Elk Grove’s Recently Purchased Parcel Bought, Sold Twice in Last Three Years

September 24, 2014 | A property and tax records search of the City of Elk Grove’s recently purchased parcel on Grant Line Road ...

September 24, 2014 |

A property and tax records search of the City of Elk Grove’s recently purchased parcel on Grant Line Road reveal the property has changed hands twice in a little over three years.

The parcel, which according to the city is just over 99-acres, is located at 10251 Grant Line Road and lies just out of Elk Grove’s current city limits. The parcel,  APN 134-0190-009-0000, was purchased by the city from Frank Loretz and Mundell Land and Livestock in August for $4.4 million.

According to public information posted with Sacramento County, the parcel has changed ownership twice since December 21, 2011.

According to a Trustee’s Deed Upon Sale filed and recorded on December 23, 2011 with the Sacramento County Recorder, APN134-0190-0000 sold at a foreclosure auction, trustee sale 11-00191-2. The reported sale amount on the document was $698,230.53.

The document lists Bay Sierra-Grant Line Properties, LLC, as the purchaser.

The next recorded transaction came on May 31, 2013 when a Grant Deed was filed and recorded at the Sacramento County Recorder’s office. The Grant Deed of the above noted parcel transferred from Bay Sierra-Grant Line to Frank Loretz, 10884 Franklin Blvd., Elk Grove CA 95757.

According to public information from the Sacramento County Tax Property, parcel number APN134-0190-009-0000 has a tax assessment value recorded as May 31, 2013 of $1,958,853.

After Bay Sierra-Grant Line's purchase, the city entered negotiations regarding the parcel during a closed session meeting on February, 13 2013. 

Subsequent to the Loretz’s purchase of the parcel, negotiations between the city and Loretz resumed at the September 25, 2013 special meeting agenda of the Elk Grove City Council. That meeting also listed real property negotiations with Leonard and Betsy Kendrick regarding APN 134-0190-010-000, 10313 Grant Line Road, which is directly adjacent to the city's recently purchased parcel.  

Negotiations between the city and Loretz were also listed on the city council’s special meeting agenda for August 13, 2014. A special meeting was called as the city council has historically been in summer recess for the first meeting of August.

According to Elk Grove spokesperson Christine Brainerd, the closing date on the sale is scheduled for November 1. She also said the city is “procuring an appraisal during this due diligence period.”   

Click on images to enlarge. 

Post a Comment Default Comments


Anonymous said...

HOLY MOLY....we paid twice the appraised value???!!! Then when you add closing costs/fee, the total amount paid by the city will be close to 6 million. That's 3x's the value. This is CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR. I wonder if this Frank guy is someone's brother-in-law? Seriously???? It is high time we have a citizen driven meeting in where WE get to talk and THEY have to listen. It is bone head moves like this that hopefully get some people to the polls to vote out these bums. How can they sleep at night knowing they planned for months to buy this land and then suddenly place it on the agenda the week of the MLS visit? Seems like a "created" or manipulated the situation for their own good. Can this land purchased be stopped??

Anonymous said...

I believe this land was part of the SOI area. Huh? This just smells bad.

J.R. Ewing said...

Negotiating for a year and a half without an appraisal report? Jeez, only in the public sector!

Anonymous said...

They did WHAT???

the city is “procuring an appraisal during this due diligence period.”

They paid $6 MILLION prior to getting the property appraised????

Only from the sister city to the Kingdom of Zamunda.



Naomi said...

Entering a sales agreement and agreeing to a price BEFORE the property is appraised?

Did anyone do ANY research on the history of this land?

Is Loretz a relative of Pat Hume's?

This city really takes the cake on bonehead moves. One after another, the hits keep coming. Where's Dick Clark?

I totally understand now, all these naysayers that keep telling us the council is bankrupting our city. I just thought they were disgruntled unemployed malcontents with an ax to grind.
Now I see they have been right all along.

This council needs to be replaced ASAP with people who will watch how our money is spent.

This sale needs to be stopped! It needs to be renegotiated by a professional.

Anonymous said...




Elk Grove ALSO KNOWN AS Stockton North.


Anonymous said...


Proud Heritage, Bright Future?

Elk Grove Thriving?

A City by the developers, of the developers and FOR the developers!

Increase in armed robberies, assaults and various street crimes

More sprawl, horrendous congestion and smog.

$100 million soccer stadium

Paid $6 MILLION for a piece of land that sold for $700,000 three years prior.

Garish 70 - 100 foot tall lighted freeway monument signs

Sister city to the Kingdom of Zamunda

Octopus Civic Center

Amusement park right across from single family homes in Madeira "the Jewel of Elk Grove".

Visions of the Olympic Trials.

3,600 units of high density very low and low income housing on the way to "Meridian" (the Southeast Plan Area) - Hood of the future to be known as Mack Road South.

Trash blowing in the wind,flat, bland, hot, windy sprawling, fast food joints, nail salons, gun stores, smoke shops, vape palaces, strip malls, cheap looking high density low income apartment projects, lack of symphony light opera and ballet, very few upscale restaurants, dollar stores, cookie cutter houses.


No, Elk Grove brought to you by the rubber stampers.

Stockton and Modesto have performing arts centers, orchestras and other cultural amenities.

Stockton and Modesto have high quality local restaurants.

Elk Grove has fast food joints, chain restaurants and convenience store cuisine.

Bring on more garish 100 foot tall freeway signs, low income housing projects, liquor stores, fast food joints, shooting ranges, gun stores, smoke shops and nail salons.

Elk Grove Thriving!

Proud Heritage, Bright Future?


J.R. Ewing said...

Once the property owner knew he was dealing with the deep pocketed city, well...I'm sure the price shot up big time.

Anonymous said...

You can hear Mr. Humes, Detricks & Garys ad libs & comments regarding this on the video below. Go to approx. 1:45:10 time slot....

According to Mr. Hume we got a steal, he says land values are not cheap. This is about a 1/3 of the cost of property in the city limits. Mr. Detrick added that services were also available & Hume concurred. Sooo people, this was a once in a lifetime deal and we should be thanking them for their expertise. They don't need an appraisal, Mr. Hume told them it was a great deal. Just sign here....


Pragmatic Paul said...

OMG! - There has to be an ulterior motive here to buy this land for such an excessive sum.

I'll give the city council the benefit of the doubt here, but they need to explain to the citizens what's going on here.
This just doesn't seem right.

Pete Townsend said...

The stuff this council does on a regular basis is enough to make anyone apoplectic.
But, remember this: the council is a reflection of the money that got them there.
The Building Industry Association, RegionBuilders, the Chamber of Commerce, the Republican AND Democratic parties...these groups all represent one thing only, and that's their individual greed over the collective needs.
Do you really think that the likes of Nancy Chaires will make one whit of difference?
She was just endorsed by the Chamber of Commerce.

Meet the new boss...same as the old boss.

Steve said...

I believe our council and staff have some explaining to do.

Anonymous said...

Trust Hume the least. He is old money, old developer, old ties to old Elk Grove. He has the most to gain from sneaking up on a new SOI scheme.

Watch how Hume waffles in his endorsements, usually, 'endorse WITH RESERVATIONS' or some such way to be both and neither, whenever he needs to in the future.

He has old landed gentry on his side as well as developer connections which go back decades.

Be very watchful of Hume.

This whole deal should be stopped before it is finalized.

More investigation is necessary to dig into the roots of who is connected to Loretz, who he is fronting for.

Anonymous said...

Quote of the Day:

"CBS13 asked Elk Grove City Manager Laura Gill says if it was reasonable to think the value could double in one year.
“I don’t know; I’m not a real estate expert,” she said. “That is the negotiated price between the city and the property owner.”

Laguna Pete said...

Gill threw her bosses under the bus last night on Ch 13 saying they all approved the purchase of the land w/ full disclosure.

Again, our city looks so foolish to the rest of the region. How long will we put up with these bafoons?

Anonymous said...

Every time they open their mouths it's a different story. I watched the City Council discussion last night regarding the Wayfinding Signs and agree with the above...like a bunch of Buffoons, way out of their league.

Thomas A. Anderson said...

If Laura Gill is, in her words, "not a real estate expert", why was she the one conducting the negotiations? This thing is beginning to smell like the fish in the refrigerator.

Anonymous said...

If the cost of this land was $4.4M, what was the other $1.6M that was borrowewd for?

Camel said...

Laura Gill looked like a fool last night. But the bigger fools are the Council for approving this sale.

Gill needs to go and last night was that straw!

Bob L said...

Correct me if I'm wrong but isn't Laura Gill's name on all those closed item sessions related to real estate procurements for the city? Isn't she the chief negotiator?

Now she says, she's "not a real estate expert." Then why are you buying all these properties on behalf of our city at costs exceeding tens of millions of dollars?

Perhaps an expert could have saved us those millions. Time for her to go! NOW!!!!

Take the members of the council that approved all these transactions with you.

Anonymous said...

It seems like a recurring nightmare, Elk Grove embarrasses itself on regional tv.

Time to make changes.

lynn said...

More often than not following a staff report council direction is requested. Staff makes few recommendations and if they ever do more often than not council disregards them. Gill is not fully responsible for this she has 5bosses. Of course she will end up holding the bag of blame..but I heard 5 votes of support. This will be another blame game. Listen to video last night regarding who holds the blame for lack of light rail. Empire building has not served residents well. Unfortunately empty council chambers with few residents attending doubt council will change. Maybe a write in candidate should be the option for us all this November.

Connie said...

There is someone over on Elk Grove Online who posts under the name of EG4ever who says Lynn and other posters on EGO and on EGN don’t know what we are talking about regarding the purchase of this land.

The fact remains we don’t have all the facts here and the city was less than forthcoming. Laura Gill’s terse response to the reporter was indicative of what we residents get. And I thought it was me!

How does anyone know if we paid too much for the land if no one knows the current appraised value? Shouldn't that be a starting point?

Aren't these fair questions to ask before spending taxpayer money?

Mainstreet GOP Dude said...

Bring it on!

If EG4ever has some further insight on this purchase, post it and share it and defuse the situation. If not, it suggests that EG4ever is either bluffing, or worse, a plant from the city.

Laguna Pete said...

I visited the aforementioned website and read EG4ever's comments. Personally glad he's not commenting here, he can just stay over there. But, he's /she's welcome here, anytime.

I'd like him/her to know I don't appreciate my friends being referred to as "dumb," and know I use this blog to comment where I can't appear at city council as I work nights. I watch them Friday mornings at my leisure. I usually share the feelings of the majority of the comments here though.

I believe the council and staff are leading this town into bankruptcy with all the frivolous spending, 100 acre parcels outside the city limits at twice the purchase price of a year ago....more on this later.

Let's not forget the crazy money spent for Haddad (sp?) to design our civic center, a design that was trashed by the council. The $700,00 feasibility study for the aquatics center, that a child could see was money wasted. The over $600,00 for "Way Finding" signs that shouldn't need to be explained. The list goes on.

The activists complain here because no one listens at city hall. I've heard the rude comments towards the citizens when someone states an unpopular opinion. - I'm going to assume that EG4ever has seldom if ever been to a city council meeting, and if so, I'll bet he didn't have an issue he felt strongly about.

I bet if he did, he'd be on this website sharing his experiences.
Now back to the 100 acre property and us "dumb" people. - Look, we may not buy and sell real estate regularly, as you claim to, and perhaps our terminology as to "assessed," "appraised" and "market analysis" may be misused, the gist of the argument remains valid. We seem to be paying much more for the property than it's worth.

The city is getting an "appraisal" done according to Ms. Gill. You say that an appraisal is usually done only if there is a loan. We are paying cash, so wouldn't that be a waste of our tax money? You say land appraisals are "much more expensive," more than on a home. Why are we doing this if it's not needed to establish the property value?

Later on you say that you "don't know what this piece of land is worth and that's why you have an appraisal." - You contradict yourself. - You also state that "the appraised value is the final determining factor." - Another contradiction in your statements.

You comment that the $44K an acre is a deal compared to 100 acres of land inside the city limits. Ok, so "who lacked the vision" on that one? - Our city has no vision, it sees only what is directly in front of them and dictated by the developer dollar. If the city was smart they would have hired an agent to inquire as to the availability of this property for an "undisclosed" buyer. Gill negotiating undoubtedly gave the seller all the leverage he needed to put the screws to us. - More poor choices by the city.

And I have to disagree with your statement that housing prices are up 50%-100% from spring of 2013. I only wish that was true. yes, they've gone up considerably, but not that much. I truly wish that was accurate.

CSGUTZ was right when she stated this mess could have all been averted if the city had had some public disclosure, another fault of the city.

I guess the bottom line was stated by Ms. Gill herself when she was asked on camera why the city paid twice the assessed value for the land and she couldn't answer because she wasn't an expert. - The city failed again. They need(ed) an expert. - EG4ever, maybe you should call Ms. Gill and offer your expertise, we certainly need it and our city should be willing to pay you handsomely, they always do.

Anonymous said...

The most Important Question...why didn't the City, which knew it was for sale , just buy it from Bay Sierra for $1,900,000 and save the taxpayers over $2,000,000 dollars...

Anonymous said...

Procedures for purchasing land are pretty clear cut relating to Assessed value and Appraised value. Don't have to write a book to explain it. There was misinformation IMO and ending with an attack of EGN & some on EGO, pretty much negates the EG4ever comments.

Still would like to know what the purchase price of $4.4M and monies borrowed in the amount of $6.M was for. That's hugh...$1.6M unexplained as far as I know.

Connie said...

Laguna Pete,

Thank you for your comments here and explanations. I asked questions because I don’t understand either why we paid so much for the land and you make a good point that the city of Elk Grove is a deep pocket; so whomever the attorney was who negotiated for Frank Loretz earned his fee.

Other questions include why the city borrowed six million from the drainage fund when the purchase price was $4.4 million. Here is the explanation straight from the city’s resolution:

WHEREAS, the associated closing costs are anticipated to be less than $50,000;


WHEREAS, the estimated remaining funds of approximately $1,565,000 will be available to study use alternatives; [End of copy]

I thought we were told that the land was going to be used for the youth sports complex and/or soccer fields. Why another $1.5 million for more studies? Missing above is the word feasibility. I think the city staff knows that word starts the sparks with us citizens.

Also, Gary Davis reported out that the city is going to file a lawsuit and that “we” could find out what it was when it is filed. In the past, Gary has usually downplayed those announcements. Not this one; he seemed to be saying, “Wait for it! You will be pleased.”

SteveB6509 said...

It may be time for a grand jury and an investigation. Something illegal must have happened for us to pay so much more than the true value. This goes beyond someone just resigning.

Anonymous said...

Ask Stockton how pro sports teams create revenue. They have new wonderful pro baseball stadium and team, a new arena and pro hockey team and now they are bankrupt. We should learn from others mistakes, not repeat them. Duh!

Anonymous said...

Just a guess, but it sounds like the city would have claimed eminent domain had the seller not agreed to sell it.

Anonymous said...

But it's not in the city limits so they couldn't do that could they? Is that not threatening the land owner...does our city resort to those tactics? A new area for me obviously.

lynn said...

Corrupt as Bell, Bankrupt as Vallejo. Maybe one of these days the evidence will present itself..this is just my opinion of course....based on the spending habits of council and the less than transparent behavior.....

Anonymous said...

I thought the CSD provides the services for youth sports, aquatics and other recreation programs? Why is the city looking to do the same service that the CSD does so well? It seems like the city is duplicating services and getting into a business or service that is already covered and doing well. They should be focusing on other amenities that would enhance the community like an art center, performing arts, concert venue if they want to make the city a destination city which I disagree with. I just find this to make no sense why they are buying property to build assets that support a business function of the CSD.

Anonymous said...




It is not too late to get out of this transaction.


Anonymous said...

Elk Grove is a hick city that is trying its best to become Vallejo East or Stockton North.

Anonymous said...

Anon 19:39 They're in too deep to back out now and besides they would have to eat crow. Not only that, but Nunes has already ordered Davis, Cooper & Detrick their MLS shirts that will be presented at Graces Coffee in December. Balloons will be flying, so taxpayers get your check books out for those upcoming hugh tax bills to pay for their pie in the sky dreams.

Naomi said...

City Council and Staff:

It's not too late to back out now. It's NEVER too late to do the right thing. There are a lot of like parcels in the surrounding urban services area than can be used for youth/adult athletic fields. We never needed 100 acres anyway. - 50 would be plenty for all our field and amenities needs. Time to show some good judgment and let's get out of this deal now. It's flaws have been exposed. - Don't make it worse just to save face.

We'll see if the support shown for Mr. Lee's article about making EG better for the citizens and our youth is heeded or the pie-in-the-sky attitude continues to prevail.

When did it get so hard to simply do what is right?

Anonymous said...

How true Naomi. I believe the culture at City Hall is faulty. That can be seen in project-by-project decision-making that neither considers what residents want nor accounts for the cumulative problems brought on by those decisions. The council needs to be taken to task for a failure to deliberate in a transparent manner. The performance of the city staff and council would most likely be given a "F" by the county Powers that be.

Follow Us



Elk Grove News Minute

All previous Elk Grove News Minutes, interviews, and Dan Schmitt's Ya' Gotta be Schmittin' Me podcasts are now available on iTunes

Elk Grove News Podcast