Coloma Road Improvement is First Stimulus Project in Sacramento County
Congressman Dan Lungren visited Coloma Road on Tuesday morning to announce the beginning of a construction project on Coloma Road. It is the first project in Sacramento County that is partially funded by Federal stimulus money.
Also in attendance was Rancho Cordova Mayor Dan Skoglund, Sacramento Council of Governments (SACOG) Executive Director Mike McKeever, and representatives for Congresswoman Doris Matsui.
The project will affect 3.2 miles of Coloma Road between Folsom Boulevard and Sunrise Boulevard. The first phase of the project has already been completed; Construction crews have begun work on the road from McGregor Drive to Sunrise Boulevard and will continue until Dec. 14.
The project is expected to cost approximately $7 million, with $1.2 million coming from American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds.
SACOG, a coalition of the governments in a six-county region of the Sacramento Valley, is credited for obtaining the stimulus funds.
”These are projects that have to be done someday,” Congressman Dan Lungren said. “There’s no doubt that we need to do these sorts of things to strengthen our infrastructure.”
Congresswoman Doris Matsui agreed with Lungren in a statement, and highlighted the fact that many jobs will be created in Rancho Cordova because of the project.
“Projects like these are putting people to work,” Matsui said. “This is the stimulus plan working for people in their neighborhoods.”
Cyrus Abhar, Rancho Cordova’s public works director, said there are several reasons they chose Coloma Road for improvements.
“We chose it based on the condition of the road, and we also chose it based on the amount of traffic that it gets,” Abhar said. “This road has roughly about 21,000 cars a day, and given the condition of the road and the length of time we have not performed any maintenance work, we thought this would be a very good candidate for the rehab project.”
Abhar also said that the next phase of the Folsom Boulevard Specific Plan will be startedwithin a year, which includes about $9 million of improvements to the Folsom Corridor.
“We’re in the process of doing design work for the next phase of enhancements on the boulevard,” he said and stated that work will begin in the summer of 2010.
-
- Construction vehicles lined up on Coloma Road.
-
- Mayor Skoglund and Congressman Dan Lungren.
Similar Posts:
- None Found
Short URL: http://www.ranchocordovapost.com/?p=4660
Posted by 
I find it hypocritical that Dan Lungren is on hand to praise the infusion of federal stimulus dollars into the Coloma Rd. project and to take credit bringing money into the district when he voted against the bill that is providing the funds.
Do we know why he voted against the bill. Sometimes the bills get loaded up with so much pork barrel spending Congressmen and Congresswomen vote NO to try and control government spending to essential projects.
That will be his excuse, always is. He claims to be against pork barrel spending, yet still pushes for earmarks in bills. Of course, he knows he will vote against the bill in the end. The fact remains, he’s willing enough to accept money he voted against. What is even more disingenuous is that he knew when he had the project put into the stimulus bill that he would be voting against it. What a sham. This is the worst kind of deception.
Hopefully, the voters in the 3rd district have had enough of Lungren’s hypocrisy and dishonesty and will send him back home to Long Beach in 2010.
I’m just glad the money is coming through.
I have to agree with Randy – Lungren voted “yes” on Bush’s huge spending and ballooning deficit, he approved both versions of the Bush admin’s fall 2009 bailout plan (the more-than-slightly corrupt mess of corporate welfare).
A few months later, before voting “no” on the stimulus, Lungren was quoted saying, “We will soon become even more French,” while holding a copy of Newsweek with the cover headline: “We Are All Socialists Now.”
Now he shows up to smile and wave for the cameras? Gimme a break! His own website page on this event starts with: “The early bird gets the stimulus money, and Congressman Dan Lungren had vowed to be at the front of the line to receive it for his Third District.” Gee, thanks! If you’d had it your way, there’d be no stimulus money!
Context is everything : Earlier this year, we learned he’s targeted by the DCCC as a vulnerable seat (so real money may finally go to his opponent in 2010), which has him nervous. There are 3 democrats vying for his seat so far .. much hotter race than prior years. Additionally, he may lose his method of campaigning for free: for years I’ve received misleading and partisan mailers from him … at taxpayer’s expense – a violation of congressional “franking” rules that disallow partisan/ campaign mailers or calls on our dime. He’s currently one of many republicans making a stink over being told “no” to public funds for mailers that demonstrably lie about health care reform – good for the public, but not so good for his message machine through the election season.
And for those who think he’s against earmarks: Dan Lungren sponsored or co-sponsored 11 earmarks totaling nearly $18 million in fiscal year 2008. Hey, every congressperson hates earmarks … unless it’s money for their district.
I love that Rancho has a local paper – and an outstanding job is done overall, but reporting like this can too often look like PR when little background and context are provided.
Sarah, adding “context” and “background” as you say is nothing more than adding spin and bias. We reported on the event as it happened and allow you to decide if you agree, believe it, or think it was bunk. The great thing about this site is if you have a different viewpoint, you can write it up and publish it. How’s that for fair and balanced.
I agree the reporting is done in a relatively unbiased manner, and I never questioned the facts of this story – no credit is overtly given to Lungren for the stimulus and there are different sources used for quotes – HOWEVER, since he is obviously the highest-profile person in the article and therefore given both a photo and first mention, there is the positive PR (=campaigning) power in the unwritten message of the story: the assumption of the reader may be “that both the congresspeople supported (voted for) the funds that made the repairs, and hence, the photo op possible.
I didn’t think you should include my pile of facts posted above as the story’s context – nor did I say so – most of my comments were both to add to Randy’s statements and to address your pondering his reasons for voting no – a defense that again lacks the context of his 8 years of voting yes to the worst deficits ever and having a sizable earmark history.
And if you look at his website, he gives a statement as to why he voted “no” … that would have been useful right after a short sentence that said Congressman Lungren voted “no” on the stimulus package, Matsui voted yes.
The end.
Not “spin,” just context.