Elk Grove Grasp Ignites Much Needed SOI, Annexation Debate

Is Elk Grove throwing its “underwater homeowners an anchor, not a buoy” with SOI? UPDATED 2;10 p.m. With the emergence of the anti-S...


Is Elk Grove throwing its “underwater homeowners an anchor, not a buoy” with SOI?

UPDATED 2;10 p.m.

With the emergence of the anti-Sphere of Influence (SOI) advocacy group Elk Grove Grasp, a new and worthy debate has started. That debate is this - does the city need to pursue its SOI application that if approved could lead to the annexation of more land into Elk Grove.

A few weeks ago the Elk Grove Grasp (EGG) anti-SOI group launched and announced its intention to educate and spur a discussion on the need for the city to pursue the SOI that could eventually lead to annexation. EGG’s has staked out the position that the SOI is unnecessary.

If nothing else, EGG has sparked an interesting debate on the matter.

Aside from coverage in Elk Grove media, the Sacramento Bee has picked up on the issue. In the February 2 edition of the Bee, a viewpoint by Michael Easton, former project director at the Cosumnes River Preserve criticized the LAFCO’s environmental impact report as a “half-hearted analysis that misses or avoids many key issues – not the kind of clear decision-making tool that this organization's board of directors deserves.”

In a point that probably hits close to most people in Elk Grove, Eaton says “for Elk Grove citizens hoping for a rebound in property values, the expansion goes in the wrong direction, fueling expectations of more land for more sprawl. Elk Grove is throwing its underwater homeowners an anchor, not a buoy.”

In response to the criticism, Elk Grove Mayor Jim Cooper and Councilman Gary Davis were given equal time by the Bee and opined yesterday on the merits of the already scaled back SOI application.

Cooper and Davis argue that given the current real estate depression, now is the perfect time to make “prudent” decisions about the city’s future needs. Furthermore, done properly, they believe the SOI and ensuing annexation can avoid piecemeal development and solve Elk Grove’s long standing job and housing imbalance.

They further state “And, frankly, it is much easier to craft a plan that puts residents' interests first when there aren't as many developers pushing their own agendas.”

So what are Elk Grove residents saying? Well the following comment was found on Davis’ Facebook posting regarding the piece he and Cooper penned. It comes from the well respected and civic minded Elk Grove resident Sarah Johnson.

Have read both articles and have heard the arguments on both sides. For me, the problem with expanding our SOI lies in trust in the implementation. Words on paper are just that, the interpretation and implementation of the words on the paper are where I most often have issues. The "semantics" of politics have surprised me in the past to the extent that I have very little trust that the words mean the same thing to all of us.

So what do you think about the SOI? For the people of Elk Grove, the SOI will determine the future path of our city and is a conversation that is long overdue.

Post a Comment Default Comments

7 comments

Anonymous said...

What a feeble attempt to justify the past ills of the City, and to warn that we better do this now before the developers apply pressure again. What happened to good old fashioned leadership and charting a course for our city, no matter who tries to grab the tiller.

Anonymous said...

We moved from San Jose to Elk Grove precisely for this reason. San Jose had some of the best agricultural land in the world, and it is now lost forever. It would be a shame for Elk Grove to follow the same path of reckless planning. Preserve the beautiful agricultural and open spaces that we have for future generations of people and wildlife.

Anonymous said...

Now really who believes that we need to do this before th developers get involved. They arethe ones pushign the city for the SOI. Ask the question, how many of the parcels in the SOI have been optioned for purchase by developers and you will be shocked.
Now the city is going to have a workshop on the 23rd to determine development of th SEPA on the south side of town. Wonder if this meeting would have happened if it weren't for the ANTI SOI group? Food for thought

Anonymous said...

It certainly is interesting that we haven't heard a peep out of Davis or Cooper regarding keeping the community informed about the SOI meetings being held until they start getting a little pressure. Now...a SEPA workshop! Next will be a workshop regarding the Sports
Complex...of course, that will be AFTER the RFP's are received and with two commission members representing aquatic & softball. Too bad soccer was not included, fields that could have been used for rugby & lacrosse, which is becoming very popular. Must be election time!

Anonymous said...

Two commission members? Who are they? And yes, why no representation from soccer. Who put this in place and why are we just now hearing about?

I attended the first meeting about a sports complex and I heard that the city would be putting together more meetings, but I thought they meant more meetings before they got down to the selection process. Something is very wrong hear. Why no more meetings? Why only two commissioners? What is the name of the commission and when do they meet? Are the meetings open to the public. Are there any records of past meetings that are available to residents who are interested in a sports complex to read and catch up on the status?

Mr. Elk Grove News, do you know what's going on?

Anonymous said...

Have no clue who they are, just that one is an Elk Grove youth sports representative and one is an Elk Grove aquatic sports rep.

To my knowledge there have been no futher meetings since the May 4th one. Since RFP's have been sent with a deadline of February 3rd, it would seem the next step would be at a City Council meeting when the Sports Complex will be on the agenda along with the RFP choosen. Hopefully that would be sooner rather than later!!!!! That would be when the community can be heard with their comments and suggestions, etc. At that time the city council could decide to hold further community meetings if "THEY" felt it was necessary or NOT!

This is how I understand the process....correct if that is in error.

Anonymous said...

The site the CC has chosen for this complex is wrong. It borders two lane roads with little rooom for parking, limited RV access and room for 3 maybe 4 fields/pitches. To do this right, it should be located just off the freeway (99 or I-5), have a large parking area, and needs to accomodate 10 or so fields. You won't get a national or even regional event to a facility with 3 or 4 fields/pitches. Also, from what I'm reading, there aren't any soccer, lacrosse, field hockey, rugby pitches in the plan, just baseball and/or softball (and these fields cannot be used for both sports). Not true for the soccer, lacrosse, field hockey and rugby pitches, they are close to being interchangeable.
But the CC has already closed the RFP process, so I guess we're stuck with whatever they want. Otherwise, they'll have to reopen and have comapanies resubmit new RFPs. Not likley to happen and if it does, it's shows the City was premature in closing the RFP process before citizen input. More evidence this City's gov't is out of control. This City just refuses to think outside the box and seeks immediate solutions reather than smart, long-term planning.

Follow Us

Popular

Archives

Elk Grove News Minute Podcast

Elk Grove News Podcast




item