Below is a draft letter created by a few members of Natomas leadership (and with input from several others).
This letter is in response to the North Natomas Finance Plan (NNFP) being on the agenda for City Council tomorrow.
What we really want is more time for more people like all of you to have an opportunity to review the details and decide if this is how you want to prioritize the build out of Natomas and how you want to use the dollars available via the NNFP.
If we do nothing and the NNFP passes we will get our fire station and some money for the police station to be attached to that fire station and some money for a community center – BUT – we will lose a lot of money for freeway interchanges, road widenings, on and off ramps and will have no money for the regional park.
We will also lose about 60 million dollars in developer fees due to reductions and defunding of projects.
Thank you to Lisa Kaplan and Rosemarie Ruggieri for taking the lead on drafting, editing and revising this letter to help us all get the word out that we need more time for community outreach and input.
Also, please consider attending tomorrow night’s council meeting to help us ask the City to grant our request.
Angelique Ashby, JD
President
Creekside Neighborhood Association
Co-Founder
Natomas Crime & Safety Leadership Team
email: [email protected]
October 27, 2008
Council Member __________
Sacramento City Council
915 I Street
Sacramento, CA 95814Re: North Natomas Financing Plan
Hearing: Tuesday, October 28, 2008 – Agenda Item #14
Dear Councilmember ____________:
Thank you so much for taking the time out of your busy schedule to read my letter. I am writing you this letter to respectfully request that you delay voting on the newest revision of the North Natomas Financing Plan (NNFP). Although the issue in front of you effects only one City Council district, I believe there are ramifications for the entire City of Sacramento if there is not a thorough review of the new NNFP that was just finalized sometime last week.
First and foremost, I do not want the request for a delay to be interpreted that I do not support the building and funding of Fire Station #43 on the Westside of Natomas. Nor do I want this letter to jeopardize the funding of Fire State #43, however, I find the quick approval of the new NNFP to fund the building of the second fire station, while at the same time the defunding of critical infrastructure needed in Natomas is something that must be thoroughly vetted and not passed by the council on the fly. Let’s not let the tragedy of the house fire and injury to our local firefighters in Natomas a couple of weeks ago become a political excuse and detriment to the future growth and well-being of Natomas.
Thus, I am imploring you to approve my request to delay the vote on the NNFP, for at least 30 days so the office of City Council District 1 can conduct proper community outreach on the final details of the updated NNFP (not just the ideas and possibilities but actual outreach and public comment from as many neighborhoods within the district as possible). I understand that there has been years worth of meetings that have included some community members on the update of the NNFP and what it should contain, however the only meeting on the final details of the NNFP was held on Saturday, October 24th with only 72 hours notice of the meeting and 72 hours worth of time for the community to react prior to the Council voting on this issue.
(Add in YOUR specific dealings with the NNFP up until this point – so that each letter is slightly different)
The community deserves to fully understand why we should give up $97 million in developer fees for only the funding of $26 million in new infrastructure. There are still some serious questions that must be answered, like why should the NNFP now pay for fire station #2, when the Natomas master plan called for the station to be built from the general fund dollars? What outreach did Council district #1 do with the community? Was due diligence put forth in reviewing the defunding of infrastructure projects as in December Natomas will become a flood zone again? What happened to all the developer fees the city collected during the flush times?
From what I understand is that the infrastructure that you are voting to defund was and has always been planned and is part of the nexus of the Natomas Community Plan (NCP), the NNFP, traffic studies and the EIR’s which have been relied upon when developing North Natomas. By defunding these projects and overcrossings the City is voting on radical and substantial changes to the NCP, therefore, it triggers CEQA and requires the City to do a new study on the impact of these changes to the Community and our Flood Zoning designation.
So does the City have authority to defund the critical infrastructure and overcrosses that have been in the NNFP at this time without another CEQA study? Did the City use these potential overcrossings with planning the federally required flood evacuation plan? Will Natomas’ flood zone status and 200 year flood protection be put at jeopardy by the City defunding these critical infrastructure projects?
What is the rush to vote? The entire Sacramento community will be irreparably harmed without this minor delay to ensure that all Natomas resident are informed an have their valuable input taken into serious consideration.. Again, Station 43 is a priority for the Natomas community, but it should used as a political trade for eliminating major infrastructure projects Natomas needs.
Based on the lack of answers to the above, I respectfully request you delay a vote on this issue so that the entire Natomas community can be educated about these serious decisions. Thank you so much for considering my request.
Sincerely,
_______________cc: Congresswoman Doris Matsui
Senator Darrell Steinberg
Assemblymember Dave Jones
Assemblymember Roger Niello
Supervisor Roger Dickinson
Heather Fargo, Mayor City of Sacramento
Sacramento City Council Members
Chief Rick Brazille, Sacramento City Police Department
Chief Ray Jones, Sacramento City Fire Department
Joe McGinness, Sacramento County Sheriff
Chief Don Mette, Sacramento Metro Fire Department
Brent Meyers, President Sacramento Police Officers Association
Rich Schmeidt, President Sacramento Area Firefighters Local 522
Ray Kerriage, Sacramento City Manager
Sacramento Planning Commission Board Members
Steve Farrar, Superintendent Natomas Unified School District
Frank Porter, Superintendent Twin Rivers Unified School District
Sacramento Bee
Natomas JournalEMAIL ADDRESSES
Congresswoman Doris Matsui
[email protected]
Cc – [email protected]Senator Darrell Steinberg –
[email protected]Assemblymember Dave Jones –
[email protected]Assemblymember Roger Niello
[email protected]Supervisor Roger Dickinson
[email protected]Mayor Heather Fargo
[email protected]send a letter addressed to each Council member separately
CD 1 – Ray Tretheway [email protected]
CD 2 – Sandy Sheedy – [email protected]
CD 3 – Steve Cohn – [email protected]
CD 4 – Robert King Fong – [email protected]
CD 5 – Lauren Hammond – [email protected]
CD 6 – Kevin McCarty – [email protected]
CD 7 – Robbie Waters – [email protected]
CD 8 – Bonnie Pannell – [email protected]Chief Rick Braziel, Sacramento City Police Department
[email protected]Chief Ray Jones, Sacramento City Fire Department
[email protected]John McGinness, Sacramento County Sheriff
[email protected]Chief Don Mette, Sacramento Metro Fire Department
[email protected]Brent Meyer, President Sacramento Police Officers Association
[email protected]Daniel Hahn, Capitan North Area Sacramento
[email protected]Rich Schmeidt, President Sacramento Area Firefighters Local 522
[email protected]Ray Kerriage, Sacramento City Manager
[email protected]Sacramento Planning Commission Board Members
Chair, Darrel Woo – [email protected]Vice-Chair Michael Notestine- [email protected]
Steve Farrar, Superintendent Natomas Unified School District
[email protected]Frank Porter, Superintendent Twin Rivers Unified School District
[email protected]Sacramento Bee
– Political Bureau – Amy Chance – [email protected]
– City Editor – Deborah Anderluh – [email protected]Natomas Journal – Will Craig – [email protected]
This paragraph doesnt make sense:
What is the rush to vote? The entire Sacramento community will be irreparably harmed without this minor delay to ensure that all Natomas resident are informed an have their valuable input taken into serious consideration.. Again, Station 43 is a priority for the Natomas community, but it should used as a political trade for eliminating major infrastructure projects Natomas needs.
The Dec 8th building moratorium will prevent the fire station/police station from being built; the rush is to get this approved so the permits can be pulled in time.
The yahoo groups talking about this are obviously setting up this political issue before the election as a pro-Johnson stunt. Look – the way I see it, because of the squeaky wheels, we are finally being heard and are getting some parts of the plan funded. I am comfortable with getting this issue heard tomorrow night and for our Fire Station/Police Station to get going. Fargo and Tretheway have other members of the city council to constantly battle with. I don’t see the need for the delay. The people who showed up Saturday are the leaders of the Natomas community who are willing to speak up. We’ve had other meetings. You’re not going to get more people to attend. Our agenda should be to get the structures built, not to posture for a new, unstable political candidate. It’s too obvious.
Completely untrue comment. I would think most would see it the other way around. Political move by lack-luster Mayor rushing to push a plan through before the election to “show” she is pro-safety. Ha! I’ve been in on this NNFP conversation for quite some time and believe ME – it was never once brought up to make waves for any political benefit. I’ll sign my full name, Tristan Godt.
If someone is posturing for a politician I am not sure who it is…
But I will tell you that the NNFP determines what will be paid for by developers in North Natomas.
If we don’t get enough money from them now it will forever be set in stone because of the way the document is being drafted.
All we (the leadership group that attended Saturday) wanted was for more neighbors like all of you to hear about the NNFP and decide for yourself if you think it is good enough.
We will get the fire station and that is great – but at what cost? What are we giving up? Three community centers? Future transportation improvments (the ones we need for new growth or emergency evacuations)?
The fire station may be built in spite of the moretorium – we may be able to get help from Matsui to get an exemption so we can build the fire house (since in an emergency evacuation situation it is the firefighters who would be helping with that effort – to keep us safe if we have to leave Natomas).
I am glad you guys are discussing this issue because it is an important one. If we can get Ray Tretheway to come out and present the final proposal to the community I hope you will all attend and participate in the discussion.