This article is part of Folsom Times’ 2026 Coffee with Candidates series, featuring one-on-one conversations with candidates in key local races. Through video interviews and accompanying digital coverage, candidates respond to a series of questions developed with input from the community, giving voters an opportunity to hear directly from those seeking office on issues important to the region.
In this segment, we sit down with Anna Rohrbough, incumbent Folsom City Councilmember for District 5 and the city’s current vice mayor. Rohrbough has more than 20 years of professional experience as a financial adviser, small business owner, leadership consultant, trainer and speaker. She holds degrees in economics and political science from the University of Washington. Rohrbough and her husband, Carter, have two adult children and have made Folsom their home.
Q: Folsom continues to grow, particularly south of Highway 50. While the city also faces aging infrastructure and maintenance needs in established areas, do you believe Folsom’s infrastructure is keeping pace with its growth? What would you do differently, if anything, and would you ever support slowing or delaying development until necessary infrastructure is in place?
Rohrbough: Interesting question. I was pretty sure we were going to get some infrastructure growth questions. I think my focus right now is maintaining what we have and building out the infrastructure to support that. So, two different things.
Right now, we’re working off previous decisions that were made long before I was on council or this council was in place. And I think what our residents feel is the lack of infrastructure keeping pace with growth.
And I agree. In the last four years, we saw a lot of apartment buildings going up on East Bidwell. I don’t think most people are anti-growth as much as they’re anti-the impacts that growth brings. So right now we’re in a critical situation where we need to really elevate getting this infrastructure done.
The last four years, what I’ve been doing is really focusing on how we can get the Empire Ranch interchange funded. That’s going to help with the impacts on East Bidwell. Again, the impacts really translate to traffic situations and congestion. So I think that’s really important to focus on.
But I think it’s not enough. We’re not talking enough about Alder Creek Parkway south of 50. Alder Creek Parkway down there is basically kind of equivalent to what Iron Point is north of 50. And it’s going to connect East Bidwell south of 50 to Prairie City Road. Completing that community will allow south of 50 folks to get in and out of Folsom in several different directions, directly reducing the impact on East Bidwell.
So I think that’s something that we’re moving forward, and we see that with one of the decisions that we made a few months ago with approving a Toll Brothers property. It’s not that we wanted more growth down there or more homes, but we need that completed community in order to get the roads built because we can’t do that as a city on our own.
So this is one way that, moving forward, I think that we’ve been really clear on our vision. Maybe we haven’t articulated it to the public as much, but I think this council right now is really focusing on how do we complete that infrastructure that’s going to help with the impacts that we’ve seen.
So, Empire Ranch is one of the things I’ve gone to D.C. twice now, met with our congressmen and other state and federal officials to make sure we got that funding in place. We’re through the design phase. I mean, it’s kind of like moving a glacier, right, at speed, but what we really need to do is continue to focus on now getting — the design part is done — getting the construction contract out.
And so, we’re moving in that. Staff was just telling us that they’re going to come to council and report out on that. So that is moving as fast as it can at this point, and I’m really happy to articulate that. And I think the next focus is still Alder Creek Parkway.
And I think your last part of the question, will you ever support slowing down development? I think that’s actually what we did with the Lakeside property purchase when that was presented to us in July.
This is actually one of the biggest things, I think, of us — or I felt like we were really listening to our residents because they’ve been telling us for years, right before I was on council even, stop the growth, stop the infrastructure, stop the build.
And when we were presented with this idea in July that Lakeside was going to put this property up for bid and then seeing that 10 offers for multifamily homes were presented, if we didn’t get involved, we wouldn’t have been able to control that timeline. So the idea that we wouldn’t be able to control what would go on that almost 7 acres along East Bidwell scared me a little bit.
So, once we were presented with the idea that we could use our housing trust funds to buy that so it doesn’t have an impact on our general fund, I think I was all for it. And talking with Lakeside now after the fact, they really want to work with us as partners. So does Folsom Lake College.
And it’s not that we’re going to prevent any apartments or whatever happening there, but what we can do is slow that growth until the infrastructure is in place to support it. And it doesn’t have to be multifamily homes or affordable. It has to be affordable in some way, but it could be student housing. It could be workforce housing, and it could be some capacity there where our residents will have a buy-in to what happens.
And we don’t have to do anything with that for a year or two if we don’t want to, or we can. And by the way, the circus is staying. We’re looking at ways to make sure that we continue that until we figure out what we want to do with that property.
So I think that is an example of really listening to what the residents wanted. It doesn’t seem like it because we spent money on something and it has to go in line with affordable housing, but it was the only way that we could control that process. So I’m pretty proud of that decision. I know it can be kind of confusing.
That’s to answer that last part of your question. I would say that’s one part of it. So I think, as a whole, this issue, infrastructure and growth, is such a big deal to our residents. I’m not interested in growing Folsom further, but I am very careful about — we need to continue to fill out the infrastructure that we need and complete the communities. And we do that on the backs of the development that’s going south of 50, having the developers pay for those roads and infrastructure that we need.
Q: Traffic congestion remains a major concern, particularly around East Bidwell Street and Highway 50. What do you believe the city can realistically do to improve traffic over the next four years? And where do projects such as the Empire Ranch Road interchange, Alder Creek Parkway, and improvements to existing roads rank among your priorities?
Rohrbough: So, I answered this a little bit, or a lot, in the other question, but I think Empire Ranch is one of our highest priorities. We had a workshop, which I’ve been asking for the last couple years, earlier in the spring with the council as a whole and the city staff and directors, and this came up to the top of a priority for all of us. So this is something that’s going to move forward.
Getting that Empire Ranch interchange has been a focus, and we’ll continue that process. I’ll continue advocating, looking for grants, looking for ways to get that done and paid for through — again, I said grants — but through the federal government is really the key on how we’re going to fund that project.
Also working with SacRT and STA and SACOG as a regional body, I think having those relationships, especially as someone with experience and influence, this is one of the reasons I think it’s important to elect somebody that has experience but also is still kind of wanting to be a change maker, and that would be me.
And so we have that influence. We have that ability to talk to regional partners and work well with them to make sure that this continues going forward.
So, Empire Ranch interchange. Alder Creek Parkway, as I said, is critical to the infrastructure south of 50. The impacts it has on my district, while it doesn’t sound like it will have any impact, it’s going to have a lot of impact on reducing the traffic on East Bidwell. We just can’t do that anymore. We can’t say, you know, dump traffic on East Bidwell, we’re going to fix that, and that’s our transportation plan. We have to have specific transportation plans.
So those two projects are critical as far as congestion. And I think these infrastructure things take time, and I don’t, outside of — I don’t have a simple solution of how we’re going to reduce congestion in the next six months except watching what we build and how we build it out and what we add and approve along the East Bidwell corridor. That’s critical.
Q: Do you believe new development should pay for the full cost it creates for the city, including roads, parks, public safety and other services, as well as the long-term maintenance and eventual replacement of that infrastructure? Would you support adjusting development and permit fees if studies show current fees don’t fully recover those costs?
Rohrbough: I think the answer is yes to that question, to all of it. I think any new development — I’m not sure that this has happened as much in the past. I know our current city manager has looked at the past contracts, and there were things, especially south of 50, that weren’t being covered, you know, continuation for our public safety as an example.
And now with the agreements that we’re creating, all of those things are in there. So we can’t go backwards, unfortunately, and make some existing development pay from the past, but what we can do is set it up for success in the future.
And so we definitely have our eyeballs on that. We definitely are aware of that, and we’re preventing kind of what got us here from happening again.
We have been doing that, actually, the last couple years, adjusting our fees. There had been, like, since 2006, I think, looking at our permit fees, our impact fees, things like that. We just did an adjustment on that, and I think that was a little late, but we got it done. And so we’re going to see some improvement in that.
We already have some of the highest fees for development south of 50 right now. But if it shows that it’s not paying for it, absolutely. I want to protect our city, and it’s not our city staff or employees that I want to protect. Of course I do. But it’s really our residents and their taxpayer dollars. I mean, what they’re investing in is they want to maintain what we have and kind of stop the building. And I understand that.
Q: Folsom faces increasing costs for infrastructure and city services while also having to maintain a balanced budget. Would you support asking voters to consider another local sales tax or other revenue measure in the future? If not, how would you address the city’s long-term infrastructure and service needs without additional taxes?
Rohrbough: I would say that I was not a proponent of this recent citizen initiative tax for one particular reason. And one particular reason is throwing money at a problem doesn’t fix a problem. And I could see that we had issues that we needed to fix before we could do that.
And when I couldn’t get information about our budget, when our budget was going over $3 million, $4 million, $5 million in expenses without being accounted for through a council level, I couldn’t support bringing in more revenue.
I didn’t publicly go against it because it was a citizen-driven initiative and I respected that process. And as we saw the results, obviously, 67% of our residents said no to it, and I think they were right.
As we try to rebuild trust, one of the first things I did four years ago was start asking questions about our budget for those particular reasons. We were going over, again, like $3 million, $4 million, $5 million in our expenses without it coming to council, and that’s just not how budgets work.
So I kept asking the question, why do we have so much revenue coming in, yet we couldn’t account for — the decisions weren’t coming to the council, which means the voice of our residents weren’t being heard.
So I think the first two years pushing back on our budget and asking those questions really kind of moved forward some new leadership that we have in our city, and I’m pretty proud of that.
I think we have a new city manager that understands finances and trust with public. We have a new police chief and a fire chief. We have a new public works director. All the directors are working so well together that they really understand our public and basically living within our means.
So right now the difference from four years ago is that when we pass a budget, they’re required to stick to the budget, period. And that’s creating some stability, some tough decisions the last couple years, but I think it’s creating an immense amount of stability in our finances, and we’re seeing that come to fruition this year already.
We anticipate having more revenue than expenses and maybe enough that we could do some things. We’re not going to be able to do everything that we want to with all the deferred maintenance, but we’re going to be able to make some good decisions that are going to keep moving us forward. So, piece by piece.
One of the things that we’re also doing is making sure that we’re building our capital replacement funds and having separate things for that so we don’t get in this maintenance issue again in, like, 10 years.
So, as far as a future tax measure, I trust the city a lot more right now than I did four years ago. And I think that’s one of the reasons that I wanted to get involved and get elected four years ago.
So I can’t say yes or no to a tax measure. I’m not just strongly against it completely. I think we still have some proving to do. I don’t know if we’d be ready in ’28 or ’30 or if we need one, in fact.
So it’s going to matter on where we are as a budget, if we are being as lean as we possibly can while also producing results, and then I would make my decision.
But I think if we do feel like that’s the only revenue option, that it has to be a council-driven, city-driven decision. Otherwise, we’re going to have this conflict again, which we had before, of the city’s involved, but they’re not supposed to be involved. And I think everyone needs to be on the same page. And if we get there and it’s necessary, I would support it, but I’m not there at the moment.
You asked about other revenue options. I think economic development is a big thing for me as well. We can continue to look for opportunities to infill, like in the Central District. That’s the area kind of over by Target and where the DMV is, that whole area. We’re having some improvement.
I know Folsom Lake Bowl Entertainment Center is doing a whole investment and revitalizing that. I think that’s going to spur some change there. All of that really, really helps.
I think one of the things that we can do to move these kind of smaller, helpful projects that help the residents that are currently here is actually reduce the lag that we see at City Hall. Sometimes it’s taking people one to two years to get through the process, and that’s just not going to work for us anymore.
And that’s one of my new focuses the next year or two, is to make sure we streamline that. We have a predictable process that saves time and money, not only for those people trying to put a restaurant in or build out their business, it is actually going to save money for the residents because we’ll get more revenue faster. So that’s just kind of a minor thing.
Q: Residents in established areas of Folsom frequently raise concerns about aging streets, parks, trails and other infrastructure. How should the city balance maintaining and improving existing neighborhoods with spending on infrastructure needed to serve newer development? What should be fixed first when there isn’t enough money to do everything?
Rohrbough: Well, the last part, what do we fix first? I think that’s a priority list with the council that they discuss as a whole and the city of what can be done.
One thing I want to talk about here is my efforts in championing the rebuild of Castle Park. I could see that we were heading down a pathway with Castle Park that we were probably going to end up having to close it if we didn’t actually rebuild. I was thinking refurbish first, but it became clear that we had to rebuild.
And I think that’s an example of waiting too long. And so I want to make sure that we don’t get in that situation with other parks and basketball courts and even all the new bright, shiny ones, like Econome Park was just built several years ago, and there’s some maintenance that needs to be done there, for example.
So, with Castle Park, I do want to talk about that because as soon as I got elected, something I started talking to the city manager about is we need to prove to our public that we’re actually delivering results on things that they care about.
And it took two years to get the funding for that, but was able to put away funding. And I think the difference that I made on that is that sat for an entire year. And even though I tried to push it forward and ask more questions, the second time it came around, it was already funded in the budget, but how were we going to get it done?
And at that time, I realized that we had to put a deadline on it to our staff to actually — because Parks and Rec, honestly, they have a lot going on. We have a huge department, but they really needed that leadership of, no, this is a priority of the council. This is a priority of our residents, and let’s get it done.
So, we put a deadline in October — I mean, I’m sorry, April — and it ended up mostly getting done in April. And I think we tried a community build. It’s actually being presented tonight at the City Council as far as what the final balance was on that. But tried the best to stay in budget.
I was able to get funding for it. Justin was able to help out with it. I think all the council members really helped out to make sure that project went forward in a timely manner.
So once that happened, we’re able to see the fruits of that labor. And I think we need to do that with smaller things. It’s not refurbishing an entire park. It’s refurbishing basketball courts.
And maybe some basketball courts like Briggs Ranch or Cummings Park don’t have lights anymore, and they’re cracked, and there’s some great divides in some of our pavement on those basketball courts. Spending time and investment in fixing what we have there, making it a little bit better rather than going out and building a whole new park that’s bright and shiny that now we’re going to have to maintain in the future.
So, you asked about south of 50, too. I think it’s important that those impact fees or any new development — Empire Ranch, for example, had impact fees for a long time for their park that’s just getting underway — those projects are important to deliver on.
So, south of 50 has money available for their own parks and trail system, and making sure that we’re making that a priority. That is not coming out of the general fund. It’s coming out of specific impact fees for south of 50.
So it’s important to keep that going, completing that community. They have an amazing park down there, but it’s also important, to your question, especially in District 5. There were a lot of smaller parks promised that haven’t been built.
Now, I don’t think we need another Castle Park. I don’t think we need another Prospector Park. I don’t think we need another Cummings Park. I think what we need is some of these things that were promised years ago. Let’s make them great, but they don’t have to have a whole play structure.
Let’s make them a passive park with accessible trails. People love that. People love walking in nature where they can sit on a bench, there’s an oak tree growing and kind of have some peace.
We are Distinct by Nature, and that doesn’t mean it’s just all parks and trails. It can be some passive parks. So that’s a focus of mine in the next four years, is making sure we’re still completing some of the things that were promised years ago north of 50 as we continue to build out south of 50.
Q: As Folsom’s population and developed area continue to grow, what should the city be doing to ensure police, fire and emergency medical services keep pace? Do you believe current staffing and funding are adequate? And if not, how would you pay for additional resources?
Rohrbough: This is one of my favorite subjects, actually, because public safety is one of the most important things that a government can provide. Period. It’s the one thing — the reason that government is in place is because of public safety in the beginning.
So, I think I championed and really had to lead the efforts — I want to talk about police first — to get our homeless outreach team.
Four years ago when I was campaigning, it was all about the transient population. And it was all about the increase in homeless that was happening in Folsom and a lot of it, the fear of the people moving from the West Coast out here because they saw what happened in the city they came from and they didn’t want it to happen here.
So really listening, and I really had to champion that and lead that fight in order to solve these transient issues and do it as a complete wholeness, not just enforcement, but also how can we help leverage enforcement to help get people help? So, working with our nonprofits and everything.
So, it took two years, but we were able to get funding to have a dedicated HOT team. And we have a sergeant and two officers, and they have done an amazing job.
Within six months of them starting in July two years ago, they were able to clean out, I think it was over 40 parks, but I don’t want to — I know it was 40 for sure, and I think it went up to 70 at some point — on our city property.
Continuation of that is working with Josh Hoover and the state Fish and Wildlife that owns property within our city boundaries, making sure — I had to set up, get a meeting with Hoover’s office to figure out how to navigate a no-trespass order so then our officers on their property could enforce our laws.
That took some time and effort. But our PD and our HOT team continued that, and we just saw the culmination of that. One of the biggest encampments we had was in that area, with the Sheriff’s Department, who completely worked with us regionally to use their helicopters, use everything that they had at their fingertips to help us clean out that encampment.
And we’ve seen great results from that. So I don’t hear from businesses anymore complaints about the homeless on their doorsteps and things like that. And I think that’s because we have this dedicated team that’s on it.
And because they’ve done such a good job, now they’re able to help with — it’s called POP, people-oriented policing, I think it is. They’ll correct me if I’m wrong. But that’s our POP team now. So our HOT/POP team is doing these kind of things throughout the city.
So I’m very, very proud of that. It took a lot of effort. I’m very proud of our department and our new chief for continuing that as well and making sure that he understood that this was a priority of our residents because of the great results we’ve seen.
We’re not curing homeless, but we are helping get people help they needed.
So, I do want to talk about that part briefly. This is going to be a long answer. We don’t just pick up these people and not try to get them help.
Sacramento has a lot of the resources that we need, but we work with our nonprofits, three major nonprofits in our city, HART, Jake’s Journey and Powerhouse Ministries, to get the people the help that they need.
And unfortunately, that means that sometimes they don’t want it. And sometimes it takes eight to 10 touches from our police officers or Jake’s Journey or one of these other organizations before they kind of build trust and will even articulate what they need.
Sometimes it’s a driver’s license. Sometimes it’s they want to get back home in the Midwest, but they can’t get there. And so our officers know who our transient homeless population is. They know what they need. They know who wants help and who doesn’t want help.
So I think — and they get them the help. They take them to the county. They take them to any services that they need when they can. And I think it’s just a great example of one way to work.
One of the reasons that I was really pushing for a HOT team is because I did a lot of research. I went to Rancho. We went to other cities around the area and talked to them about what worked and what didn’t work, and then we saw that happen with our HOT team.
So I’m very, very proud of that. I think it’s made a major difference in our city.
As far as fire, unfortunately, last year was really difficult with the Fire Department. There was a very transparent process, and we got to a point where we had to brown out one engine.
But based on the data, there was one or two of our locations that were only getting two to four calls a day. So based on the data, our city manager recommended that decision to brown out because otherwise it would cost another couple million dollars, and we were already in a structural deficit at that moment, having to use the general fund reserve.
So it was a temporary closure, a brownout, as they reorganized. The new chief came in, was able to reorganize, and I think this is a testament to the win and the great work our Fire Department is doing because we just went to a single-role paramedic service.
So all three ambulances are up. They reorganized where they were at, what stations they were at, to prioritize our Folsom residents rather than us going out as much.
And then we just — I think it’s on Friday — that the fifth engine is coming back in service because of this reorganization.
So instead of having to get rid of firefighters, we actually added four more positions to our Fire Department and without it costing any more money. And I think we’re going to — we didn’t see a downturn in our response times, which I was really careful and watching for in February. I think it was February.
And I think the testament is our response times seem to be really solid. We’re going to keep an eye on that. We’ve asked them to keep coming back to us because we know that that’s what really matters to our residents.
And I think it’s just a win-win for everybody. All the stations are up, all the engines are up, firefighters are happy, 522 was happy, and it didn’t cost the city any more money.
So I think having to make tough decisions in the short term to create sustainability for the long term is something that is a priority for me.
Not just — we saw the example, a positive example with the fire — but also I see that with parks. I see that with different programs. If it’s becoming unsustainable, what can we do in this moment to make it sustainable for the long term?
And that’s really those kind of tough, nitty-gritty, in-the-weeds numbers and decisions that we have to make, and I’m willing to make them in the short term. So that’s a positive thing.
Q: Housing remains one of the more difficult issues facing California cities. Within the authority Folsom still has under state law, what kind of housing growth do you believe is appropriate for Folsom? Do you believe the city currently has the right balance of apartments, higher-density housing and single-family neighborhoods? And where should future housing be concentrated?
Rohrbough: This is a great question, and I knew it was coming. I think I’m not opposed to more housing, and we are, as you indicated in the question, mandated by the state to meet these RHNA numbers.
Now, Folsom is doing a great job of it, and that is a testament to what’s happening south of 50. And this is why we can’t completely stop all growth. We need to complete these communities, keeping infrastructure and the impacts in mind, but we really can’t say no to more housing, period.
Then type of housing is quite interesting because this is one of those decisions. It doesn’t matter which way you say. You want single-family homes, you’re going to get people upset that we don’t have enough student housing, their kids can’t live here, or affordable housing for seniors.
And if you go the other route — affordable housing for seniors, student housing, workforce housing, all of that — then that’s going to create more impact because it’s usually multifamily density, high density. And then you get the other people saying, “No, we don’t want that.”
So this is one of those balanced decisions that we have to make regardless of what our public is saying. We want no growth, but we want this type of growth.
So it’s one of the kind of funner parts of being on City Council and having to be principled enough to make the right decision on how to really control what happens in Folsom.
So I think this kind of Lakeside — buying the Lakeside property, not the church, but the property right below it — is a great example of how we can control some of this and how we want to be very thoughtful, as I indicated in the first answer, of what kind of housing is going in there.
We hear a lot about affordable, that we don’t have enough affordable housing, and we don’t have workforce housing. And I think the student housing thing with Folsom Lake College being such a great college there is an interesting idea, too.
So I think we have a lot of housing. Some people say we don’t have enough affordable housing. Other people say we have too many. So I think we definitely need to balance that.
We’re not meeting our minimum requirements on the one part of affordable housing. So we do need to keep that in mind.
I get a lot of people saying, “Well, just put it all down south of 50.” Well, that’s not fair either.
So, I will vote yes on development in this way, and I will vote no. A few years ago, I voted no on a project. I was the only one to vote no on a project because I did not think it was the right timing or the right place, particularly. And this is the apartments that are going on across from the prison.
But I also believe that I was in the minority on that. And so once the council made the decision as a whole, then I’m going to support the decision and I’m not going to be a communion about it, right? So that project is going forward, but I did vote no on it because I did not think it was the right place.
Lakeside, again, putting apartments right up there on East Bidwell, I would definitely have said no to it if we could and how we can. So now we can be thoughtful what goes there.
East Bidwell is kind of overrun with traffic. And I think that’s, to me, it’s more of a — I could probably 75% say no on any projects that are going to go there right now.
By SacRT, I think there’s some opportunities along Folsom Boulevard where we could put some multifamily affordable housing that won’t have great impacts on East Bidwell or my district, but can provide affordable housing.
So I think it’s a thoughtful decision, leadership opportunity, of what type of housing, where, timeline and location. I think really matters to reduce the traffic and any additional cars coming in.
So I think there’s not one answer of where I would put it. I think it’s when projects come to us or when we have opportunities that we see parking lots and things like that, that we could do something different with. It’s what is our vision and what would work there.
And I would like to see the council actually kind of create more of a vision of where we want these, and I think that’s another workshop that we can work toward having.
Q: Folsom residents value the city’s parks, trails and open spaces, neighborhoods, and overall sense of community. While issues such as e-bikes, homelessness, code enforcement and neighborhood safety continue to generate concerns, which quality of life issues do you believe require greater attention from City Hall? And what specifically would you do about them?
Rohrbough: I think you mentioned all the ones that I think are important. And I think this is, you know, we see trends. Four years ago, for me, what I heard mostly was about our homeless and transient population.
This four years later, I’m not hearing that as much because we have some sort of a control over it, right? And when something does pop up, we’re able to take accountability and fix it and help come up with solutions.
I think the e-bikes is a great example of a new trend that we’re seeing throughout the nation. And last year when this kind of became an issue in the fall, I’m on the 2×2 Committee, which means two council members and two school board members, their staff and our staff all meet every quarter, if not sooner, depending on if there’s an issue.
And this was an issue that I brought up during that meeting. Like, how can we bring more education to — obviously, first starts with education for the parents and the students, and then enforcement coming along with that.
So we worked with the school district. They were a great partner in educating, sending out information, posting all of this to try to get parents aware of what bikes were illegal, e-scooters are illegal, what are the rules, and then following up with our Police Department on actually going there and confiscating the ones that were illegal because some of the bikes that are ridden, you can’t ride until you’re 16, have a license, for example.
Or the scooters are — I forget all the dynamics, but I know that we have it up on our website if people want to get on the nitty-gritty on that.
But that education campaign, I believe, really helped set the tone of going forward. And then we saw an escalation. I think it calmed down for a little, but then we saw an escalation this spring.
And I think bringing a new chief on board, he needed a little time to catch up with that. This is a really big issue for Folsom, these quality-of-life issues.
We obviously had some kind of gang activity. I mean, I had one of my cousins had something thrown at her car as she drove by. That’s embarrassing. We don’t live in downtown some big huge city.
So having our Police Department be accountable to their actions and reactions and how can we do this without escalating it? And it’s not an uncomplicated thing, but we are actually discussing tonight again an ordinance, kind of beefing up our ordinance to give our police officers more resources.
But again, we need to balance that with not taking away the joy that seniors have being able to enjoy our trails with their e-bikes. So that’s a balance.
I think we’re moving in the right direction. We’re seeing improvement. I haven’t gotten near as many people upset about the e-bikers lately.
And really, it comes down to parenting. And sometimes our school district, our police officers, council members, the public are having to kind of take the role of that. And unfortunately, that’s just the way it is.
So these kind of issues will probably always come up, and it’s how we respond to it and how we react. And right now I think we’re seeing some positive things.
I think prosecuting one of the gentlemen or kids that threw a water balloon, I believe, that had a rock in it on a windshield at Palladio Garage, and making sure that we followed the legal pathway there, I do think that gets around and other kids hear it and then don’t want to take it that far.
So I think leveraging consequences is very effective with education campaigns.
So that was e-biking. Quality-of-life issues, like you said, parks, trails, we’re Distinct by Nature. That also means maintaining our trees or that kind of infrastructure. Protecting what we have. Reducing the fire ladders that we have, making sure that all of that is in place.
One of the great things about Folsom is, I mean, people move here, I think, because of safety and the schools, but they really move here because of the quality of life that Folsom provides.
And I think that’s what makes Folsom unique because we are focused on quality-of-life issues like Castle Park, like making sure there’s not transients at schools, making sure we’ve got a pulse on the e-bike situation, those kind of things that pop up.
So I would say the three things that are most important to me are fiscal responsibility, public safety and our quality of life. And all of that, infrastructure bleeds into all of that.
But I think the quality-of-life issues is something that I really care about.
Q: What should Folsom be doing to attract employers, restaurants, retail and other businesses that strengthen the city’s economy and generate revenue? At the same time, what could City Hall do better to support existing locally owned businesses?
Rohrbough: I think we’re doing a pretty good job of Folsom being Folsom. People want to come here, and I think that actually helps some of the business get over some of the obstacles that are in our way.
I think the biggest thing that we can do as a council right now, outside of kind of creating a new department, which means more money, and so we’ve got to be careful of that. I think we’re moving toward that direction. Maybe we’ll have a dedicated economic person or some kind of staff member that can really take the ball and run on that.
We’re not quite there because we want to make sure our finances are stable first for a few years. But I think the biggest thing that we can do is get out of their way.
And over and over I hear complaints, and I don’t know if the general public knows this. I know business owners know this. Anyone that’s trying to build an addition to a restaurant or some of the places that we know and love and we all visit have had issues with our city processes.
And I know that our staff is on it. They understand that this council, the majority of this council, is really pushing toward streamlining some of that and making sure it’s not about reducing fees or anything. Absolutely not. They pay for their permits. They pay for what they need to do, but making sure that the process is predictable and we can get things done in a timely manner.
And I’ve been pretty frustrated the last six months because I continue to hear this, and it’s been something I’ve been articulating to our staff over and over again.
And so I think there’s been others, too, with certain projects that have been coming through, and we need to — so I think we need to get this done. We need to figure out what’s going on.
Our department heads are on it. They understand that this is a priority and a vision of our council now, and I think we’re going to see some good improvement in the next six months to a year. And if not, then we’re going to continue to push until it happens because I think this is one of the biggest obstacles in our business community’s way.
So this is, again, I started, I think, at the beginning, that this was one of those unsexy kind of visions that I have for this city. But I think that, again, we have a council, and I run this way, is that I have a vision for the city, and it doesn’t mean and it doesn’t include having projects delayed for two years. So we’re going to fix that.
Q: If elected, what would be your three highest priorities during your term? And four years from now, what measurable results should voters use to determine whether you were successful?
Rohrbough: Great. I hadn’t thought of that question in that way. My priorities right now are quality-of-life issues in Folsom. I think that’s what we’re dealing with, like the e-bikers, things like that.
Continued focus on our fiscal responsibility and stability. I think that’s one of the things I championed from the beginning. I got a lot of pushback on it, but in the end, I think that is what has created the situation. Now we’re predictable on our expenses and our revenue, and we can continue to move forward positively.
And then, again, it’s public safety and making sure that our public safety is well-resourced and funded. I think there’s still some resources that we need for our public safety departments, but making sure we do that wisely.
Again, I really trust our two new chiefs. That is still a focus of mine, though, to maintain what we’ve kind of overcome and making sure that we have the funding to continue that in the future.
So I think — and then, you know, I think you said three, but infrastructure first. It’s one of my number one things.
So infrastructure first, how do we do it? Now again, these things are projects that take a lot of time, so we can do a lot of other things in the meantime, but making sure that we are like the squeaky wheel, right, that gets the oil.
And Empire Ranch, one of them, Alder Creek Parkway, making sure that as the development continues down there, that they are paying to complete these projects.
Prairie City Road is another one, working with the county to make sure, because they own half of it, they’re going to be responsible for half of that buildout, making sure that we stay on that priority list.
So I think what’s important about having me continue in this seat is I already have these regional experiences and connections. I also know what needs to get done, where the sticky points are.
I work really well with our city manager and our staff. We’re working well as a council, and we need to have that leadership moving forward and creating a vision, not just talking about it either.
I think I really thrive and strive for, let’s listen to what the public wants. Let’s figure out what the problem is. Let’s not just talk about it. Let’s figure out a solution. And even then, that’s not the stopping point. The solution is then delivering the results.
And I think the last couple years you’ve seen us deliver some results with some road improvements, these kind of things. Prairie City Road just got paid. Castle Park, the HOT team, all of these, like, some results.
And I think that’s what’s important to re-electing me, is that I’m not just running on a promise. I’m running on a verifiable — verifiable production. I mean, I can’t think of the word. My record is there.
So, yeah, those are the priorities going forward. There’s still a lot of things to do and building off of what I’ve been able to already advocate for and continue.
Q: In closing, is there an important issue facing Folsom that we haven’t asked you about or something about your candidacy that you want voters to know? This is also your opportunity to discuss your qualifications, endorsements or community support, and to tell voters why you believe you are the best choice to represent your district on the Folsom City Council.
Rohrbough: Well, I think we’ve covered a lot of the issues I think our residents really care about. I think they want accountability. They want a council member that really listens to them. I’ve shown that over the last four years.
I’ll meet with anybody. I talk to anybody. I love representing everybody, or people on all kind of sides of an issue. I really think that I bring a balanced approach to governing.
And while I was a great campaigner four years ago in order to beat out the incumbent, I think I’m still a great campaigner, but I also trust my decision. And what I trust and why I wanted to get involved and stay involved is that I trust that I always put our residents first.
And sometimes the decisions conflict. But in the end, the result of every decision is that it’s going to benefit the residents going forward.
And I value that in myself, and I think I value that in other council members and other leaders in the city.
I’m not looking for a step up. I’m looking to represent Folsom because I fell in love with the city six years ago, and I’m still in love with it. I love our home. I love where we live. I love all the quality-of-life issues that we have in Folsom, and it’s really what keeps us here. And I love serving the people of Folsom, period.
I have quite a few endorsements. I have Police Officers Association, the Middle Management Association, John McGinness, Josh Hoover, Roger Niello, I think our current mayor. I mean, there’s more endorsements.
But I think what’s important about being an incumbent in this round is you can look at the things that I said I was going to do four years ago, and I have touched on and improved every single one of the things I have said I was going to do, and I’m still going to do that.
This year, the issues are a little bit different than four years ago. It’s a little bit more infrastructure this year than homeless. It’s more quality-of-life issues than other things.
So you can look at all of the results and the improvements I’ve made in our district, in District 5 and around the city, the regional networks, the influence, the accessibility, the transparency.
A lot of people talk about transparency, and they say, “Oh, traffic’s bad,” but they don’t maybe have the solution and maybe have proven that they’ll keep pushing and directing and holding that vision until they see it through. And I have proven that almost every time.
So I hope that I can earn your vote. My website is electanna.com. So, pretty simple, pretty easy. And basically, I want to serve you for four more years.
I’m listening. I still care. And I’m not looking to go elsewhere. So this is where my husband and I have decided to really put our time and effort into.
Again, I love Folsom, and I think the people that actually resonate with me love Folsom, too.
So I think I touched on everything that you said I could touch on, and I just value anyone that listened this far. And I’ve really enjoyed being your city council member and vice mayor this year.
And I can’t wait to see what we can get done in the next four years. And that’s really why I’m running. I believe I have four more years of work to do and to put you first to make sure that we have kind of fixed some of the issues, those kind of tipping points, to make it even better in Folsom. Anna Rohrbough’s website is www.annarohrbough.com.
Copyright © 2026, Folsom Times, a digital product of All Town Media LLC. All rights reserved. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the publisher.
