Monitoring Groundwater in Sacramento County

Posted on October 12, 2018October 12, 2018 by Alexandra Reagan

October 12, 2018

The South American Subbasin is located in the central portion of Sacramento County. It is primarily managed by the Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority (SCGA).

ECOS believes that Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority’s understanding of the hydrology of the Subbasin should be measurably improved, and we have written a letter suggesting some ways to achieve that. Below is an excerpt of our letter.

The Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS) notes with interest the Sacramento Central Groundwater Authority (SCGA) Board’s September 12, 2018 direction to Staff to evaluate the State of California’s C2VSimFG model input data for the South American Subbasin (Subbasin) and update the State’s model data as necessary. We believe that SCGA’s understanding of the hydrology of the Subbasin should be measurably improved. SCGA should look to the modeling and monitory efforts underway by the Regional Water Authority and the Sacramento Groundwater Authority (SGA), and adopt and put in place a comprehensive and compatible monitoring program for the Subbasin.
We also believe the Board acted with imprudence when it recently adopted its operating budget for the upcoming year, in that, among other issues, the Board did not provide enough funding for groundwater monitoring and modeling. SCGA’s existing set of monitoring wells is insufficient to provide a full understanding of the flows of groundwater into, through and out of the Subbasin. Semiannual data points are not sufficient to understand and effectively manage the Subbasin. While we commend SCGA’s recent effort to provide real time monitoring in a small, select group of wells, we believe you should do far more in this important area.

Click here to read the full letter (PDF).

Sacramento Region Highway CapCity Projects

Posted on October 3, 2018October 15, 2018 by Alexandra Reagan

On October 3, 2018, the Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS) sent the following letter to the California Department of Transportation regarding the Sacramento Region Highway CapCity Projects.

Dear Director Benipal:
The Environmental Council of Sacramento (ECOS) is concerned that planned freeway expansions in the Sacramento region will induce major increases in vehicle volumes, contravening the spirit and intent of state legislation such as SB 375. We are most concerned about the CapCity (SR 51) expansion (including possible widening of the American River bridge), and also concerned about the planned I-5 HOV lanes between Sacramento and Elk Grove, and the proposed widening of I-80 between Sacramento and Davis.
We appreciate the CapCity project team’s continued engagement with ECOS and its willingness to discuss the project’s progression. However, ECOS would like to expand this conversation into a broader discussion about regional transportation challenges and priorities. We are willing to work with Caltrans staff to coordinate discussions with other regional agencies and stakeholders with the aim of considering potential alternatives to address these challenges.
Following are some reasons why this conversation is timely: CARB’s greenhouse gas scoping plan shows that we must reduce VMT by 15% to meet 2050 goals for GHG emissions. Guidelines for SB 743 specify that the principal criterion in evaluating transportation projects is now VMT reduction, as opposed to congestion relief. Based on these Guidelines, Caltrans will need to consider induced travel demand from future expansion projects, such as caused by land use impacts. The Sacramento Transportation Authority is planning a tax measure for the 2020 ballot. SACOG is developing its draft preferred scenario the 2020 MTP/SCS. Finally, the fate of SB 1 hinges on the outcome of Proposition 6 in November.
The proposed CapCity expansion is emblematic of multiple other prospective projects in the region, and raises questions about historic approaches to longstanding problems as well as approaches to future challenges the region faces. We acknowledge that the challenges involved are significant, and that a rethinking of potential solutions also has great hurdles. We believe that the convergence of challenges and opportunities we face warrants an exploration of additional tools to increase travel-mode options, support infill housing and economic needs, and reduce VMT with increased transit operations and emerging strategies such as congestion pricing and shared mobility.
We would all benefit from a broadly based conversation regarding alternative solutions for regional mobility before major public funds are committed to significant increases in highway capacity. We hope that you will consider cooperating in such a discussion with ECOS, and we are sharing this letter with other organizations and government bodies that we hope to include in this conversation as well. We look forward to discussing possible meeting times and locations.
Sincerely,
Ralph Propper
ECOS President

Click here to read the full letter in PDF.

Elk Grove General Plan

Posted on October 1, 2018October 1, 2018 by Alexandra Reagan

On September 26, 2018, the Environmental Council of Sacramento submitted a comment letter on the Elk Grove General Plan.

Summary

Following ECOS and Habitat 2020s’ opposition to the recently adopted Kamerrer-99 Sphere of Influence Expansion, ECOS and Habitat 2020 are primarily concerned with the “study areas” for further expansion proposed in this General Plan Update. Elk Grove’s anticipated growth can be accommodated within the existing City limits, and we find no justification for expansion beyond the Sacramento County Urban Services Boundary (USB) established in 1993 to be the ultimate growth boundary within the County. The proposal is inconsistent with the Sacramento Area Council of Governments’ (SACOG) Metropolitan Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (MTP/SCS) for meeting State mandated greenhouse gas (GHG) reductions, Federal mandates for Air Quality Attainment under the State Improvement Plan (SIP), as well as myriad regional goals for social equity, public health and natural resource conservation. There is an extreme lack of certainty that municipal water can be provided to this area without severe regional impacts, and the impacts to invaluable agricultural and biological resources by the proposal are potentially impossible to mitigate.
The justification given for study of further expansion is the need for Elk Grove to correct its job’s housing balance. This is a goal that ECOS agrees with, but, again, the housing and employment that Elk Grove anticipates to achieve from existing planning areas within the current City boundaries already far exceed that of SACOG’S projections for Elk Grove by 2040. If Elk Grove were to achieve these housing and employment projections in the SOIA as well, it would certainly have impacts on housing and employment in neighboring jurisdictions in the region.
While these proposed expansion areas are only “study areas,” it is irresponsible of the City to signal intent for growth that is so divergent from the regional plan, and where the cumulative impacts to the region would be so great.

Click here to read the full letter in PDF.