Twenty-Five Theses on the Elk Grove General Plan Schema - Part II

By Michael Monasky | March 20, 216 |

The city wants to “showcase Elk Grove's assets.” Roads are Elk Grove's largest and ironically most neglected asset.

The city markets “agritourism” while converting prime farmland into suburban sprawl.

The city advertises it wants to “protect small and existing businesses and allow them to grow.” However, many small businesses have failed in Elk Grove, and the only businesses to receive support and subsidies from the city are very large ones.

Although the city has said that it wants to “partner with the Cosumnes Community Services District (CCSD) to ensure parks continue to serve as a focal point of the community,” it has a dismal record in this regard; there is also no mention of cooperative efforts with the Elk Grove Unified School District, with which it's had poor relations.

The city has failed to create a conduit for community input to the elected city officials and city staff. The city has refused to continue the community planning advisory council model, used before city incorporation, to provide valuable citizen feedback to the council.

The city blithely considers the community's identity a marketable commodity. This makes the city and its people susceptible to sales-oriented governance.

The city is blind to the community's identity as a bedroom community, insisting that there is a “civic core.” Elk Grove is a young and overdeveloped adolescent of a bedroom community that is prone to urban blight as each of its neighborhoods age. A civic core is usually developed over time and reflects the interests and activities of its citizens.

The city's strategy for rural and agricultural heritage makes absolutely no mention of the valuable resources of the Sacramento County Farm Bureau, and the University of California Agricultural Extension Service, much less the brain trust at UC Davis School of Agriculture.

The PMC/City report complains of a vast population increase, yet does not differentiate between how that increase is affected by expansion of the city's Sphere Of Influence (SOI.)

The city has no plan and no money to connect trails and bicycle lanes.

The city's parks plan has no intention of improving and expanding relations with the CCSD beyond its existing Memorandum Of Understanding.

The city pays lip-service to “Complete Streets” yet does not coordinate pedestrian improvements with “Safe Routes To Schools” and WalkSacramento.

The city fails to see that SUVs and other, fast traffic does not mix well with pedestrian modes of travel. The city has consistently failed to separate pedestrian amenities from deadly traffic corridors.

The city and PMC tout their Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Trails Master Plan as if it is a complete plan with complete funding.

The city is blinded in its transit vision by its refusal to cooperate more fully with Sacramento Regional Transit, and has failed to mention a multi-modal transit center and coordination with other means of travel. Having read this far, you're the sort of person who might have read all of Luther's 95Theses.   

But I think these modern theses are far more interesting. They're based upon the same type of fiscal corruption that collided with the introduction of the printing press, the rise of Protestantism, and the dawn of the Renaissance. What we face today is global warming, suburban overgrowth, and fiscal collapse. The city's proposal falls flat; these challenges require the wit and wisdom of all the people in our community, not the people who think they own it.