 8:46 PM:

" Sounds to me like Mounce has been trying. She is just out voted. "

Report Abuse

16925 wrote on Feb 8, 2009 8:45 PM:

" If a project is detailed in the plan it would take years to change and "highly unlikely" according to Blair King. If a project is spelled out in the plan future council would have a hard time changing it : just eminate domain. "

Report Abuse

patton1 wrote on Feb 8, 2009 7:48 PM:

" If Mounce would like to have a project list why didnt she work on one. The city raised the idea of RDA 8 years ago. Also, even if there was a list of project, couldnt a future council change the list. Remember, one council cannot bind another. "

Report Abuse

patton1 wrote on Feb 8, 2009 6:02 PM:

" Keeping more tax dollars in Lodi is a good thing plain and simple. The idea that is beeter to let those dollars flow out to the State is somehow better for Lodi is crazy. Lets pass measure W and then we can all help decide what things should get corrected first. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 8, 2009 12:38 PM:

" Eileen, ex-mayor Mounce asked that very question of manager King at Wednesday's council meeting and all we got for an answer was nada, zip, nothing. King couldn't name one specific plan and kept referring to completely different subjects for Mayor Mounce's answers. Just go to the city website and click on the archive or that meeting and use the drop down box to go to item K-1 and watch manager King, nor anyone of his staff come up with one single project, just ramblings, most of which had nothing to do with redevelopment at all. You just sound like another who's ignorant to the facts that your ayemeegos make their own rules and change their minds as they go along. Look at Reynolds Ranch and the superWalmart project. And the fact that none of these developers have bought any real acreage to replace the agricultural land your CC members let them take away. I guess they can just borrow or claim a friends' land so they can bend the rules. "

Report Abuse

JoAnne wrote on Feb 8, 2009 11:50 AM:

" Eileen,
Thank you for confirming that the projects that have been presented by the Chamber of Commerce only COULD be completed with RDA money. The proponents have presented only a wish list but nothing cast in writing.
I embrass progress and change if done correctly.
I believe the city should go back to the drawing table, re-write the Redevelopment Plan to "guarantee" that the Eastside infrastructure will be the first project completed with tax increment dollars.
Eileen. I have included my phone number with my opinion for you to call me any time.
JoAnne "

Report Abuse

Eileen St Yves wrote on Feb 8, 2009 5:37 AM:

" The question, will there be a forum on Measure W? The answer is there have been several forums on this issue over the past two years. The first one being with the City Council and Planning Commission held at the Boys and Girls Club in 2007. The remainder have been held at the LOEL Center, Heritage Elementary school, Lincoln School and the Lodi Improvement Committee.
All of these meetings were posted in the Lodi News Sentinel. Many of you made comments at that time about the issues. Every meeting had a posting of the projects that could be included in the RDA, including the possible dollar amounts to be spent.
How fast one forgets when the mind is closed to progress. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 7, 2009 6:39 PM:

" If CenCal is found guilty of cheating their employees as charged, they're in danger of losing their privilege to bid nor work on any prevailing wage jobs. Cheating is a common practice used by non-union contractors by reporting employees as a say$30 hour plumber. This is his wage set by the state labor boards for their area and includes wages, health care, pension. The company owner and contractor are required to turn in a certified payroll report weekly. When the funds are released to these contractors, they'll have employees that they use as 10or12$ an hour laborers that're listed as journeyman on the certified payroll, but are really those, say, $12hour laborers. The owner then pays that $12 an hour to his employee and puts the other $18 in his own pocket or splits it with those who help him cheat on his certified payroll. The city's have to approve those certified reports and some there will help cheat, too. The CenCal decision is due any day now and we'll find out who helped them. They do much od Diede's fire protection work.Companies such as these attend ABC seminars that offer several seminars on how to cheat without getting caught. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 7, 2009 5:43 PM:

" Do Diede or Gillespie live in Lodi? Why should anyone not a resident of Lodi share in the government pig trough money? Why did Diede build his new digs in the county and not Lodi? All contractors, developers and any employee that gets a penny of RDA money should be required to pass an E=verify. Any contractor, business or individual who frefuses should be disqualified from and contracts or funds involved with the RDA. RDA is supposed to be about jobs, good paying jobs, not just "labborers" doing the work of a journeyman. And any craftsman on these prevailing wage jobs that's classified as a journeyman or apprentice, should be able to prove where he got hid training. CenCal fire has to use Union apprentices on their prevailing wage jobs because the non-union sprinklerfitters don't have an apprenticeship program. They have to call the union rep and request apprentices. Some of our two and three year apprentices(5-year program)have more knowledge and better work ethics than those the non-union call journeyman that have been working non-union without any training for 10-15 years.If we're paying these underqualified non-union workers prevailing wages,why don't we use qualified, trained certified union journeyman for the samecost? "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 7, 2009 5:27 PM:

" And I still do consider you the Mayor of Lodi,Ms. JoAnne Mounce.You are the only one on council that will speak her own mind and who represents the citizens of Lodi.You're the only one to challenge Mr. King on ant issue that you feel is a detriment to Lodi or its citizenry.Those currently on council now are the same parties that have fought against you the last 20 years or so,especially when you were an advocate on the Eastside Improvement Committee. If they'd heeded your words then, many of the problems on the eastside would not be there.Hutchins Street Square took all those valuable funds meant for many projects on the eastside,but the powers to be needed a hospice and babysitting services for those well-connected relatives and friends of council, wealthy and well-connected. Hutchins still owes over $10 million but those like Hitchcock-Akin-Glenn and Hansen made sure that debt was forgiven.Now it still operates at about $1 1/2 million loss per year.It should be merged with parks & rec and Mr. Dutra should be appointed the director of that dual agency. Mr. Hood should be promoted to city manager and King could be assigned to LEUD director. Fire Morrow. "

Report Abuse

oldguy wrote on Feb 7, 2009 5:15 PM:

" Mounce wonders if the proponents of Measure W live in Lodi. I will tell you an opponent who does not live in Lodi. JIM McCARTY. What standing does he have other than Big hat and no cattle. He has absolutely no stake in this matter. Mounce also says she would support this if it was not ill conceived or misguided. Redevelopment in the State of California is 40 years old. The legislation is quite specific and has been successfully used by a great majority of the cities in California. There is not a lot of room to be original. It is amazing to me that the City of Lodi has waited this long to take advantage of the benefits of Redevelopment. "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 7, 2009 5:08 PM:

" can anyone tell me if there will be a public forum on measure W? "

Report Abuse

loadeye wrote on Feb 7, 2009 5:06 PM:

" Whoa Nellie, thank you very much! That's my opinion a nutshell. God Bless you for seeing the shortcomings. And with the present state of the economy, borrowing any money should be completely out of the question. And thank you Mayor Mounce for a truthful and well documented editorial. "

Report Abuse

wtf wrote on Feb 7, 2009 10:22 AM:

" whoa nellie! wrote: "To the YES folks- rewrite this and be specific, ie: $X million for sewer pipes, $Y million for water meters, $Z million for sidewalks and alleys, etc etc... With all that is going on now (economy, bailouts, jobs, etc) you need to be detailed on how the money is going to be spent."

That's it in a nutshell. Well said! And well said, Ms. Mounce. You nailed it! To the other bloggers who are YES, do ***you*** live on the East Side? "

Report Abuse

mp wrote on Feb 7, 2009 10:06 AM:

" I didn't see any developers listed as giving money to mounce's campaign fund real one. "

Report Abuse

real one wrote on Feb 7, 2009 9:58 AM:

" She is to represent the whole city, not just the East side and there are guarantees to keep our tax dollars in Lodi and improve our town as a whole. There are local developers who care about Lodi and why is she is only their buddy during campaign time? The other council members are straight forward even though you may not like what they say. "

Report Abuse

whoa nellie! wrote on Feb 7, 2009 9:30 AM:

" I thought Mounce's opinion was well written, and gives ample reasons to vote NO on W.

Real One, you ask why she is against W? Did you read her opinion? She talks about NO GUARANTEES of what projects will be done.

And once again Observer hits the nail on the head: no sane developer will tackle the eastside blight without some incentives and the upside of a nice profit. That too is capitalism.

IMO, this was a badly proposed RDA, with no specific projects identified and the possibility of a blank check for the RDA Board (CC) as they can vote to add more money. As proposed there is more risk than benefit for my liking. I am worried we will end up with a $200K bus stop and a $1M arch over Cherokee Lane.

To the YES folks- rewrite this and be specific, ie: $X million for sewer pipes, $Y million for water meters, $Z million for sidewalks and alleys, etc etc... With all that is going on now (economy, bailouts, jobs, etc) you need to be detailed on how the money is going to be spent. "

Report Abuse

real one wrote on Feb 7, 2009 7:57 AM:

" My guestion to our wishy-washy council member is if your are so pro east side, why would you be against this- a certain amount has to be used to improve the east side like 20 percent or something and if it does not pass you have nothing, this is a no brainer-VOTE YES! The people who are against this are so misinformed and giving the public false info such as our Mr. Talbot who does not have a clue himself. "

Report Abuse

Observer wrote on Feb 7, 2009 5:38 AM:

" Nothing will be done on the east side if you don't provide incentives. My understanding is that's the whole purpose. Providing incentives to get work done that wouldn't otherwise be attempted. Businesses will NOT come of their own accord. They will locate in communities that embrace new business...not drive them away. I respectfully disagree with your opinion on this one. "

Report Abuse

Comments on this story are now closed.

Special Sections

Sentinel Silver 2010

Photo Reprints

Find Ads




Services

Contact Us

Office

125 N. Church St.
P.O. Box 1360
Lodi, CA 95241
(209) 369-2761
Fax: (209) 369-1084

Newsroom

E-mail

(209) 369-7035
Fax: (209) 369-6706

Subscriptions

Subscribe

Problems with your subscription?
(209) 333-1400

Advertising

E-mail

(209) 369-2761
Fax: (209) 369-1084

Classifieds

Place an ad E-mail

(209) 333-1111
Fax: (209) 369-1084