On November 11, 2024, ECOS submitted a letter to the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) regarding a suggested policy regarding the performance of projects included in the 2025 SACOG Blueprint.
Tag Archives: SACOG region
ECOS Climate Committee Meeting feat. SACOG, 11/18/2024
SB 375 has been the “North Star” of regional climate action in California since Darrell Steinberg got it enacted sixteen years ago.
With half of State GHG emissions coming from vehicles, it requires State transportation funds to only go planning agencies (SACOG here) that show how they can fund transportation systems in a way that can achieve State-mandated GHG reductions.
This has been challenging, as we see Caltrans continue to expand freeways, and as Sacramento County supervisors continue to approve sprawl development.
After 16 years, a lot has changed — SACOG wants SB 375 to be paused until it can be revised.
On Monday, let’s hear why – from SACOG’s leader. And also – from an academic leader – should it be revised, and if so, how?
AGENDA
6 PM: Welcome and Introductions
6:10 PM: Why does SACOG want the State to pause its SB 375 target setting process?
CA Senate Bill 375 (Steinberg, 2008) provides the framework for reducing GHG emissions, requiring the Air Resources Board to set regional targets: for SACOG, 19% per capita vehicle GHG emission reduction, from 2018 to 2035. CARB is now working on establishing future targets for CA regions. In his last “State of the City” address, Sacramento Mayor Steinberg cited SB 375 as a notable legislative achievement.
- James Corless, Executive Director, Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) will explain why he (and other regional planning agencies) asked CARB to pause its SB 375 target. Link to letter: https://calcog.org/why-are-mpos-seeking-a-pause-on-sb-375-target-setting
- Amy Lee, postdoctoral scholar at UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies, will provide a perspective. Amy studied with UC Davis Prof. Susan Handy in Transportation Policy, including study of regional transportation planning and induced travel. Amy previously worked at SACOG.
7:20 PM: Q&A, Discussion
7:50 PM: Updates
• Lawsuits over Caltrans’ plan to add lanes to I-80 in Yolo County
• Sacramento County Climate Action Plan, & County’s Climate Emergency Mobilization Task Force
• ECOS’ work with SacRT to highlight benefits of public transit
• Election Recap – Sacramento Region
Link to join: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/6656164155
To phone in: 669-900-6833, Meeting ID: 665 616 4155
SACOG: 2025 Blueprint Discussion Scenario
On April 18, 2024, ECOS sent the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) a letter regarding Item #15 on their board meeting agenda, the 2025 Blueprint Discussion Scenario.
Below is an excerpt from our letter.
ECOS supports SACOG’s Option 3 of its Discussion Scenario: “Prioritizing Build Out and More Complete Communities”. This option assumes more complete build-out of developing and potential developing communities but in fewer places. SACOG needs to prioritize those developing communities that have the strongest likelihood of lower vehicle- VMT based on factors like proximity to existing development and jobs/housing balance.
SACOG Land Use & Natural Resources Committee Meeting 3/7/2024
Please tune into the SACOG Land Use & Natural Resources Committee Meeting – Thursday, March 7, 2024 at 1:30 PM, SACOG Board Room, 1415 L Street, Sacramento 95814.
Of particular interest:
- Item 2. Climate Pollution Reduction Grant Application: Grant Support and Subrecipient Commitment
- Item 4. 2025 Blueprint: Housing Product Type Demand Trends
- Item 5. Phase One 2025 Blueprint Outreach Results and Principles
Why ECOS is opposed to Measure A
October 18, 2022
ECOS’ Executive Committee has voted to oppose Measure A, the Sacramento County sales tax initiative on next month’s ballot. Here are some reasons to vote NO on Measure A:
Measure A is designed to circumvent the Sacramento BLUEPRINT, California’s climate targets, and federal transportation planning law. Its highway projects are not included in our region’s long-range plan, the Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS). They have not gone through any public process or analysis against accepted smart growth planning principles, goals, and laws. Why? Because these projects would not pass the test. So, the measure’s proponents have skirted the process, and spent over a million dollars for a “citizens’ initiative” to make us pay for projects that enable their sprawl developments.
Measure A is full of roadway capacity expansion projects and a new rural expressway. These projects will induce more car travel and sprawling housing development. This will pull resources from infill development, with its attendant economic revitalization, better transit access, affordable and energy efficient housing, and community enhancements.
Being anti-planning has another serious dollars and cents impact for our region. SACOG, our metropolitan planning organization, has shown that the measure’s projects would cause our region to exceed federal air quality standards and greenhouse gas targets, making us unable to receive State and federal transportation and housing funds.
Measure A will mean a dismal and economically disastrous step backward; a forty-year prospect of regional decline and a worsening climate. So, can we consider and pursue other options?
We admire cities in Europe because they have many layers of development, making the character of the streets inviting, alive, and culturally valuable. In Sacramento, we have just an initial layer of built form, and in many places the buildings are dilapidated and no longer work economically. We are ripe for another layer of development to fill in. Sacramento should take this moment in its history to flex forward, to turn away from the automobile as the primary means of getting around. This is what the climate challenge demands and what future generations will need.
Let’s work together to write an initiative for 2024 that puts local transportation funding where it needs to go: locate higher capacity transit where more people live and where bus ridership is high; create new accessible public plazas and parks, connected by boulevards and promenades; and provide housing for people of all income levels within walking distance to transit, food, and schools. And, let’s show the federal and State government that Sacramento can be a reliable partner for funding by uniting around a vision.
On Thursday, the SACOG Board meeting will feature an example of coalescing behind a vision with a workshop/case study of the Salt Lake City region, Envision Utah. October 20, Agenda Item 18: https://sacog.primegov.com/Portal/Meeting?meetingTemplateId=3358
Below is SACOG’s map of the Measure A proposed projects and their estimated effect on vehicle miles traveled (VMT.)
Please vote NO on Measure A.
Click here to read our full statement, including footnotes.
Support for SACOG’s “Green Means Go” budget request
May 3, 2021
The Honorable Nancy Skinner, Chair, Senate Budget Committee
The Honorable Phil Ting, Chair, Assembly Budget Committee
RE: Support for SACOG’s Green Means Go state budget allocation
Dear Chairs Skinner and Ting,
The Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS) supports Senator Pan’s request for the Sacramento Area Council of Government’s (SACOG) state budget allocation of $100 million dollars to implement the first year of its Green Means Go pilot program.
By accelerating infill development through infrastructure investments in centers, transit nodes, and commercial corridors in established communities, Green Means Go will help SACOG implement its Sustainable Communities Strategy and achieve the GHG emission reduction target of 19 percent per capita, set in 2018 by the California Air Resources Board pursuant to SB375.
SACOG has identified infill areas or “Green Zones” in 23 of the 28 jurisdictions in its six-county region. The local jurisdictions are ready to partner with the State to invest in infrastructure, such as water and sewer lines, to facilitate infill development. This kind of development can revitalize existing urban areas, and with transit service nearby and a mix of residential and commercial uses, can reduce driving, and therefore, vehicle miles traveled and GHG emissions. Green Means Go can increase housing availability and affordability without loss of habitat or agricultural land.
SACOG estimates the capacity of the identified infill areas or Green Zones at 84,000 dwelling units. To meet the challenge of climate change, it is critical to begin infrastructure work in the Green Zones, so that infill development can be the land use pattern of choice during this decade. Referring to the Regional Housing Need Allocation for 2021-2029 (RHNA, Sacramento County’s 21,722 dwelling unit RHNA could became mainly infill, and Sacramento City’s 45,000 dwelling unit RHNA similarly. This would shift the region’s development trajectory and put us on a more sustainable path. The state budget allocation of $100 million dollars to implement the first year of Green Means Go would give infill a chance.
Infill development is costly, and our region is behind coastal and other metropolitan areas in creating it. Local jurisdictions must provide the infrastructure upgrades to set the stage for infill development, and they need additional funding to do it. State funding is vital for this purpose, and we ask you to include the allocation of $100 million dollars in this year’s budget for the first year of the Green Means Go pilot program.
Sincerely yours,
Ralph Propper
ECOS President
cc: The Honorable Richard Pan, California State Senate
The Honorable Kevin McCarty, California State Assembly
Keely Bosler, Director, California Department of Finance
James Corless, SACOG Executive Director