ECOS letter to SACOG re 2025 BP Developing + Potentially Developing Communities

On May 29, 2024, ECOS submitted a letter to SACOG regarding SACOG’s 2025 Blueprint MTP/SCS – Study of Developing Communities and Potentially Developing Communities. Below is an excerpt of our letter.

ECOS has conducted an analysis related to housing units in the Developing Communities and Potentially
Developing Communities in SACOG’s land use scenarios for the 2025 Blueprint (MTP/SCS). We would
appreciate your sharing this letter and attachments with your Committees in June.

Click here to read the letter in full.

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.

Click here to read the letter in full.

The Sacramento region has approved too much sprawl already; a reckoning is here

By Tom Philp | March 6, 2024 | The Sacramento Bee

The politics of the Sacramento region have long been fueled by its expansion, with land speculators, developers, builders and trade unions funding political campaigns. But the extraordinary power of this political bloc needs to be checked before they cost the region hundreds of millions of dollars in state funding and blow up Sacramento’s climate goals.

Click here to read the full article: https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/article285860766.html#storylink=cpy

Related to inhibiting sprawl, SACOG is tasked with developing a new 25-year housing plan that lowers GHG emissions in Sacramento’s six-county region. The Land Use and Natural Resources Committee of SACOG will receive important new information on the region’s future housing demand on March 7, 2024. To watch a recording of the meeting, go to https://www.sacog.org/meetings/meeting-agendas; Advanced Search – insert meeting date, then see Item History.

SACOG delays MTP/SCS to align with MTC and SJCOG to enhance interregional coordination

On March 3, 2023, ECOS sent a letter of support for Assembly Bill 350, which would facilitate greater interregional collaboration by more closely aligning the Sacramento Area Council of Government’s (SACOG) sustainable communities strategy update with those of its regional partners, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the San Joaquin Council of Governments (SJCOG), both for SACOG’s current plan update and into the future.

Click here to view the letter.

Click here to view a fact sheet on AB 350.

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.