default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
Logout|My Dashboard

Eminent domain a major concern at Lodi City Council's redevelopment meeting

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Thursday, June 10, 2010 12:00 am

Ensuring that eminent domain cannot be used, building trust between the council and having a specific set of projects were some of the concerns mentioned at a special Lodi City Council meeting on redevelopment.

The meeting was discussion only to get feedback on what is next for redevelopment.

"Is there any kind of redevelopment agency this community would pass?" Hansen said. "That is the first step."

Councilwoman JoAnne Mounce said she would support a redevelopment agency that could only use the money generated for infrastructure on the Eastside. Repairing the infrastructure would still benefit developers, she said, because it would make the area more appealing.

But she said the possibility of giving direct incentives to developers is one of the major concerns with redevelopment.

"It gets morphed into this back door economic development based on all kinds of visions that might or might not happen," Mounce said.

However, redevelopment supporter Steve Jarrett said the council has to include some economic development tools in order to generate the property tax increment needed to pay for millions of dollars in infrastructure projects.

"Redevelopment is driven by the private sector because it has to have the increase in revenues that can only come from commercial," Jarrett said.

Seeking a compromise, John Beckman suggested that maybe the redevelopment plan could prioritize public works projects first and require that those be finished before allowing any economic development. He is the president of the Building Industry Association of the Delta and a former councilman,

Having never attended a council meeting before, Karen Dillard said she wanted to explain that eminent domain was the major reason people opposed Measure W. She said the council needs to do a better job of explaining that the redevelopment plan has safeguards to prevent the city from taking property.

"It's a fundamental concern, and no amount of logic will convince people otherwise. It's an emotional issue," she said.

Councilman Larry Hansen said the council decided to not include eminent domain in any form in its redevelopment agency, and that the city has a strict eminent domain ordinance. He said he understands that people worry that a council 20 years from now could go through the process to reinstitute eminent domain into the plan.

He suggested that maybe the council could consider putting the issue on the ballot to allow people to vote on limiting eminent domain. Then, it could only be overturned by another vote of the people.

The council plans to set another special meeting to discuss in more detail what an agency would look like at a future meeting.

Contact reporter Maggie Creamer at maggiec@lodinews.com. Read her blog at www.lodinews.com/blogs/citybuzz.


Redevelopment is not a new issue. The council formed an agency in 1999, and the city has run into opposition ever since. Here is a brief overview of important redevelopment events:

July 1999: The Lodi City Council formed the city's first redevelopment agency.

August 2002: Opponents of redevelopment collected enough signatures to halt the agency.

September 2002: Council voted to repeal the ordinance that created the city's redevelopment agency and to seek additional public input.

March 2003: City leaders discussed reintroducing a new redevelopment plan that excluded eminent domain, but the plan never gained traction.

July 2008: The council voted again to establish a 2,000-acre redevelopment agency.

October 2008: Redevelopment opponents collected enough signatures to require the council to put redevelopment on the ballot.

March 2009: Measure W, the ballot initiative, failed after receiving only 46 percent of the vote.

Source: Compiled from News-Sentinel stories

What is needed on the Eastside?

The city of Lodi sent postcards to Eastside residents asking what they would like to see improved. City staff divided the responses into four categories.

Below are the top three answers in each category and how many people voted for it:

Potential redevelopment projects:
Sidewalks: 31
Streets: 22
Street lighting: 11

Requests for additional city services:
Code enforcement, including noise, rental property, weeds and unkempt yards: 38 Gangs/crime/police: 41
Tree maintenance: 11

Private enterprise requests:
Bowling alley: 6
Skating rink: 4
Grocery store: 3

Enforce immigration laws: 4
End homelessness: 2

Source: City of Lodi survey of Eastside residents

To see the results of the complete survey, go to www.lodinews.com/blogs/citybuzz.

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don't pretend you're someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don't insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • posted at 5:26 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    Lodidian- I agree!Another sad truth is that these same east side residents are being USED like an old tissue so that certain builders, developers and estate agents will PROFIT from the misfortune of others.The eastside residents are the pretext for the theft by the RDA process.It's a cruel hoax to tease the poor into believing that "they" will receive benefits that will improve their lives. It will only increase the control and income of those who pull the strings of government for selfish and greedy motives.

  • posted at 5:14 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    The city/council has already spent over a half million (tax)dollars on two expensive special elections trying to sell redevelopment. The citizens have voted! No!The council is not listening----it appears the three gentle councilmen will spend more of our tax dollars trying to get their way.I grew up on the east side and it kills me to see it continue to decline but--- "it is what it is". Even if the city was flush and times were booming, there is a cultural issue here that defies redevelopment. No offense to those east side folks who take care of their property and abide by city codes. Too many do not respect themselves, their neighbors or the property they live in. Redevelopment will not change them.

  • posted at 5:09 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    pre$$ure$on- I wish I could send you a private email of PUBLISHED evidence of the scam. Whats going to happen with the increase in city liability with an increase of vehicles parked on the public streets?A few locals are in the anti-garage and anti-carport mode. They can't get money out of land that has a car parked on it.As most realize, many poor folks seem to accumulate multiple vehicles (most not operational). Wonderful ornaments for Lodi improvement. One reason for C C & R's and HOA's is to get rid of unsightly junk cars...but plans are underway to put more junk on the street, so they can rent out what was formerly a garage or carport.A new trend in LA with already tens of thousands of vacant houses, are the new mini-apartments brought to you by greedy builders. 300 sq feet of bliss with "open" floor plans for $2,000/mo. Off street Parking? ON THE STREET WITH METERS. Wanna rent a closet?Some prisoners are allowed up to 120 sq feet per cell.

  • posted at 4:54 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    Pre$$ure$on- Do you remember this?www.recordnet.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080816/A_NEWS/808160317/0/A_NEWSAnd this from 2010http://outside.in/granite-bay-ca/dunmore-homesIsn't it interesting why some people keep getting sued for "alleged" shady developing deals?This is similar to the "alleged" Ponzi scheme of Madoff--- He now claims to be a victim of the people he bragged he ripped off. Ohh that eternal optimism and smiling faces ---doesn't it make one feel proud to be a "victim"? With Truck loads of bail-out cash, taxpayers must "burden" developers and builders who quiclkly forget their schemes of only weeks ago.....and we keep throwing money at them. It is more than perverse.

  • posted at 4:41 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    Edumacation, the three malemen are only trying to deceive councilrep Mounce into their own world of greed by trickery, when, IMO, they will just set her up and make her their doormat like some of them have when she was an advocate for the eastside and on the board of the old Eastside Improvement Committee. Neither of those three have shown any scruples nor leadership quality, only an interest in making monetary gains for the gob's, who in turn make it worth their while. Just how many times have these three male council men broken ranks and not voted together? None that I can remember. Weren't they the three that dissed and overruled their own planning commission to keep the superWalmart issue going forward? IMO, these are three very dishonest, greedy and spendthrift men who use other peoples money to enrich their owners, who in turn provide perks of all kinds. When is Mr. Munson going to builld that downtown Lodi hotel? Didn't council vote to keep other developers out for a specified amount of time to allow Mr. Munson time to procure property for this farce? And the ready to be dedicated eastside mural on a religious building?

  • posted at 2:15 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    pre$$ure$on- Are *they looking for a plumber to plug the leak? I wonder who is spilling the "legumes" about this scheme that is being hatched?IT is true---and the CC knows it.This scheme is hiding in plain site.Will *they get upset when their schemes are discussed in public? BTW "Plan B" stinks worse than "plan A". Is it like blaming a rape victim for being raped?

  • posted at 1:41 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    *they are censored names- BUT everyone knows their names. Lets all bury our heads in the sand and pretend we don't know anything? Just like we have NO GANGS in Lodi---its a proven fact. We also have no movers and shakers who OWN the city council. Why never here!IDEA - When *they try this evil stunt, lets require THEM to live in the teensy dumps they have planned for the east side. WITH NO 24 hour POLICE protection. What about driveways? IT HAS ALREADY BEEN SECRETLY DISCUSSED.All residential parking will be on public streets. You can't charge rent for car parking spaces. *They think this is improvement? China and India never planned their ghettos. Why are we planning our new ghettos using the RDA? To keep *them doing the only thing they know, scheming and throwing hammers.

  • posted at 1:32 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    Secret plan revealed---First, *they sneak in the RDA. *They NEVER want to use their money,just working taxpayers money! Second, *they start block busting to scare people they have targeted who own the parcels they want to "develop" to "give" or sell to them.Third, *they grab two lots and join them together using their influence over city planners.*They squeeze the "approvals" they need and built THREE tract houses on the TWO small lots. They spray lawn paint on the grass and pretty it up to extract MORE rent money out of the same tiny plot of dirt.Never mind that you have to close your windows, when someone flushes the toilet. The tenants live so close they can hear everything. Instead of squeezing two rents out of an old tract house, they squeeze out three rents.If the builder/owner/investor gets bored they can tout this as "prime" investment property. voila! redevelopment ghetto style.Is Lodi looking for some (gang bait) to volunteer to be the next crime victim? Regentrification does NOT work.

  • posted at 1:10 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    To Pat... AMEN !!!

  • posted at 12:21 pm on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    Why is it the government can take people's property, homes, livelihoods, right-of-ways and what ever else they deem in the interest of the public, while bending over backwards to keep a bird in its nest, a shrimp in its puddle, a gopher in it's hole and a politician in his seat. Makes no sense to me...

  • posted at 5:28 am on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    So, like the water fiasco, these guys are trying for a "third time, a charm" scenario.....just remember: Most of these Redevelopment set ups are usually called Redevelopment SCHEMES....think that's for a reason.

  • posted at 5:28 am on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    I know of about dozen developers who would like to tear down old rundown housing on the east side...and build NEW homes/apts/ condos there...even elderly living or low income housing....but the Planning has so many !diots there who..never will allow City of Lodi to redevelop because of their BS obstacles...I personally have built in Lodi....and will never do it again..PAIN!!

  • posted at 4:47 am on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    Edumacation, IMO, that important redevelopment tool would certainly have to be CASH. What else would be the goal for the select group that would be chosen by the GOB's other than taxpayer CASH? You must have a great connection with the GOB when they are merely editing your blog and not bouncing you without warning like they do others who don't agree with them or who reveal the truths about the GOB or even mention a GOB name in vain? LOL Looks like you hit a nerve of one of the realtors, builders, developers, bullies, etc. to get edited? Just who is the webmaster? Fred, Marty or Rich? Oh, and edu, don't forget Diede Court? And, nellie, that Beckman is sure smart. Build more new housing developments while Lodi can't even sell its own hidden inventory and banks trickle out 1or2 at a time for fear of prices dropping even further? It's greed and thinking like that that got Lodi where it's at now. How about going back to the old standard that worked so well?Actually honestly working for a living. Look out forthe conspirators, nellie,and don't go out after dark, play with black cats or walk under a ladder!

  • posted at 4:14 am on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    Here we go again. Don't back down ex-mayor JoAnne Mounce. This redevelopment issue is going nowhere while the three greedy, corrupted male council members remain on this city council. Mr. Schwabauer and Ms. Mounce were the only 2 people that sounded sincere to me. The ladies that spoke from the citizenry were very acccurate and the same old deadbeats from the good old boys were there to beg the council to pass a system of redevelopment that would again line the pockets of the local developers, builders and contractors, along with their own. Mr. Patrick, John Beckman and Mr. Jarrett put in their pitches and got a pat on the back from the three malemen on council and I thought I saw them drooling their usual dollar signs. I seriously don't think that the council should worry about putting Lodi further in debt until the economy drastically improves. Ms. Mounce is the only one going in the right direction. The eastside has been crapped on for too long, and they don't even have handicapped curbs on many sidewalks there yet? Why? Because those 4 corners(LowerSac&Hwy.12) and new homes were more important?The GOB's needed their survival money.

  • posted at 4:14 am on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    boy, i wish i would have seen the unedited comment by Edum. Could it have been more conspiracy theorist? All that post was missing was 1) the phrase GOB's, and 2) innuendo of backroom meetings between CC members & Developers involving lots of cocktails.I cant believe I'm saying this, but Beckman actually has a good idea. Of course, that was blogged about here by so many of us before the failed vote. Giving the CC a blank check with no list of priority projects is just wrong.

  • Simon Birch posted at 3:48 am on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.

    Simon Birch - Online Manager Posts: 139 Staff

    edumacation's comment was edited because of a complaint.

  • posted at 1:33 am on Thu, Jun 10, 2010.


    "It gets morphed into this back door economic development based on all kinds of visions that might or might not happen," Mounce said."Morphed" is a euphemism for "developers and builders ordered their handmaidens to get on with it and force Lodi taxpayers to pay them to fix up THEIR OWN properties. They will let local builder constructed houses on the east side to continue to rot until they extort MORE money from us to pay them to fix their own properties.Here another good one--- "...Steve Jarrett said the council has to include some economic development "tools" in order to generate the property tax increment needed to pay for millions of dollars in infrastructure projects...." And who will be getting the TAX money AND PROFITS for these "infrastructure projects"? I got it, maybe we bneed some more new infrastructure street names like "Lowell Way" or "Bartlam Road".We can all meet at Bozant park and discuss the new intersection of Marty road and Christi way? Or ....we could add a few more members of the family? "...Activity creates activity..?



Popular Stories


Should graduations return to the Grape Bowl?

Lodi Unified leaders are moving Lodi and Tokay high school graduations from the Grape Bowl to the Spanos Center at UOP in Stockton. They cite limited seating, costs and unpredictable weather at the Grape Bowl. But others say graduations at the Grape Bowl are an important Lodi tradition, and one reason many supported renovating the stadium. What do you think?

Total Votes: 100


Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists