Former mayor petitioning to impose council term limits
A former Loomis mayor is conducting a drive to change town rules to impose term limits on council incumbents. Former Loomis Mayor Tom Millward, along with Barbara Burklow and Sonia Cupler, have filed a notice of intent to circulate a petition to impose 8-year term limits on council members. “We’re not going after anyone in particular. We’ve got to get rid of personal agendas. We’re trying to get new blood, new ideas. We need new faces,” Millward said. Millward served one 4-year term on the council, during which he was mayor for one year. He lost in his re-election bid to Gary Liss last November. A ballot summary document delivered by Millward to the Loomis News states that “each Town Council member will be limited to two consecutive four year terms in office” and won’t be eligible to serve again for eight years. The document states that the rules, if approved, would go into effect Aug. 1, 2010. “It’s pretty much geared to Walt and I. If they can’t get rid of us at the polls, they’ll try and do it this way,” said councilman Miguel Ucovich. “Term limits haven’t worked in the state legislature. Limits don’t allow the people to choose who they want. If you have someone good, they should be allowed to serve,” he said. According to Town Clerk Crickett Strock, Mayor Walt Scherer and Councilmember Rhonda Morillas are both serving their fifth terms on the council, although Scherer took a 4-year break in the 1990s. Ucovich is serving his third term. “Usually the incumbents win unless their opponents spend a lot of money or time,” Millward said. Millward said that he will start distributing the petition door-to-door, and will probably be at local businesses soliciting signatures. He said he, Cupler and Burklow will have 180 days to secure 465 signatures. He said that the completed petition will then go to the Town Council and they can vote to approve or deny it. “If they deny it, then it will be on the June ballot,” he said. “It’s up to the voters,” Ucovich said.
|
Change Location:
|
Tom Millward didn't take his decisive drubbing in the polls well, so now he wants to exact revenge on those he doesn't like. This doesn't speak well of his character.
Dear Loomis News Editor & Staff:
Please do not turn the Term Limits for Loomis Town Council Initiative into something that it's not. Please take it at face value & for the good and positive changes that it can bring to our community. This Initiative is truly not about old grudges between current and prior councilpeople and/or citizens, it's about the hope of changing our community for the better & moving forward, not getting stuck in the past. There are many other people in our community beside Tom Millward who want Term Limits for the Loomis Town Council. As our blog states: "Overwhelmingly, most voters prefer term limits."
Term limits make room for fresh candidates, and encourages participation. We invite you to participate in your local government. Begin by visiting: termlimitsforloomis.wordpress.com to find out more about the Term Limits for Loomis Town Council Initiative that will be on the ballot in June of 2010. Just as Councilman Ucovich states: "It’s up to the voters."
Sonja Cupler
“Hope of changing the community”? Why?
Loomis should NOT embrace term limits for the very reason that it does NOT need changing. Loomis is still one of the most, if not THE most, desirable places to live in Placer County. This success is due solely to the old guard resisting the temptation of being bought out by developers.
This is not about old grudges, but rather about old wisdom, especially after we saw what happened when previous developer-swooning town council folks voted for every development they could. Thank goodness those dark days of Loomis are gone.
Term Limits make the developers drool and rub their hands together in glee.
Term limits MAY make sense when the area being covered is huge (ie, Assembly Districts). Term limits for a small town merely give wealthy developers a better change of buying 3 out of the 5 seats. That's usually all they insist on. Oh, once in a while they'll bankroll a fourth seat, just for insurance, or they'll get a clean sweep when a fence straddler decides the benefits (percs) are too good to pass up.
Don’t fix it if it ain’t broke—keep Loomis just as it is. Don’t let greedy developer-driven pawns, spouting sanctimonious claims, take over and destroy the town.
Dear "Change Now",
Please do not make Term Limits into something that it's not. Please take it at face value & for the good and positive changes that it can bring to our community.
Are the sitting members of our Town Council the only ones in our town that have old wisdom, new wisdom, or any wisdom at all? How do you determine whether or not someone running for a Town Council seat has connections to developers, how do you determine whether or not any of the current Town Council Members have ties? All of this is very subjective to it's very core. This tells me that they are some how indispensable, which is all of the more reason for Term Limits. For democracy to be successful or effective, no one should become indispensable. That's how dictatorships are created. Is that we want for the Town of Loomis?
Sonja L. Cupler
http://termlimitsforloomis.wordpress.com/
Dear "Change Now",
Please do not make Term Limits into something that it's not. Please take it at face value & for the good and positive changes that it can bring to our community.
Are the sitting members of our Town Council the only ones in our town that have old wisdom, new wisdom, or any wisdom at all? How do you determine whether or not someone running for a Town Council seat has connections to developers, how do you determine whether or not any of the current Town Council Members have ties? All of this is very subjective to it's very core. This tells me that they are some how indispensable, which is all of the more reason for Term Limits. For democracy to be successful or effective, no one should become indispensable. That's how dictatorships are created. Is that we want for the Town of Loomis?
Sonja L. Cupler
http://termlimitsforloomis.wordpress.com/
Dear "Change Now",
Please do not make Term Limits into something that it's not. Please take it at face value & for the good and positive changes that it can bring to our community.
Are the sitting members of our Town Council the only ones in our town that have old wisdom, new wisdom, or any wisdom at all? How do you determine whether or not someone running for a Town Council seat has connections to developers, how do you determine whether or not any of the current Town Council Members have ties? All of this is very subjective to it's very core. This tells me that they are some how indispensable, which is all of the more reason for Term Limits. For democracy to be successful or effective, no one should become indispensable. That's how dictatorships are created. Is that we want for the Town of Loomis?
Sonja L. Cupler
http://termlimitsforloomis.wordpress.com/
Dear "Change Now",
Please do not make Term Limits into something that it's not. Please take it at face value & for the good and positive changes that it can bring to our community.
Are the sitting members of our Town Council the only ones in our town that have old wisdom, new wisdom, or any wisdom at all? How do you determine whether or not someone running for a Town Council seat has connections to developers, how do you determine whether or not any of the current Town Council Members have ties? All of this is very subjective to it's very core. This tells me that they are some how indispensable, which is all of the more reason for Term Limits. For democracy to be successful or effective, no one should become indispensable. That's how dictatorships are created. Is that we want for the Town of Loomis?
Sonja L. Cupler
http://termlimitsforloomis.wordpress.com/
Dear "Change Now",
Please do not make Term Limits into something that it's not. Please take it at face value & for the good and positive changes that it can bring to our community.
Are the sitting members of our Town Council the only ones in our town that have old wisdom, new wisdom, or any wisdom at all? How do you determine whether or not someone running for a Town Council seat has connections to developers, how do you determine whether or not any of the current Town Council Members have ties? All of this is very subjective to it's very core. This tells me that they are some how indispensable, which is all of the more reason for Term Limits. For democracy to be successful or effective, no one should become indispensable. That's how dictatorships are created. Is that we want for the Town of Loomis?
Sonja L. Cupler
http://termlimitsforloomis.wordpress.com/
Sonja, without knowing in detail what those "positive changes" are, and what they mean for the future of Loomis, I find it difficult for me to support your claims. You make critical claims against the council inferring a "dictatorship". Based on your own language, I don't see any posiitve change. People get re elected because more people support them than those who don't. A popular council member stays in office because he or she is doing the will of the people. What you are trying to do is subvert the will of the electoriate. An informed candidate with broad based support, can win an election. I think Gary Liss proved that.
Dear vicmarkey:
I'm sorry if you felt that there was an inference about any statement that I made against the Loomis Town Council a "dictatorship", all of my statements about Term Limits only was make in board general terms and were about Term Limits only, and the dangers that can take place as a reult in a democratic society, Loomis, California or the United States.
I agree, Gary Liss, ran a very sucessful campaign, he garnered a lot of support from a board base of support. And lucky for him he also had the support of council members who have been in office for more than four terms.
As far as subverting the will of the electorate goes, if the electorate for for Term Limits for the Loomis Town Council, how exactly would we be suberting it? It stands on face value, nothing more or nothing less. Just as Councilman Ucovich states: "It’s up to the voters."
You can find details about the positive changes that Term Limits can bring at: termlimitsforloomis.wordpress.com
Sonja Cupler
Wisdom can be judged in part by results. Judging how highly rated the Town of Loomis is, and judging how well the Town has resisted developer attempts to clone it into L.A. or Rocklin, I would say there is wisdom on the Loomis council.
I cannot believe the question is being asked (how to determine dev ties?)—just look at campaign contributions for starters (public record). If that’s not revealing enough, look at the endorsements. Look at who puts on the fundraisers. Or look at who funds illegal campaign smears and gets caught! THOSE are your devs knocking at the door in wolves’ clothing. In the case of Loomis, make that, “trying to knock down the door” via Term Limits.
If you cannot recognize a “good ol’ boy,” then of course, you will support Term Limits. Term Limits policies will insure that dev money is put to best use by hand-picked pawns.
Apparently, some have a glaring lack of understanding of the disadvantages of Term Limits when big money wants it implemented and the “old guard” can’t be bought. We will do everything in our power to defeat any Term Limits for Loomis and keep the Town as lovely as it is.
Dear ChangeNow,
Loomis is highly rated by who? I guess this totally depends on who you talk to. There's a big difference between L.A. and Rocklin.
If you are going to look at campaign contributions to people running for the Loomis Town Council, you may be surprised to see what you find. Please check everyone, not just the people in question. As far as endorsements go anyone can endorse whoever they want to. Canidates can ask for endorsements, and they can also pay for endorsements.
As far as anyone that is on the Term Limits for the Loomis Town Council Committee, no one has any developer ties whatsoever, no one how been bought, and no one is a pawn. Mr. Millward is retired law enforcement and used to be on the Council, I am a house wife who used to work for the LUSD, and Ms. Burklow is a retired medical professional.
I'm sorry that some people won't accept that we are just typical residents of Loomis who want Term Limits.
Pleae do not make us into something that we are obviously not, and please do not create a fear factor to and influence others and defeat something that would ultimately benefit our town. Greater participation in government also benefits a democratic government.
http://termlimitsforloomis.wordpress.com
Sonja L. Cupler
Ask any realtor about the “desirability” of living in the Loomis area. The difference between Rocklin (roofs and roads) and L.A. are minimal. Loomis is respected for valuing open space and slow growth—people want to live here BECAUSE of good decisions.
Greater participation in government is wonderful, but “limit” means just that—limiting the democratic process. Term Limits policies can/do result in elected officials not needing to listen to the public. Whey should they—they’re lame ducks at the beginning of their last term.
Term Limits set an arbitrary length of time and encourage intense, expensive campaigns. It favors slick campaign consultants because when each “term” is up, new, inexperienced candidates have to reinvent the wheel.
Term Limits destroy not only consistency in policies, but it diminishes good (wise) officials who are elected by their constituents. We “rotate” the Mayor or the Chair—that in itself disperses the authority, if that’s what the pro-Term Limits people are so concerned about.
Term limits are a lot like “mandatory retirement.” Worse, when applied to elected officials of small communities, it concentrates power in unelected civil servants. The unelected “CEO,” who doesn’t answer to citizens, but keeps staff on edge, in effect becomes the community “ruler.”
When elected officials are making a “career” of their $90,000 to $300,000 (or more) per year salaries, plus all the favors, per …
... [per] diems, and other “gifts,” then Term Limits might make sense. A “career” politician is SELF serving rather than community serving.
Inexperienced small town officials would be no match for “career developers” and their attorneys. When elected officials of small-governments earn $30 or $300 per meeting (or less) or some minimal amount, Term Limits make no sense.
No one wants to make the Term Limits people into something they’re not, but if they walk, talk and look like.... If citizens are opposed to elected officials, they have the right to run a candidate and vote the incumbent out. Throwing the baby out with the bathwater is foolish, and that’s what Term Limits do in a small community.
Since Mr. Millward was mentioned, please see if there were any developers or dev relatives who helped with his campaign. Has everyone forgotten what happened three years ago when one developer henchman did a hit piece mailing?
Sorry, Sonja...but ChangeNow came out on top in the areas of logic and common sense. He/she took away everything I wanted to say, but they probably did a better job of it than I could. And you are right, Sonja, Rocklin and LA are not alike. LA is a poster-child for moderation and restraint when compared to Rocklin. To ChangeNow....YES, everyone HAS forgotten the hit piece. That's what voters do. So I'm glad this debate brings it up again. Give it a break, Millward...you LOST. You are in bed with developers, and Loomis is a unique town in that it doesn't want to wake up with fleas.
Please read through all of the information on the Term Lilmits for Loomis Town Council Initiative on our blog, and our ballot summary document. We are not asking any one to retire we are asking anyone who has already served two terms in a row to take a break for two terms in a row. That's all, very simple stuff.
Term Limits can serve our community very well. I know that the community will become more active in the local governemnt. I t will discourage apathy when people consider running for office or voting for a canidate. Our goal is for more paticipation in local government not less. I have a heard time reading all of these blogs posts that say we need to leave the Old Wise Guard in place, only they know what's best for our community. Or maybe it's someone that's running that receives their blessing or support that can ever get elected?
I think that a lot of people will be surprised when the June election in 2010 to find out how many poeple will be supporting this. With a secret ballot many more people will be voting for this than you think.
Sonja L. Cupler
Sonja, it obvious that ChangeNow isn't interested in any change, but does bring up an interesting point, if someone is running for town council and accepts campaign contributions from dev.'s, that must make them beholding to that developer according to ChangeNow, well we followed the advice that person offered and we checked ALL candidates Form 460, we went back 10 years, and guess what, one of the council members pointing fingers at everyone for being on the take from developers, took 2 big juicy checks from developers for his campaign! What a hypocrite, right ChangeNow & Nicklbag, thought you guys would want to know, we know how you detest those filthy developers! Maybe this is why we need term limits?
If you are going to make a statement about someone specifically (i.e., Mr. Millward . . . ), then at least "man up" and post your real name.
Don't hide behind a user name.
Sonja L. Cupler
1—Why do we need Term Limits (TL)? Loomis voters know when it’s time to give someone the boot. We just had an INCUMBENT voted out of office, so why are TL folks saying it’s impossible? Doesn’t that prove that we don’t need Term Limits? When a better candidate comes along, Loomis sends the incumbent packing! Pray tell how TL can work any better than that?
2—TL folks say they want fresh candidates, but they can have them right now by just filing the paper work. Don’t they know how to file?
3—TL promoters say they want change, even though change is not needed or wanted (except by developers who are not getting their way). Why do TL folks insist on forcing their narrow-minded, idiotic platform on a community that is doing just fine? Who is behind this cockamamie idea? We need to follow the money to find the perpetrators because from what we’re seeing, intelligence is not behind it.
4—No one detests “filthy developers.” We just don’t want them filling our wetlands, polluting creeks, causing traffic nightmares, getting special deals, and then reneging, or screwing the town. Those developers are the ones who rule when they buy their candidates, put them in office, or put out illegal hit pieces to try to snooker voters. If you don’t think that happens, then I’ve got a bridge I’ll sell you, real cheap.
5—I use my name, but with all due respect, SLC, you don’t make the rules or call the shots with writers any more than I hope …
In the words of Bill Shakespeare . . . . "doth protest too much, methinks". The level of harsh words and protests of something as simple as Term Limits, 2 terms in a row = take a break for 2 terms. Very simple right? Not for public servants who have been in office for 3-5 terms and their supports. Why is that? Greedy developers? People who are trying to take over and destory the Town? Someone who is exacting revenge or subverting the will of the electorate? They will make it out to anything they can come up with.
Really examine this for what is. Why would people come up with every reason in the world that they can think of or dream up and then give a rash of harsh words for the people who are bringing this initiative to the voters. They do not want to lose their POWER. They become entrenched in their offices. All the more reason for Term Limits for Loomis Town Council.
As far as asking people to leave their real names if they are going to name someone specifically, if they can't or won't that really says a lot about them and how they operate. I don't have to make rules, people will see it for what it is. Believe or not the people who reside in Loomis are very intelligent.
Sonja L. Cupler
Whoa there Sonja, I wasn't talking about Millward, I was referring to one of the council members who worked against Millward in the last election (one that's been in, seems like forever.), that's the hypocrite.
Hey, I'm on your side, I think when any politicians become so "comfortable" in their position that they try to manipulate an election by false allegations toward a competitor, yet are guilty of what they are accusing others of doing, or stooping to unethical measures to thwart someone trying to open a business by going to So. Cal., taking photos of a run down property, not even owned by the business owner, and trying to pass them off as an example of how the business owner conducts his business, (did our town taxes pay for that trip, was that done on our state taxes we pay for civil service), then it's time for TL.
I don't know why a few people feel so threatened by TL (I really do know why). Can't termed out council members still participate and be involved in shaping the town, there is plenty community service projects they can be involved in, they can go to Planning Commission meetings and still have a voice at town council meetings. It is time for them to move over and let other people serve their time in local government.
Why are a few people so afraid to let democracy work? If you don't like an elected official, then kick ‘em out, just like what happened in the last Loomis election.
When the dark side has three seats locked up, they make sure illegal campaign activities are not investigated (cover up is easier) and horrendous developments are approved (like Montserrat—After clearing the natural vegetation for hideous vineyards, it looks as if they are ready to throw in the towel. Just like Bickford, they creep in, cr*p, and creep out, leaving us to clean up the mess). That is exactly what can happen with Term Limits in a small town.
Term Limits has no place where electeds receive little to no financial compensation, but where developers can/do make millions by coming in and destroying all that Loomis has stood for. It’s the reason Loomis incorporated—to keep lions (Rocklin developers) at bay.
Term Limits will result in big money lopsided campaigns by devs who want this or that special project approved. They will never be fair elections because it will be too expensive to campaign. Term Limits guarantees that will happen.
Term Limits is NOT needed because Loomis has demonstrated that it can/will vote incumbents out if they are not voting for the will of the people.
BTW: Judging from some comments, intelligence is in the eye of the beholder.
Oh and I guess the great oracle ChangeNow (did you ask Obama if you could use his campaign slogan) will decipher intelligent comments from unintelligent comments. The only thing that is stopping Bickford now is the economy, nothing more, nothing less, once housing has stabilized. it'll be back to business.
And since you have assumed the role of morals monitor, what about the guys who's in the big picture at the beginning of this article in the paper (hint: plaid shirt) his form 460 shows taking contributions from several developers, why do you people keep glossing over that? Here it is in black & white, proof posititve, not just conjecture, and you don't want to include him in that "dark side", it's almost like you want to save him in as your pawn, why else are you not equally outraged by his developers ties?
If you are so dead set against development, why did you allow it in the general plan?
Letting people vote on T.L. is democratic, statistically speaking, most the time people vote in incumbents, not on an educated decision about the candidate, but several reasons come into play, some are afraid of change, some listen to campaign lies etc. Candidates don't have to be educated, don't have to have experience, don't need to be wealthy, but they should have the moral fiber we voters deserve, and we all know ChangeNow, how important that is to you.
Obama did not ask if he could use my moniker (I had mine first), but that’s OK.
I don't think the guy in the plaid shirt has ever been accused of being in the back pocket of devs. His voting record proves he cannot be “bought.” He, along with some others, is the reason that Loomis is as green and clean as it is. If you're so upset at his developer ties, please name the development(s) he's voted for after citizens voiced their opposition.
Go back to when Loomis was in its dark period and look at all the 3 to 2 pro-development votes. They came about because someone was elected due to an illegal hit piece. The responsible party even admitted he did it—claimed he didn’t know it was illegal even though he himself had held, and continues to hold, public office. We’ll probably have a repeat performance, but this time he’ll cover his tracks better.
Bickford clear cut thousands of heritage oak woodlands. It may come back, but it was approved by supervisors who received campaign contributions for their vote. The same thing can happen to Loomis if the “green-keepers,” the wise ones who cannot be bought, are forced out of office by the ridiculous Term Limits campaign.
No one is against development (General Plan) if it’s done the way the old timers have managed it: SLOW, Responsible Growth. Some developers hate that and will go to any length to rid the council of those darn, well-liked, council folks who listen to constituents and NOT the money changers.
Saying things like, slow, responsible growth, is like saying " blue" is the best color. It's strictly subjective, not based on any tangilble measurement, unless of course it's your measurement standard. It's always the minority that want to dictate to the majority. We have young people in this town that need jobs, and when they do get older, maybe they will want to live in the same town as their parents, where is the housing?
Your typical, yea you've got your spread, but screw anyone else who wants to move to Loomis and send their kids through these great schools. Your full of contridictions, your against Montserrat, but wasn't your hero on the council when St. Francis Estate was approved, and that's a gated community, at least at Montserrat you can drive through and look at the beautiful vineyards, where was the citizen outrage then? Why do some developers get by with it and others don't, that smacks of improprieties . The wave of discontent is growing, I think you are going to be amazed at how many people are going to vote for this, everyone on my street can't wait for the petition to start coming around. That's True Democracy.
If you don't know by now what "Smart Growth" is, what it looks like, characteristics, etc., then I'm talking to a thick, dense wall here.
There are plenty of green jobs for our youth; we don’t need to poison our nest(s) for energy-hogging McMansions that our youth will never be able to afford.
Give me a break: “beautiful vineyards”? I bet they’ll be dead within five years, just like the Bickford Ranch mitigation oak trees are now. Have you seen Montserrat’s obnoxious 2” mesh plastic “deer blocking” mesh that doesn’t surround just the vineyards, but surrounds entire parcels, crosses roadways, and does not make any sense whatsoever as it blocks wildlife migration? Oh, excuse me—those must be the homes that the “young people” you care so much about will want to live in. No one in their right mind is buying those million dollar ostentatious white elephants.
I, my family, friends, and neighbors will oppose any Term Limits campaign for Loomis and will fully participate in the democratic process. We may not have the money that the developers will throw into this crazy idea, but we will have the manpower.
The same sad & sorry rhetoric from the "Old Guard" with the "Old Wisdom" Council is nothing more than fear and scare tactics. This is how they get people to vote for them and support them, by telling people that they are the only ones that can save them from the greedy developers who only want to take over and destory the town. This is so old! It doesn't work any more. They are not the only ones who can save anyone from anything. There are many other qualified people in this town that have a lot of really good ideas, but they will not run for office, why? Because we have entrenched council people who try to use fear against them. Smart people don't want to mess around and plays games like that. They don't have time. Let's level out the field, sort of speak, and give other people in our community who have fresh ideas, new perspectives, a more competitive election.
I heard a lot about hit pieces and hench men, but with all of the rhetoric I've heard lately it sounds more like a melodrama straight out of Palookaville. The people who don't want to give up their power on the Council will say and do anything to not lose it. It's true, if they're upset about the County Sups approving Bickford Ranch development then why don't they run for County Supervisor? Term Limits, an idea whose time has come.
Sonja L. Cupler
P.S. "Independent" my comments was not directed towards you, it was directed towards the people who posted and named Millward specifically
Sounds like "wealth envy" to me CN. Only thick dense wall here is you, you still can't define smart growth can you, it's your phrase so define it, is it St. Francis Estates, is it Legacy Lanes or D. Hood's projects (you know where I'm going with this ,right)?
Ah, now the green issue, why do I see M.U. running around town with his gas lawn mower, I think I've seen Liss out front mowing his lawn with a gas mower too, why does every job in this town have to be green, maybe because you live in a "nest" and not a regular house you are more susceptible to enviromental pollutants, no wonder you drive by, I mean bike by, Montserrat with such envy in your heart, it's sad when we can't afford something.
So you, your family, & friends will try and stop TM, okay that acccounts for 10 people, but rest of the town will be voting for at least the right to vote on it!
The hit bird is fluttering a bit here.
SC has nothing to contribute to this discussion other than to throw out some platitudes of fear mongering. We’re a little beyond that, SC. I have no idea who you are, but a definite image is emerging, and it ain’t pretty, nor is it indicative of anyone we would want deciding the future of our town's policies. Ignorance may be bliss, but the town demands more.
If there are so many “other qualified people,” and if they refuse to run, then they do not support Democracy. If they are “afraid,” then let’s hope they never get elected because without backbone, they’ll cave to every threat, bribe, and pressure. Please, do NOT apply or run, and be sure to tell your friends not to run either, assuming they're part of the fearful group.
Those who are quaking in their boots with fear can either speak up during the Public Comment periods, write letters, meet individually with elected officials (last I heard, they’re pretty open to that), or forever hold their tongues.
To live in Monserrat would be close to living in Hell. There are NO redeeming virtues of that monstrosity.
Usually, a stalker doesn’t admit it publicly, but if anyone is “spying” on people and their habits, maybe authorities with the straight jackets would be better equipped to respond. Talk about scraping the bottom of the barrel for arguments....
Politicians, like diapers, have to be changed frequently – and for the very same reason. -Anonymous
Government is not reason, it is not eloquence – it is force. Like fire it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master; never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action. -George Washington
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act. -George Orwell
The most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government and I'm here to help. -Ronald Reagan
There is nothing so bad that politics cannot make it worse. -Thomas Sowell
A little government and a little luck are necessary in life, but only a fool trust either of them. -P. J. O'Rourke
"... it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds ..." -Samuel Adams
Maybe the unpretty image is your own reflection C.C., and the only fear mongering is coming from the side that wants to squash the opportunity for voters to decide if it is time for Term Limits.
The concept that there is only 2-3 current council people that can "save" Loomis from the evil developers, is getting comical, you can't keep beatin' that dead horse forever, especially when people start looking around and realizing the major developments that have taken place has been under the watchful eye of W.S & M.U.! Where were they when Loomis's only gated community was built, or when the land off Taylor Rd. was bulldozed and made into Legacy Lane, (was it because M.U. has on public record, accepting a large campaign contribution) ? Why is it only objectionable for some developers and not others?
Let's shatter this "smart growth" concept that is used by all the candidates during election time. The General Plan adopted by the town dictates what every square inch in Loomis is zoned and what it's use is, so why do people vilify someone for purchasing land and then wanting to build on it what it was zoned for? If people don't want developments, they need to "pony up" buy the land and let it sit. It seems the town has money for law suits against Rocklin, they should use that money to buy up land. The only reason there is not more development going on now, IS THE ECONOMY, not because our great "saviors" have staved off evil ! ! !