Why the Upper Westside project would be a major boon for Sacramento | Opinion

My family has owned land in the Natomas Basin for over 80 years. We used to make a living farming here, but decades of urbanization have made this way of life unsustainable for us and many other farmers. This was our impetus to support the Upper Westside project, a development plan that would provide for 9,356 housing units, 10 active parks, greenbelts and multi-use trails.

My family currently owns 80 acres within the Upper Westside proposed project area (my property is located west of El Centro Road, east of Garden Hwy and south of San Juan Road).

I was disappointed that — two weeks before the County Board of Supervisors was scheduled to meet on this project — the Sacramento City Council voted to oppose this plan based primarily on three pervasive myths. Now, Sacramento County leaders have decided to postpone their decision on the proposal.

My hope is that the County Board of Supervisors will look past pervasive myths that have led to opposition of the Upper Westside project and focus on the facts.

The myth of preservation

The first myth is that this area must be preserved for agriculture and open space. However, this conveniently ignores the reality that theft, traffic, vandalism and restrictions on farming practices have made large-scale farming in this area nearly impossible.

Local farmers made their case before the County Planning Commission and the Natomas Community Planning Advisory Council, each of which held two meetings and heard many hours of testimony from supporters and opponents. Both recommended that the County Board of Supervisors approve this project.

The Upper Westside project proposes a more realistic vision of a farmland preservation program, including a permanent 542-acre agricultural buffer.

Development is allowed

The second myth is the city would be guaranteed control of all land use planning in the basin forever because of a Memorandum of Understanding approved by the city and county in 2002. The legislative record shows that it was framed as the first step toward a future agreement.

As then-Sacramento Mayor Heather Fargo said when the city council adopted the memorandum, this agreement “is the first step in a long process and not a final step at all . . . we’ve got a lot of difficult and complex issues left to resolve and left to discuss. So, this certainly is not final by any stretch of the imagination.”

In fact, the county did not adopt the city’s map in 2002 because it did not want to be bound to a rigid vision. There is one other critical fact: In 2011, the county adopted new criteria-based growth management policies to potentially allow for development in the basin.

Environmental impact

The third myth is that the Upper Westside threatens the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan, adopted by the City of Sacramento and Sutter County. Overlooked by opponents is the fact that the county’s Environmental Impact Report concludes that the Upper Westside project’s impacts to the Swainson’s hawk habitat and other sensitive resources in the basin would be avoided or mitigated to less-than-significant levels.

This project incorporates wildlife corridors and habitat restoration, and complies with conservation programs to ensure that urban growth and environmental stewardship move forward together.

Boon for Sacramento’s future

It’s important to remember what the Upper Westside project could mean for Sacramento’s future. The project will provide a mix of housing 3.5 miles from downtown Sacramento and major job centers. This infill development meets the smart growth principles adopted by the Sacramento Area Council of Governments by helping to reduce sprawl, cutting commute time and providing housing choices at a time when affordability is slipping further out of reach for many families.

I hope the city and county can move forward with constructive dialogue about development in the Natomas Basin.

Joseph Brazil is a third-generation Sacramentan and small business owner whose family has farmed in the Natomas Basin for more than 80 years.


Published August 25, 2025 -
https://www.sacbee.com/opinion/op-ed/article311812095.html