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
Councilwoman JoAnne Mounce: We need to talk to ‘average Joes’
Wednesday, March 25, 2009 6:03 AM PDT
Councilwoman JoAnne Mounce has long been a champion of Lodi’s Eastside. She was the lone council member to oppose Measure W, the unsuccessful redevelopment proposal aimed at making improvements on the Eastside. This week she shared her thoughts on Measure W and the future of the Eastside with News-Sentinel Editor Rich Hanner.
Q: You were the only member of the council to oppose Measure W, which was rather soundly defeated by Lodi’s voters. Did that vote give you new credibility?
A: Measure W was just one of those issues that demonstrated the people’s distrust of government — and their desire for government not to take on more debt. ... I believe I listened to my constituents, and my job is to bring their voices forward. I was surprised Measure W did not pass. The “yes on W” people worked very hard and had a ton of money. The folks opposed to W did not have much money, and I was not sure they would prevail.
Q: So why did it lose?
A: I believe it goes back to the trust issue. After all, everyone opens their utility bill every month and they are not happy. And people are not happy with some of the decisions made by this council and other councils in the past.
Q: How can the trust be rebuilt?
A: It is about relating to your constituents, trying to understand where they are coming from. When’s the last time a council member walked down an alley on the Eastside talking to folks, really spent time in the neighborhoods, trying to understand the needs of the people? ... I am a firm believer that you shouldn’t ask government for something that someone can and should do for themselves and are quite capable of doing for themselves. I believe that at least 51 percent of the homes on the Eastside are landlord-owned by people who should provide clean and attractive homes. Landlords and citizens who own homes should both step up to the plate. I like the quote of our Eastside Improvement Committee (now the Lodi Improvement Committee), which goes, “If everyone swept in front of their own home, the entire city would be clean.”
Q: Some proponents said those who opposed Measure W did not understand it. Your response?
A: I think people understood Measure W very well. They understood it was about trust and it was about debt.
Q: You’ve said you aren’t against redevelopment, just the way it was proposed under Measure W. Tell me about a redevelopment plan you would get behind.
A: It would need to be citizen-driven. It would need to set out specific projects, a specific use of funds and a specific timeline. It would not include direct funding to private developers, though it could include infrastructure and improvements that could encourage private development.
Q: Some have suggested that, since you opposed Measure W, and you are the only council member living on the Eastside, that you now have an obligation to help direct a plan of action for the Eastside. Is that fair?
A: I signed up for this job, and I will take the tough questions anyone wants to throw at me. If I had the answers for what ails the Eastside ... it would all have been done long ago. What I have tried to do is bring awareness, because working together can resolve the issues together. ... I believe many of the tools for improving the Eastside are already in place. We have the Enterprise Zone designation, which has tremendous value that I don’t think has even begun to be realized for our community. We have (federal) CDBG monies, and the staff is recommending we use $225,000 for drainage in Eastside alleys, which was brought up 16 years ago. We have a revolving loan fund for small businesses. We’ve gathered $27 million for infrastructure replacement.
It is a matter of priorities — and what the council sees as priorities.
Q: Councilman Bob Johnson has suggested an Eastside summit to explore directions for the Eastside, post-Measure W. What do you think?
A: You’d need an open venue where everyone feels comfortable, not just the people we hear from all the time: the council members, the non profit leaders, the Chamber of Commerce. When is the last time we listened to the “average Joes” and asked them what they think? I have the greatest respect for (Chamber President) Pat Patrick, but he is directed by a board of directors, many of whom live outside of Lodi ... somehow we need to reach out to the people at the Richmaid or the Omelet House, the average citizens.
Q: What is your vision for the Eastside 10 years from now?
A: The Reynolds Ranch and Southwest Gateway projects would be done, both providing needed money for the Eastside. Cherokee Lane is upgraded, with businesses flourishing, which are reflective of the neighborhoods. Houses show they are cared for and well-maintained.
As my grandma used to say, “It doesn’t have to be brand-new — as long as it is clean.”
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
edumacation wrote on Mar 29, 2009 9:38 PM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 29, 2009 1:00 PM:
Observer wrote on Mar 29, 2009 11:09 AM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 29, 2009 8:48 AM:
Would YOU vote for a politician who couldn't even pay their mortgage payments? I wouldn't !
Why pour taxpayer cash to the CC in the form to pay off financial OBLIGATIONS that they made in our name?
Last week a DEFAULT was recorded. I don't care about the "reason". I DON'T LIKE THE TONE. Within days we see a Deed of trust which can represent some things---but to me I WOULD NEVER LOAN MONEY TO SOMEONE who "needed" to get some cash from their residence---like an ATM machine.
I know that a DEED of trust in this case is a subordinate loan. I won't mess with them.
If a wealthy person can't handle their family finances---why should I help them? Some people have "their money" as debt instruments, and others as prudent investments---with NO LOANS.
Who would YOU trust ---a doubletalker who uses OPM or a person who is trustworthy and handles their own finaces? "
Observer wrote on Mar 28, 2009 8:45 PM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 28, 2009 5:33 PM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 28, 2009 11:27 AM:
Here is a hint. All free---
Go to http://sjmap.org/website/DistrictViewer/Viewer.asp
Which is the County web viewer free and online.
When you find an interesting document tried to real property. Copy the APN Assessor Parcel Number and enter it into the above map viewer. It will zoom you right into the property. The situs addresses (postal street addressesses) ---are listed at the top right.
Now you now enough to have LOTS of fun. Look at all the properties owned in the new planned RDA "blight area" owned by the GOB.
Do you have any reason to doubt now?
The RDA is their chance to get free money to improve their own property. They continue buying old dumps today, for us to fix up tomorrow via the RDA. They are still trying to "educate us" on why we need to bail them out for their profit and out loss. "
edumacation wrote on Mar 27, 2009 2:58 PM:
How smart is a person (*Moochie XRTZQ) who sells LOT A to Ugmo TZumzzz and they quickly resell the lot to Bjhutto XRUMPZ at a profit who sells it to others and again back to Moochie. Its perfectly legal, but why would you sell a lot and rebuy it for a much higher price---again and again and again. Are you el estupido? NO!@-- It depends on where you get the money to buy it--- IF AND ONLY IF IT IS NOT A SHAM transaction. Could this be a way for someone to get a construction or development loan when they KNOW that there is NO or virtually NO UNDERWRITING?
Read the Wall street Journal---see anything familiar- Remember "Whitewater" they pulled the same game, only a few went to prison ---FOR NOT TALKING. "
edumacation wrote on Mar 27, 2009 2:45 PM:
TRY THIS- Go to the internet url link I submited and use your fingers to TYPE IN one letter at a time---the names of those you are curious about. Start with your own name. VERY SIMPLE
YOU WILL NOT READ SOMTHING THAT SAYS :
"This is an illegal transaction".
But after some time READING AND THINKING and a LITTLE BIT of thought, you will IMMEDIATELY have lots of questions.
RE transactions ARE Not illegal---but the REASON for them can be.
READ. If you now a persons name is lets say Bubba Zumpz, but see hundreds of names of people who do not exist from whoopie Zumpz, abadabba Zumpz and they all live at different addresses and all have homemowners exemptions. Now go visit one of them to sign a NO on W petition. Oops---another tenant- I wonder how that ever happened? Talk to them and find out--they have lived there for years---and Zoomi Zumpz keeps getting "their" mail by "mistake" from the county recorder. I wonder why that is? "
Observer wrote on Mar 27, 2009 12:48 PM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 27, 2009 12:00 PM:
Observer wrote on Mar 27, 2009 6:29 AM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 27, 2009 12:38 AM:
My favorites are the Deed of trust filings! Yummy! Look at all the familiar names and relationships.
Bubba sells to Dummo who sells to Whamo who sells back to The wife of Bubba at a MUCH HIGHER PRICE. I wonder why that is? Maybe jack up the comps to get a higher mortgage loan or construction loans? Maybe to deceive so-called investors in to thinking the facts are different than they are?
Much of the appearances are legal, but who is watching what REALLY goes on?
In the past, hometown newspapers would have investigative reporters who would dig out the slime and dirt and the expose' would cause investigations arrests and indictments.
Today, the local press knows they will lose ad revenue plus the fact that investigative journalism costs time and money. ALL of us lose as a result, as our freedoms are sucked out before we even know it.
Look at all the homowner property tax exemptions on rental or vacant property. "
edumacation wrote on Mar 27, 2009 12:26 AM:
This PUBLIC website will either get you asking questions, and/or make you very upset.
http://www.co.san-joaquin.ca.us/Recorder/grantorgrantee/searchindex.asp
1) First visit the FREE online San Joaquin County Recorders Grantor-Grantee index. Read the instructions and have fun. Once you collect all the document numbers you will have to run the document numbers through a private database, or print out the data and drive down to the Recorders office during business hours.
Many real estate shops have these databases.
Ask the clerk to show you how to get the Situs address or APN from the Document numbers (MAP book and page).
You will learn about the world of fast talking developers, real estate gurus, flippers, property owners and managers, bankers and mortgage firms.
You may want to subscribe to a service. Make sure you buy a database with all the County court record filings as well as the fictitious firm name index.
For more fun, contact the Calif Secretary of state for ALL UCC records. "
Observer wrote on Mar 26, 2009 9:23 PM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 26, 2009 7:12 PM:
R: Mr A zyzxyxdolozysky + a letter for every possible combination---ITS ONE PERSON FOLKS. "
mp wrote on Mar 26, 2009 11:40 AM:
mp wrote on Mar 26, 2009 11:26 AM:
mp wrote on Mar 26, 2009 11:25 AM:
mp wrote on Mar 26, 2009 11:25 AM:
mp wrote on Mar 26, 2009 11:23 AM:
mp wrote on Mar 26, 2009 11:14 AM:
beside, if lodi voters had any trust in people like you, measure w would have passed.
i suggest you take a long look in the mirror and be honest with yourself for once in your life. "
dogbark wrote on Mar 26, 2009 10:48 AM:
Observer wrote on Mar 26, 2009 10:21 AM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 26, 2009 9:49 AM:
If we REQUIRED our Code Enforcement dept to do its job---we wouild NOT have the problem. Intensive enforcement will get the interest of the slumlords who own these properties. Its that simple. The "east side" slumlords = the pro RDA folks. They want the taxpayers to clean up their messes.
Its another sign of GREED and welfare capitalism. If you can't take care of your property, you should lose it. Its ironic that these slumlords are making big bucks on the rentals and sublets going on but they want the money FREE, without fixing these old east side "charmers" (Real Estate jargon for dump---or money pit) "
edumacation wrote on Mar 26, 2009 9:42 AM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 26, 2009 9:40 AM:
ttian wrote on Mar 26, 2009 1:27 AM:
ttian wrote on Mar 26, 2009 1:15 AM:
Observer wrote on Mar 25, 2009 10:29 PM:
OTH wrote on Mar 25, 2009 8:23 PM:
Pour yourselsevs another glass of the grspe fellows. Your sour grapes at having lost Measure W keeps anyone from taking you seruiously. "
edumacation wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:47 PM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:44 PM:
ROFL "
edumacation wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:43 PM:
So bongo, bongo, bongo, I don't wanna leave the Congo, oh no no no no no
Bingo, bangle, bungle, I'm so happy in the jungle, I refuse to go
Don't want no bright lights, false teeth, doorbells, landlords, I make it clear
That no matter how they coax him, I'll stay right here
They hurry like savages to get aboard an iron train
And though it's smokey and it's crowded, they're too civilized to complain
When they've got two weeks vacation, they hurry to vacation ground (What do they do, Darling?)
They swim and they fish, but that's what I do all year round
So bongo, bongo, bongo, I don't wanna leave the Congo, oh no no no no no
Bingo, bangle, bungle, I'm so happy in the jungle, I refuse to go
Don't want no jailhouse, shotgun, fish-hooks, golf clubs, I got my spears
So, no matter how they coax him, I'll stay right here
They have things like the atom bomb, so I think I'll stay where I "ahm"
Civilization, I'll stay right here! "
max stanfield wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:37 PM:
edumacation wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:36 PM:
"The "Avg Joe's" of Lodi are not eating at Richmaid or Omelet House. I've had breakfast with my retired/senior parents at Richmaid and the minimum age in there is at least 75. These seniors are fine people but they are not forward looking individuals, they are more 'reactionary' types.
Say WHAT? I am not a 75 year old, and besides when is getting older a crime?
Have you ever figured out what wisdom is? If you have experience you gain knowledge. It is much easier to see a wolf posing as a sheep when you aree older. You are naiive!!!
You are like "little red riding hood" in a den of wolves and thieves. The wolves want the RDA so we can pay taxes for their pretend work.
I was a card carrying Democrat until Obongo made his first appearance. What can we do when we had an illiterate cheerleader President who failed at every job he had including his last one. He tried to act like a Democrat by being friendly with illegals, but he fooled no one. "
edumacation wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:22 PM:
I hear the state mental hospitals have some extra beds. Are you serious? You must have been absent more than a few days from your civics classes. Its time to grow uyp---pretending your are ignorant is no longer fashionable. "
edumacation wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:16 PM:
" Ask any business owner if they can survive by not growing their business and allowing it to have decreasing revenues and deteriorating equipment."
BS !!! We have been making a good profit EVERY year since 1921. YOU SAVE YOUR EXCESS PROFITS FOR THE LEAN YEARS...just like any prudent family budget should be run. YOU PAY YOURSELF FIRST. When you pay interest it's like a cancer that eats at the soul of the business. WE NEVER had a bank loan.. EVER!
" The real estate bubble in Lodi was caused by all the morons who believed they could "get rich quick" like the rest of their neighbors, yet ignored simple economics and logic. "$400,000 for an 800 sq. ft. house on a $40,0000/yr salary?...Oh, but it'll be worth $500,000 in a year, just like my buddies!" Yeah, right." AND WHO TOLD THOSE MORONS THAT NOW IS THE BEST TIME TO BUY??? MORE MORONS---who are screaming the same chant today. BUY---BUY BUY LOL ROFL
If people weren't buying, developers wouldn't be building. "
And who are the LIARS seducing them? "
edumacation wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:05 PM:
sam wrote on Mar 25, 2009 5:01 PM:
I think you forgot the first $500,000 that was spent on Ms Hitchcock's greenbelt attempt with her Berkeley Consultants several years ago.
This second $500,000 is ridiclulous. I know many of us on Armstrong are against it. Why would the city of Lodi spend this much money on land they have no say over?
If you want land you may be able to buy 5 acres out here for $500,000 , but I doubt it. The last 6 acres out here sold for $1.2 million. "
Whoa Nellie! wrote on Mar 25, 2009 1:42 PM:
The Lodi Wine Commission out there on Turner Rd needs to show hard facts of this; motel stays on wknds, wknds with wine special events, tasting room zipcode tracking, etc etc... Ask one of the local wineries about their Wine Club membership and the amount out of 95240-2.
New REVENUE STREAMS would be things like new retail at Reynolds Ranch and of course the over politicized WallyWorld. The city has lost a ton of tax dollars with the closing of a few auto dealerships.
Even in these tough times it is time to bring back the full time position of an Economic Development Director.... hello? Blair King, are you listening? Or any of you Council Members? Are you LISTENING to your "constituents"??? "
4AStrongLodi wrote on Mar 25, 2009 12:05 PM:
What would you recommend we cut? While I think spending $500k on an assessment to make Armstrong Road a greenbelt is a total waste, I don't want to see the major City services cut any further...especially police and fire departments. Now, some things like a new animal shelter may have to wait, but we what we need to do is find new revenue streams that can help support our City.
Fighting any growth and expecting wine tourism to bring in the revenue are just naive ideas. We need businesses to move here, open, and thrive. That will bring jobs, which will infuse dollars into our City. "
anayud wrote on Mar 25, 2009 11:53 AM:
patton1 wrote on Mar 25, 2009 11:40 AM:
reality wrote on Mar 25, 2009 10:56 AM:
she voted against Reynolds Ranch and isnt Southwest gateway over by lower Sacramento rd. if 51% of the property owners are absenttee, how are you going to get them to comply - code enforcement - it hasnt worked in the past so why should it work now "
Bohica wrote on Mar 25, 2009 9:58 AM:
4AStrongLodi wrote on Mar 25, 2009 9:39 AM:
Also, please explain how a City with decreasing revenue and growing unemployment, crime, and blight is supposed to survive by not growing.
Ask any business owner if they can survive by not growing their business and allowing it to have decreasing revenues and deteriorating equipment.
The real estate bubble in Lodi was caused by all the morons who believed they could "get rich quick" like the rest of their neighbors, yet ignored simple economics and logic. "$400,000 for an 800 sq. ft. house on a $40,0000/yr salary?...Oh, but it'll be worth $500,000 in a year, just like my buddies!" Yeah, right.
If people weren't buying, developers wouldn't be building. "
MP wrote on Mar 25, 2009 9:34 AM:
4AStrongLodi wrote on Mar 25, 2009 9:32 AM:
Basically, she's saying she has no answers, but she's going to keep complaining about it (and not really do anything but hold more meetings to complain some more). Plus, she voted against a huge effort to restore the Eastside...and there wasn't going to be much, if any, new debt. We could just sell bonds on taxes that would be coming back to us (and it was capped).
Way to go, Joanne. You're beginning to make Susan Witchcock look competent. "
Observer wrote on Mar 25, 2009 8:48 AM:
Whoa Nellie! wrote on Mar 25, 2009 8:39 AM:
The "Avg Joe's" of Lodi are not eating at Richmaid or Omelet House. I've had breakfast with my retired/senior parents at Richmaid and the minimum age in there is at least 75. These seniors are fine people but they are not forward looking individuals, they are more 'reactionary' types.
If JM wants to use restaurants as a place to find Avg Joe's maybe try Ricks Pizza? You can find all socio-economic types in there, along with White, Hispanic, and Asian races. Or maybe Chili's or Angelo's downtown.. Geez why didn't JM include The Village Coffee Shop in with those east side eateries, same demographics, lol.
JM is correct when she says us NO on W voters: 1) don't trust the CC & City Mgr, 2) don't want more debt, 3) want a specific list of projects including budgets & time lines, and 4) more public imput. And I want the Grape Bowl on the list, to dismantle the GB would be a huge, huge mistake. "
edumacation wrote on Mar 25, 2009 7:49 AM:
The nasty attitude of the W proponents also leads to mistrust. The "they" don't understand "W" is really an attempt at marginalizing us so the GOB can take from honest hardworking wage earners.
Good for you! Many of us are also getting prepared for the next attack on Lodi by the same developers, builders, Realtors and investors who ar responsible for the HOUSING bubble. "
Comments on this story are now closed.