Elk Grove City Council Removes Cosumnes River From SOI Application

Before a standing-room only audience, the Elk Grove City Council decided last night to remove the Cosumnes River floodplain from its s...



Before a standing-room only audience, the Elk Grove City Council decided last night to remove the Cosumnes River floodplain from its sphere of influence(SOI) application with the Sacramento LAFCO. The SOI is the mechanism whereby a community moves to annex property.

The SOI process has been something the city has been working on since 2006 during which time the boundaries have shifted.

Prior to the city council meeting a rally and press conference was held outside city hall where council member Gary Davis spoke in favor of removing the floodplain and urged on the audience. Many of the people in attendance were from the Sacramento County communities of Wilton and Franklin who supported removal of the floodplain and carried placards.

One of the more pointed placards said "No Humeville in Wilton," a direct reference to council member Pat Hume who has been a leading proponent of Elk Grove's SOI.

After a presentation from the planning department, Hume quickly addressed an e-mail correspondence he received asserting that because his extended family owns property adjacent to the SOI area created a conflict of interest.

"Yes my stepfather does own property in the transition zone," Hume said. Hume went on to say that based on counsel from Elk Grove City Attorney Susan Cochran, there is no conflict of interest because there is no blood relationship.

"We are not blood relatives," Hume asserted. "We have no financial interest."

After hearing from over two dozen people comment of the application, the council started their deliberation which at times was contentious.

Leading the charge was Davis who has consistently said the city should not be wasting resources on this process and should instead focus its attention on more pressing issues like correcting the imbalance of residents and jobs in Elk Grove.

“It is a drain on time and resources,” Davis said. “It is a liability.”

Davis went on the reference an oft used term during the meeting by several speakers who called the Cosumnes River a jewel. “Somebody will grab that jewel and sell it,” Davis said.

Countering Davis was Hume who said much of the opposition to the SOI was based on misconceptions and fear. Hume said the SOI does not mean the city will annex the property in the SOI.

“There is a lot of fear of what is going on,” Hume said. “The fear is unfounded.”

After giving a lengthy presentation on the history of SOI, Hume said it actually represents a long-range planning tool and should not be scrapped.

Mayor Sophia Scherman made the first motion on the matter that would have left the SOI intact and strengthen language to assure there would be no development in the floodplain.

Davis sharply criticized Scherman motion to strengthen the language as being vague and subject to interpretation.

“Here is the problem,” Davis said. “Shall turns in to should be turns in to ‘never mind’,” Davis said.

Davis also chided Scherman for her suggestion that a decision be delayed so more information could be gathered. “We’ve talked about this for two years, what is it you need,” he queried.

Davis then made a motion to remove the floodplain from the SOI application. In a vote 3-2 vote with Hume and Scherman in opposition, the motion passed.

The audience erupted into a loud round of applause.

Afterwards a clearly upset Scherman decried the vote. “Sadly it tells the landowners you have no right to do what you want with your land,” she said.

Post a Comment Default Comments

15 comments

Phillip Stark said...

The entire SOI should have been tabled... not just the floodplain. It's a victory... but winning a battle does not equate to winning a war.

SacramentoCrash said...

What is with this city? They can't even get it right with what they have.

What do they want?

Miles of sprawl connecting south Sac with Stockton?

Sarah Johnson said...

Well said, Phillip! I couldn't agree more.

wickedvision said...

The Wednesday night EG City Council meeting was a well executed political drama directed by the members of the City Council. I believe the council has obtained the exact expansion of the sphere of influence they really wanted from the beginning. They never wanted the flood plain. Who would. They really wanted the center tier of land; from grant line up to the flood plain east and west of Hwy 99. I knew the fix was in the minute that Taro Echiburu told all in attendance that the City/City Council had allocated some federal funds to pay for the unfinished SOI feasibility study. These funds were allocated the morning of the same day the City Council was to discuss the future of the SOI. Supposedly the whole SOI could have been scrapped at the meeting. The council had already decided the SOI would go forward before they heard the citizens at the meeting. I believe the Council had included the flood plain from the beginning to keep the people focused upon it while they continued to focus upon the center tier. I feel for all the people of Wilton and the farmers that were used as pawns by the council. Keeping everyone focused upon the flood plain was important for them to get what they really wanted. In the end, they pulled it off masterfully. Now, if the citizens that live within Elk Grove city and the center tier would get together, they could really stop this insane expansion of the city. Expect a real fight from the council and don't be fooled by their good cop/bad cop approach to manipulating people.

Sarah Johnson said...

It is very concerning if we really were "played" by the Elk Grove City Council. I would like to hear more if anyone has any actual Facts to back that up. We should focus on getting the remaining SOI expansion shelved, and I believe we have a chance to do that now. Take the fight to LAFCO and the County Board of Supervisors now. I do want to point out that the City did not actually "get" anything yet.

charon said...

If the City Council played the crowd on April 14, the Mayor and Mr. Hume deserve an Academy Award.

wickedvision said...

Hello Sarah,

The city has silenced the vocal majority by removing the flood plain. After that decision was presented, the hall emptied out and only 4 people remained to discuss other items. The anti flood plain people were placated and nobody else cares about the rest of the annexation. It was a beautiful piece of strategy by the council. But if you watch the video of the council meeting, you can hear Taro when he makes the statement about getting the federal funds the same morning of the council meeting. The funds were distributed my the city folks. There was no way they were really voting on scrapping the total SOI after forking over $30,000.00 the same morning to complete the feasibility study. We were played and placated. If you want to see just how dishonest they are watch the portion of the video that covers 10.2 the utility tax increase. There is absolutely no reason they have to increase taxes or sources of taxes to protect the $600,000.00 they said was at risk. They can amend the language and protect the $600,000.00 for nothing. It just has to go on the ballot. The biggest concern people in and about EG need to have is the credibility and integrity of our council.

Sarah Johnson said...

I did watch the meeting live and I do believe you about that grant money. Have to wonder if that was the same grant money Sophia was telling people about days before the meeting?

Malleus Codex said...

It is quite simple, folks....VOTE THEM ALL OUT ASAP ! ! ! !

wickedvision said...

wgallup.. the ones that deserves the oscar is Steve Detrick. He must have had a total epiphany from the time the meeting began until he cast the vote that took the flood plain out. This would be funny like a joke if it were not so deceptive. This is the man that stated before, on TV, and during the meeting that he didn't know enough about the issue to make any decisions. It was like we were supposed to believe he lived in wonderland all this time. But when it came down to time to vote, he made it official to scrap the flood plain but keep all only property that could be built upon in the SOI. Yep, the man must have learned so very between the time, after all the speakers when he said he didn't have enough information to make a decision, until some 45 minutes to an hour later when he cast the vote that sent all the flood plain people home with smiles on their faces. Who builds in flood plains? They played us just the way people wanted them to play. So now Elk Grove can expand into the middle area and build whatever they want. I am sure Pat Hume is laughing is proverbial back side off and they are all patting themselves on the back.

wickedvision said...

Wayne, the one that deserves an oscar is Steve Detrick. He professed his lack of knowledge and information about the SOI before the meeting in front of news cameras and after the public comment portion of the council meeting. Did he have an epiphany from the times he made those statements and cast the deciding vote? Don't get me wrong, I am glad he voted down the flood plain. I just think it was all a well choreographed play from the beginning. A play that used people's emotions, time and energy to make it appeared they were really listening to the people. When all the time they were keeping their eyes on what they really wanted. The center tier for expansion. Where did anyone get the idea that Elk Grove must have further expansion? Do the people want an expanded EG? Do we want the center tier to grow to look more like Elk Grove city? Do you want city and its problems moved out further? I would think the council would want to protect people outside of EG's present SOI from suffering the same blight the city has become. What do others think?

Elk Grove Politics said...

wickedvision: I beg to differ. This was a stunning defeat for Hume. He thought he had it because he thought he could bring Cooper around. All you had to do was watch him. Hume was lobbying Cooper all night. I guess Cooper wasn't buying what Hume was selling. (And neither did the majority of people in the room. It is no secret that Hume loves to hear himself talk. It is like, "If I vote your way, will you please shut up!")

As far as Detrick is concerned, he deliberated, as required by the Brown Act, in an open meeting. Not so in the past. (No deliberation, the motion made, the second right on cue, vote against the citizens, with backdoor deal written all over it.)

When Detrick realized that the market study did not include the floodplain, and the results had no bearing on it, as he said many times, he didn't have a reason pro or con, so he voted to remove the floodplain from the SOI.

Detrick knew full well that the cost of the EIR would have been tens of thousands more if the floodplain was included. Not to mention the fight with the county of Sacramento and at the LAFCo level. So he did us taxpayers a favor in that $250K EIR bill we are going to pay.

But make no mistake about it, Hume got his come-upings, and as he is used to in the past, he couldn't talk his way into this one!

wickedvision said...

So Eye On EG--what becomes of the rest of the SOI? More city expansion? More city cost? More of everything that has taken the simple joy out of Elk Grove. Is that what people want? Is that what you want to happen?

Elk Grove Politics said...

vw: I venture to guess most Elk Grove residents, if they know about it, do not want the SOI and would prefer it shelved. And many have asked at the meetings for the SOI question to be on the ballot. The former would never happen at the city council level. Off to LAFCo if you want that. The latter wouldn't happen either.

It is the lawsuit that is sure to come that I am most concerned with and how much that is going to cost us. With the floodplain out, and with public outcry, LAFCo could pull the boundary back to Grantline, or deny it in its entirety. But I don't see that happening.

And then of course, there is that word Hume promised might not happen: Annexation! This is all about annexation and it is insulting to those of us who are following this SOI very closely for him to continually say it isn't.

The good news is that question does go before the voters. But how much of our money will be spent before we even vote yes or no on annexation.

If planned exactly right, is some expansion okay? Maybe so.

But one thing is for sure, we need to make a couple more changes on the city council. There could be three seats come this November, if Cooper wins the sheriff's race. And the thought of one person who has declared he is running, if Cooper wins, scares me to death.

If he get on the city council, no way in hell would I support even one more inch of expansion!

Unknown said...

So if Cooper should win in November who has declared they will run for his seat? Only one person who causes resident's blood to run cold and that's former Leary-appointed planning commissioner Tim Murphy.

With a Hume/Murphy combo (with Scherman Hume's puppet) on the council we should all just resign ourselves to the SOI going all the way to the floodplain, annexation and every last square inch of vacant open space with the existing city limits being developed. Now that is truly a "wicked vision."

Replace Hume this November, work to keep Murphy out of Cooper's seat and let's start a petition drive to get the SOI application on the ballot in 2012 to keep it from going through.

phlaw

Follow Us

Popular

Archives

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




item