News

Skip ahead to 4:58:30 to see WRCA member comments.

On November 18, three WRCA active members spoke to City Council about their experiences with the effects of the manner in which low- and very low-income housing has materalized in North Natomas over the past several years.

Becky Correia spoke passionately about how the city’s current policy of allowing giant three-story apartment complexes to be built with 80 to 100 percent low income occupancy is harming the Natomas community. “Natomas has had more than our fair share of these giant apartment projects and it is detrimental to our community, our schools, our neighborhoods, and frankly, you’re losing people [who] could stay and pay their mortgage — they’re choosing not to because of the direct impact these units are having on our community. They’re fleeing to Rosevile, Lincoln — anywhere but where these projects are going in,” Correia said.

Correia suggested a lower percentage of low- and very low-income units would be more appropriate for apartment complexes built in the future: “It can be done better: no more than 20 percent in any individual complex.” She added that having such high concentrations of affordable housing contributes to a stigmatization effect that many such complexes currently have, saying “if you start building [projects with] 80, 100 percent [affordable units], that’s not including people — that’s making a wall of ‘Oh, there go people that live in that complex.’ ” She cited how The Lofts has only 20 percent of its units set aside for low-income tenants and that there have been far fewer problems with that complex than Atrium Court which has a much higher concentration of affordable units.

Correia’s testimony prompted several compelling comments and questions from Council. Mayor Fargo acknowledged the mistakes made in Natomas. “It seems like it’s been Natomas’ role to do for the city — I guess since I’m leaving I can say this — is that we’ve learned how not to do apartment complexes in Natomas,” Fargo said, adding “we tried to learn what we did wrong in South Natomas as [development] moved to North Natomas . . . I am hoping what Council will do is pay some attention to what we need to do to fix what isn’t working in the North Natomas version of these projects,” she said.

Fargo also addressed the high subsidized-to-market ratio issue and urged Council to address problems in the current version of the city’s inclusionary housing ordinance. “We have made, I believe, some other mistakes in the ordinance . . . in terms of the number of units and the fact that . . . we end up with whole complexes of nothing but low-income, as opposed to mixed income — and having a community be mixed [but] separated by fences isn’t necessarily a mixture anymore,” Fargo said, adding “I don’t think we have all the answers here, but I think that the council is going to need to hear from Natomas to know how to fix it because these problems aren’t being experienced elsewhere to the same extent as they are [in Natomas].”

Fargo went on to comment on how the city’s goal of economic diversity should not undermine communities. “We want to have a community with mixed income — we want to have economic diversity in the city, but we need to do it in a way that doesn’t harm the community’s stability,” Fargo said.

Brandy Kollenborn also spoke about her experiences living a few yards away from the perimeter of Atrium Court Apartments. “Natomas needs some counteraction for the mistakes that have already been made . . . Natomas is not being given resources to deal with the problems that come with these apartment complexes — these kids are feeding into our schools [and] our area crime is progressively worsening,” said Kollenborn.

Kollenborn spoke of problems associated with the apartment complex that have caused her family to recently buy a home where they “specifically asked to be as far away from [low income apartments] as we could possibly be, and we will be leaving the home that we lived in for five years to get away from what this brought to our neighborhood. I don’t want to raise my son there [and] I don’t want him going to Natomas schools as they are right now. I’ve seen disgusting things happen in front of my home and I don’t want to raise my family there anymore — that’s what this is doing to our neighborhoods and I hope you can take that story and really consider it when you talk about the [inclusionary] housing ordinance, because these are real people that are leaving this area, fleeing away from what this housing element has done to our area.”

Richard Guess also weighed at the podium. “I looked at communities like Lincoln, Roseville, West Sacramento, Elk Grove, and Natomas, and I chose Natomas. The number one reason I chose it was because of the conforming growth plan . . . something that is balanced, fair, and wanting to take and bring people together,” Guess said, adding “the fact that we were having inclusionary housing in the community, in a limited number, is the way communities should be developed — I was totally in favor of that.”

Then Guess expressed disappointment in the outcome of the development of Atrium Court. “We were told it would be about 14 to 16 percent inclusionary. That sounded balanced and fair to me.” (Records show the density of subsidized units at Atrium Court is actually a much higher 80 percent.)

We’ve had nothing but [an] extensive amount of crime — if you talked with your police officers, you’d know that,” he said, adding “It’s out of balance — there’s no balance in the program that we have right now.”

Guess predicted dire consequences for Natomas if the city does not act to address the problem. “If the city doesn’t do the corrections to make the changes in combatting the crime, and adjusting and limiting this inclusionary housing to a realistic maximum level, I think North Natomas is doomed.”

District 1 councilperson Ray Tretheway was absent from the meeting, but his district Director, Dan Roth, was recognized in the audience.

The housing element update was approved unanimously by the council but a workshop will be held in the near future to discuss changes to the inclusionary housing ordinance. It is tentatively scheduled for an afternoon session on December 9 but community members pleaded for that session to be rescheduled for an evening session so that members of the Natomas community can participate without taking time off work. Mayor Fargo asked the clerk to make every effort to do so.

Video of the testimony is available — WRCA member comments begin at approximately 4:58:30.

The Sacramento Bee recently reported that Rancho Cordova’s city council voted 3-2 to drop its version of an inclusionary housing ordinance altogether.

Congresswoman Doris Matsui (D, California district 05) introduced a bill in Congress on November 20 that, if passed, will allow fire and police station construction in urban areas, even if there are FEMA-imposed building restrictions in place. Natomas is destined to be rezoned into an “AE” flood zone on December 8 which will mandate strict building restrictions and flood insurance for federally-insured home mortgages.

“Since learning of the FEMA remapping of the Natomas area, I have been working to protect homeowners from increased flood insurance costs by requesting a one year extension of current rates. I have also worked to ensure that Natomas has the vital infrastructure it needs. The bill I introduced today will allow for sensible building in the interest of public safety,” said Matsui in her her press release.

“The relief and the abillity to build the safety structures (police & fire) are so important for Natomas,” said Angelique Ashby, President of Creekside Neighborhood Association and co-founder of the Natomas Crime & Safety Leadership Team.

“We have faced so many challenges at the City level just to get the conversation about the fire and police station going — it is really nice to see an elected representative planning for our future development and safety/infrastructure needs in Natomas,” Ashby said.

Natomas community leaders have been pushing hard for a fire station west of Interstate 5 for years, and those efforts have intensified in recent months following a devastating house fire in on Stilt Court in October that sent four firefighters to the hospital and the death of a woman while waiting for paramedics to arrive. Both of these cases were west of I-5 and because of their location, the response time for first responders was several minutes longer than Sacramento Fire Department targets. Many wonder if the outcomes would have been different if a fire station had been in place at the designated location of future fire station 43 at the intersection of El Centro Road and Arena Blvd.

By Keith Sharward, Co-founder, Witter Ranch Community Alliance

At 2:49 am on Saturday, November 8, 2008, an 81-year-old woman residing at Hurley Creek Apartments (4275 El Centro Road) called 911 to request assistance for chest pain and difficulty breathing. Engine 30 and Medic 30 from Sacramento Fire Station 30 in Regency Park responded as quickly as possible, running lights and siren along the 3.1 mile route.

Upon arrival nine minutes later (2:58 am), paramedics found the door unlocked and the woman unconscious on the bed, not breathing and without a pulse. CPR was initiated four minutes later (3:02 am) and rushed to a hospital emergency room, lights and siren all the way, arriving at 3:16 am, where she was pronounced dead shortly thereafter.

What would the outcome of this tragic case had been if Fire Station 43 at the intersection Arena Blvd. and El Centro Road been built and staffed? We will never know for sure… But we do know that the route would have been a fraction of the distance Engine 30 had to travel.

We needed a fire station west of Interstate 5 years ago. Now, with the Silva Family losing thier home to a devastating house fire, which also sent four firefighters to the hospital due to the intensity of the flames.

We can’t wait any longer. We need the fire station that we deserve and have paid for through our tax dollars.

Quoting Captain Hahn of the Sacramento Police Department:

(360506) 11/9/08 @ 5:08 pm, San Juan Reservoir Park (Shrike Circle), North Natomas

Officer Hanson (and several other officers) have been checking this area regularly. Officer Hanson stopped several subjects at this park after they ran a stop sign and then walked into the park after hours. He contacted three 17-year old subjects that got out of the car. One had some marijuana on him and didn't have a driver license. They were cited for loitering in the park after hours, possession of marijuana and for driving without a license. Their white Honda was also towed. All three 17-year-olds lived in South Natomas.