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

Lodi must pay planning costs for agricultural region, San Joaquin County supervisors say

Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 10:00 pm

The city of Lodi will have to pay all of San Joaquin County's costs to consider maintaining the Armstrong Road corridor as an agricultural region to keep Lodi separate from Stockton.

The Board of Supervisors voted 4-1 Tuesday to require Lodi to pay the planning costs, which will likely be just less $500,000.

Subscription Required

An online service is needed to view this article in its entirety. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?



You must login to view the full content on this page.

Thank you for reading 20 free articles on our site. You can come back at the end of your 30-day period for another 20 free articles, or you can purchase a subscription at this time and continue to enjoy valuable local news and information. If you need help, please contact our office at 209-369-2761. You need an online service to view this article in its entirety.

Have an online subscription?

Login now

Need an online subscription?



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.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.


  • posted at 10:02 am on Mon, Apr 27, 2009.


    Oh patty boy... Lodi is NOT growing right to my property. Have you ever looked at Lodi's new general plan? Currently my land, and many many others out here are on it... illegally labelled as Lodi's Ag Greenbelt. You need to get informed. However I do LOVE those grapevines... i just "heard it thru the grapevine" that the county officials do NOT like the 5 acre plan. Go ahead and plop another 1/2 million on my tractor dirt, big fella. Haha. I am off for a late lunch with AG's daughter. Did I tell you we went to school together? and that my sibling works for her and her dad? Ciao.

  • posted at 7:37 am on Mon, Apr 27, 2009.


    Sam, please get informed. While the city of Lodi is going to grow right up to your property, Lodi is not going to put your property in the general plan. If they were to do that, there is no course of legal action because you would not be required to develop. But I know you would want to.

  • posted at 6:27 am on Sat, Apr 25, 2009.


    Gooo sam gooo sam gooo sam...

  • posted at 1:11 pm on Fri, Apr 24, 2009.


    Patton, you have a promise from me. If my land IS in Lodi's new general plan, I am suing Lodi. I am not part of Lodi. My land is AG40 under SJ County jurisdiction. I do not answer to Lodi.Patton, you need to wake up.

  • posted at 12:53 pm on Fri, Apr 24, 2009.


    patton, high and mighty? I think that is you, big fella, trying to dictate to all of us what we should do. We have the land. You do NOT.You mock the needs of farmers and pretend to care.I know Lodi is not interested in developing the land out here. That is fine by me. Actually we all would LOVE it is Lodi left us alone.We are GREAT without Lodi. Trust me. We are very great without Lodi.

  • posted at 6:07 am on Fri, Apr 24, 2009.


    Sam, I know you want that area included into the lodi general plan. Thats my point! You are frustrated that you cant sell to a developer because you are just outside the speher and yet suffer from the congestion. Just remember to not act high and mighty

  • posted at 11:39 am on Thu, Apr 23, 2009.


    patton, seriously, Spanos is buying up the land by I-5. He likes that cheap land... especially the "below sea level" land. Stockton is going to hit Lodi by coming down Hwy 12 from I-5. Watch out for Spanos and Grupe.On a serious note, anytime you REALLY want to feel how the Reynolds Ranch traffic at less than 3% completed is hurting us, I would love to show you. In my eyes, Lodi should take the Armstrong land into their general plan. When development hits Armstrong (30 plus years) why would Lodi not want to surround Micke Grove and control the development? Cutting this land into 5 acre pieces is a waste.

  • posted at 10:50 am on Thu, Apr 23, 2009.


    Sam can keep his property or ne can sell it, I dont care. But I know that his complaing to the AL5 idea is that he wants to Mr. Spanos to write him a big check. Thats fine too.

  • posted at 3:43 pm on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    OldZin, well said. AND keep on driving that tractor.

  • posted at 3:36 pm on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Why thanks, Cog. I appreciate the support. What is weird is that patton admits the 5 acre deal will destroy property value. Who would not fight to maintain their property value and their property rights?And fyi, like I said earlier, we are not interested in selling. Family comes before patton's $$$.

  • posted at 3:17 pm on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Patton, why don't you and your like minded buddies pony up and buy Sams land at fair market value? Then you could do with it as you wish, providing Sam is willing to sell. Have you ever heard of private property rights? It's one of the foundations that make America great. Complainers, like you, never accomplish much of anything.

  • posted at 1:33 pm on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Please don't start lying about me also saying I want to sellout to developers. I have farmed on Armstrong for 76 years. This 5 acre design is the worst type of land use there is. More houses means less farming.

  • posted at 1:23 pm on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Patton1, you make fun of Sam for talking about traffic on Armstrong RD. Have you ever tried to move tractors down Armstrong lately? Tractors are moving daily down Armstrong going 12 mph and you think increased traffic is a foolish complaint?My thinking is that you have no clue about what it takes to farm and no respect for us farmers.

  • posted at 12:03 pm on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Yo big fella, sorry I hit a nerve talking about your flawed Reynolds Ranch EIR and all your neglected city wide needs not being met because "no one is watching your check book."Looks like I drove you to drink... your lunch that is.Have a good evening.

  • posted at 9:27 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    And I say sam shoulf have that right if he wants its just lame to complain about traffic when in the end sam will sell out also.

  • posted at 9:24 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Nobody is buying land on Armstrong rd. becuase al5 isnt worth much. The point is that sam would sell to a developer in a heartbeat. Sam would prefer that the property remain ag40 so that in the future he could sell it to spanos.

  • posted at 7:42 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Who is buying land on Armstrong Road?

  • posted at 5:43 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Oh and patton,please remember the words of your "leader", Ms Hitchcock while she was addressing the farmers on Armstrong at one of our greenbelt meetings.She said she does not care about preserving our farming businesses on Armstrong. She is interested only in creating a separator for Lodi.Yeah those are words of love every farmer wants to hear.

  • posted at 5:27 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    I just love all the kind words that patton1 is always spewing. Nice words coming from an ex-man-of-the-cloth.

  • posted at 5:16 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    patton1, you do not know me, big guy, but feel to call me all the names in the book.sticks and stones....I am not a developer and I have no intention of being a developer and I do not plan on taking any bribes (wink wink.. you with your fat pockets) from developers.My oppostion to this 5 acre cutup proposal is that we currently are starting to experience the results of your poorly planned Reynolds Ranch... and you have not even developed 10 % of it.Adding more people, more traffic, more houses out here on Armstrong is NOT going to preserve our farming. But I think you know that.Who are your developer buddies who have been buying the land on Armstrong since this separator idea started 5 plus years ago? They aren't farmers.Gee big guy, who is the real hypocrit?

  • posted at 5:06 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Your comments highlight that you dont like developement if you cant participate. You complain about Lodi going south of Harney but if you were offered big bucks you would sell. You are a hypocrite. Your opposition to the seperator is the desire for traditional development down the road.

  • posted at 4:26 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    Patton, as of today.. no I would not sell to anyone. But then I doubt if you would understand family... seems you are driven by the almight buck. And fyi, who I sell to is none of your business. Just like who you choose to sell your home or your business to is none of my business.You have a nice day, big fella.

  • posted at 4:04 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    come on Sam, we know that you would sell your acres to a developer if possible.

  • posted at 2:29 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    NAGOB, no no no. Please build your wall, the one you promised, next to Reynolds Ranch. Lodi is encroaching on our farmland and ruining Armstrong quicker than Stockton.Keep your money and repair your leaky sewer pipes, build your water treament plant, fix your roads, upgrade your sewage plant, put your artificial grass in the your Grapebowl, get rid of your gangs...Use your taxes to cure your ills. Leave us alone.

  • posted at 2:16 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    We need to take the money and build a wall at Eight Mile to keep Stockton and the problems they have away from Lodi.

  • posted at 1:55 am on Wed, Apr 22, 2009.


    I vote NO. With no MOU with the county or the landowners there is no guarantee that this $500,000 will buy us anything. What a waste of MY tax dollars.

Readers Choice Awards 2014


Popular Stories



Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Featured Events

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