For a lot of people in Folsom, South of 50 probably feels like it just happened.
One day there was mostly open land south of Highway 50. Then came the roads, thousands of homes, more traffic, more construction and more pressure on schools, parks, public safety and infrastructure.
Now residents are asking questions that should have been asked much earlier.
Can our roads handle it?
Do we have enough water long term?
Is the infrastructure really keeping up?
And how did all of this get approved in the first place?
The answer is that South of 50 did not happen overnight.
It was built over decades through annexation, planning decisions, development agreements, political relationships, campaign spending and hundreds of votes most people never saw.
I know because for part of that time, I was sitting on the Folsom City Council.
And once you sit behind the dais, you start seeing things differently.
What I Saw From the Inside
Before I was elected, I knew developers, unions, businesses and special-interest groups were involved in politics.
What surprised me was how small the circle really was.
The same names kept appearing; developers, consultants, attorneys, former City officials, Chamber interests, building-industry representatives and commissioners.
It usually wasn’t dramatic.
You simply started noticing who called whom, who got meetings, who sat on boards, who was appointed to commissions, who represented developers before the City and who suddenly had political organizations spending money for them.
There was an establishment in Folsom that understood City Hall very well.
I was never really part of it.
I self-funded my campaigns because I wanted to make decisions without worrying about who helped pay to get me elected.
That gave me independence.
It also made me inconvenient.
I asked questions. I challenged things. I wasn’t afraid of losing a donor because I didn’t have one.
And over time, I became convinced that some of the same interconnected political circles did not want me elected in the first place and later wanted me out.
Follow the People
Start with former Folsom Mayor and Councilmember Bob Holderness.
After public office, Holderness became a land-use attorney and consultant. His professional biography identifies AKT Development and Elliott Homes among his clients and describes his work on a roughly 3,600-acre Folsom annexation project. Reporting has also connected him professionally to WestLand Capital Partners, which today controls a significant portion of the Folsom Plan Area.
Then there is Martha Lofgren.
Lofgren served as Folsom City Attorney from 1994 to 2000 and City Manager from 2000 to 2006, important years in the early planning of South of 50.
After leaving City Hall, she entered private land-use work. She was later identified as counsel for The New Home Company, and her firm publicly documents her work for Dignity Health on the Folsom Ranch Medical Center, including entitlement, CEQA and development-agreement matters.
Former Folsom planner Mike McDougall later moved into private development management and was identified as part of the WestLand Landowners Group associated with Folsom Ranch.
None of this means anyone did something illegal.
But residents should understand the revolving door.
People who worked inside City Hall know the process, the staff, the personalities and how to navigate the system.
That knowledge has value.
Now Follow the Money
If you only look at today’s City Council, you’re missing most of the story.
This goes back decades.
Kerri Howell. Steve Miklos. Andy Morin. Jeff Starsky.
Those names dominated Folsom politics during the period when South of 50 moved from concept to reality.
A Sacramento News & Reviews’ review of campaign finance records found that South of 50 landowners and developers contributed more than $20,000 to the Folsom Chamber’s political action committee during the period examined.
That same PAC reportedly spent roughly $54,000 supporting Howell, Miklos, Morin and Starsky.
Most of that spending was through independent expenditures.
I’m not saying somebody bought a vote.
I’m saying development and business interests have spent money for years trying to influence who sits on the Folsom City Council.
That pattern continued.
In 2018, North State Building Industry Association reportedly spent roughly $55,000 supporting Kerri Howell, Sarah Aquino and Mike Kozlowski.
That same election cycle reportedly saw about $104,000 spent attacking Planning Commissioner Aaron Ralls, who was running as a controlled-growth candidate.
Think about that.
More than $100,000 against a candidate for Folsom City Council.
Why is one local council seat worth that much money?
That’s a question voters should be asking.
Then in 2022, building-industry and Chamber-related organizations spent approximately $17,126 supporting Sarah Aquino and $18,252 supporting Mike Kozlowski.
In 2024, approximately $60,461 in business, Chamber and building-industry independent expenditures supported Justin Raithel.
That’s roughly $96,000 in outside business and building-industry spending supporting three members of today’s City Council in the elections that put them there.
Those were independent expenditures, not direct checks to the candidates.
But the larger point remains.
Developers and builders understand exactly how much local elections matter.
And they should.
Councilmembers vote on development agreements, zoning, Specific Plan amendments, infrastructure financing, Community Facilities Districts, fees and tentative maps.
There can be enormous amounts of money riding on five votes.
What Happens When You Challenge the Establishment?
This part is personal.
During my time in Folsom politics, so-called anonymous complaints were filed against me with the California Fair Political Practices Commission.
I had to defend myself.
It cost me thousands of dollars.
And after all the time, expense and distraction, I was not found to have committed the wrongdoing those complaints suggested.
That taught me something.
A complaint does not necessarily have to succeed to work politically.
The complaint itself becomes the weapon.
You spend money defending yourself. You lose time. Rumors start. Opponents repeat the allegation.
And if the person behind the complaint is “anonymous,” the public may never know whether it came from a concerned resident or someone with a political motive.
Later, as I started connecting the dots around people who had worked against me politically, familiar names came up.
Local Realtor Dan McNeil had political connections to former Councilmember Steve Miklos.
Gary Richards had connections to former Councilmember Kerri Howell.
There were others too, many tied into overlapping political, civic and business circles.
I believe those connections matter.
But connections alone do not prove who authored an anonymous complaint, and I won’t claim something as fact unless I can prove it.
I can, however, tell you what I experienced once I was sitting on the Council.
When I announced my intention to relocate my family while still choosing to maintain a residence in Folsom so I could complete my elected term, then Mayor Sarah Aquino took the position that I should no longer remain in office.
She pushed as hard as she could to remove me.
I had a lease prepared so I could continue maintaining a residence in Folsom and finish the term voters elected me to serve.
That didn’t seem to matter.
I was removed from the boards and regional assignments I had been serving on. And within roughly five days of announcing my intentions, my name and photograph had already been removed from the City’s website.
Before the situation had even fully played out, it felt to me like the decision had already been made.
I was out.
Maybe others will describe those events differently.
I’m telling you how it looked from where I was sitting.
I had been elected by Folsom voters. I wanted to finish the term. Yet the machinery moved remarkably fast in the opposite direction.
And before anyone asks; yes, I moved back to Folsom. This is my home again, which is also why I care deeply about where this city goes from here.
That experience stayed with me.
Because by then, I had already seen how local political pressure works.
Understand What the Building Industry Is Doing in Folsom Politics
North State BIA is not some random political organization.
It represents builders, developers, contractors and businesses whose livelihoods are directly affected by land-use decisions.
Its members care about zoning, fees, infrastructure requirements, entitlements and where housing can be built.
Naturally, they care who sits on the City Council.
Over multiple election cycles, North State BIA and related Chamber political organizations have spent substantial amounts supporting some candidates and opposing others.
Its membership includes WestLand Capital Partners, and its broader industry network includes Elliott Homes, New Home Company and other major builders.
WestLand’s Rob Aragon has participated in BIA programming involving acquisitions, entitlements and financing.
So, when BIA spends money in a Folsom election, this isn’t a disconnected organization parachuting into town.
The industry it represents has direct business interests in how Folsom grows.
There’s nothing illegal about that.
What bothers me is how little the average voter knows about it.
Most people see the candidate’s name.
Very few flip the mailer over and read who actually paid for it.
Even fewer look up who funds the committee.
If a building-industry group spends $20,000, $50,000 or $100,000 trying to influence a local election, don’t immediately assume corruption.
Ask a simpler question:
Why is this candidate so important to them?
Look at the Planning Commission
This isn’t just about City Council.
The current chair of the Folsom Planning Commission, Eileen Reynolds, previously served as chair of the California Building Industry Association and worked as vice president of government affairs for Tejon Ranch Company, a major land development company.
Another current commissioner, Amanda Ross, operates a consulting business working in land-use planning, CEQA, annexations and LAFCo matters.
That experience may be useful.
But residents should know about it.
Who sits on Planning matters.
Who appoints them matters.
Their professional backgrounds matter.
And when you put the larger network on one page, many of the same names keep overlapping: former City officials, developer representatives, building-industry leaders, land-use attorneys and political organizations.
Any one relationship may be perfectly normal.
But together, they show how small the circle really is.
Look at the Timeline
Folsom approved the South 50 Specific Plan in June 2011.
LAFCo approved annexation in January 2012.
Major land transactions followed.
City financing documents now say WestLand affiliates began acquiring property in the Folsom Plan Area in 2012 and ultimately accumulated nearly 2,400 acres.
That land is planned for roughly 8,350 homes and around 1.2 million square feet of commercial, office and industrial development.
That’s a massive amount of value.
And South of 50 did not stop being a political issue after annexation.
Specific Plan amendments continued.
Development agreements continued.
Infrastructure financing continued.
Community Facilities District decisions continued.
Thousands of units kept moving through the system.
And the political spending continued.
Residents Experience It Differently
Residents don’t experience development through a staff report.
They experience it sitting in traffic.
They experience it when East Bidwell backs up.
They experience it when another thousand homes appear.
They experience it when infrastructure feels behind.
They experience it when they start asking whether we really have enough water for continued growth.
Then they ask:
How did this happen?
Part of the answer is simple.
The people with the biggest financial interest in development have been watching City Hall very closely for a very long time.
Most residents haven’t.
Turn Over the Mailer
Here’s one thing I wish every Folsom voter would do.
The next time a glossy campaign mailer shows up telling you who is going to “protect Folsom,” flip it over.
Read the fine print.
Who paid for it?
If it’s a committee, look up the committee.
Who funds it?
Then keep paying attention after Election Day.
Who gets appointed to Planning?
Who votes on development agreements?
Who votes on Specific Plan amendments?
Who appears before Council representing developers?
Who gets hired after leaving City Hall?
You don’t have to assume everybody is corrupt.
Just stop assuming everything is random.
Be Careful Who You Vote For
Serving on the Folsom City Council changed how I look at local government.
I saw good people doing good work.
But I also saw how much relationships, access and political money matter.
That’s why I’m writing this.
I’m not against every house.
I’m not saying every developer is bad.
I’m not saying every politician supported by the building industry is compromised.
I’m saying residents deserve to understand how the system works.
If every relationship is appropriate, disclose it.
If every vote is based on merit, explain it.
If every appointment is the right one, defend it.
Transparency should not scare anybody.
South of Highway 50 has permanently changed Folsom.
The next round of decisions will shape this city for decades.
Traffic.
Water.
Housing.
Infrastructure.
Schools.
Parks.
Public safety.
Quality of life.
Before you vote, know who you’re voting for.
Know who wants them elected.
Know who is spending the money.
And ask what those interests have riding on the outcome.
Because while most of us were working, raising families, sitting in traffic and living our lives, a very organized political and development network was paying close attention to Folsom City Hall.
I know.
I sat inside it.
And once you’ve seen it from behind the dais, you don’t look at local politics the same way again.
Roger Gaylord is a Folsom resident who served on Folsom City Council from 2016 to 2020. He previously served as City of Folsom Utility Commissioner and has served on several boards over recent years.
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.
The above commentary was written by its author and submitted to Folsom Times. The views and opinions expressed in community commentary submissions are that of the authors and do not reflect the views and opinions of Folsom Times, its management, staff, stakeholders or advertisers.
