By Robert J. Hansen | OBSERVER Staff Writer
How can the city ensure that Oak Park residents aren’t displaced by future development projects and that they benefit from any job opportunities that are created?
And will residents, businesses and local developers have a voice and be included in large-scale, city-backed projects such as Aggie Square and the Railyards?
The fight to preserve the quality of the neighborhood and protect against gentrification is being led by Sacramento Investment Without Displacement. The coalition represents social justice organizations, neighborhood associations, labor groups, residents and community partners from Oak Park and surrounding ZIP codes.
As part of the Aggie Square settlement agreement in 2021, Sacramento Investment Without Displacement was organized to support building affordable housing, preserving cultural traditions and the stability of neighborhoods impacted by significant developments.
“This is a people’s fight,” said Gabby Trejo, the coalition’s board president.
Board Vice President Tamika L’Ecluse said the community wants an agreement with the city that genuinely helps them live their best lives.
“A community benefits agreement can be a model not just for cities around Sacramento but for cities across the United States,” L’Ecluse said. “We need a robust ordinance that really addresses some of the root causes of homelessness and displacement that we see on our streets and our community.”
The ordinance proposed by city staff Oct. 17 didn’t adequately address the community’s needs and concerns, L’Ecluse said. “Such an ordinance should give the community a voice in decision making, both in the benefits agreement and the monitoring of and enforcement of any future community benefits agreement in the various neighborhoods.”
It is not clear when such an ordinance will be finalized and take effect.
Sacramento Investment Without Displacement member Rashid Sidqe is advocating for the community’s most vulnerable and to ensure that Sacramentans rather than large outside developers benefit from development projects.
“We are making sure that we have in an ordinance an opportunity for training, for jobs, for housing,” Sidqe said. “To make sure that the people that make this community what it is today benefit from all of the great developments that happen here or in the Railyards or in your community.”
Other points of disagreement over the ordinance include the cost of which projects are subject to a community benefit agreement and whether housing developments would be subject to such.
The city proposed that any project receiving $10 million or more in subsidies from Sacramento would require a community benefit agreement. Also in the draft, housing developments would not be subject to such an agreement.
District 1 Councilmember Lisa Kaplan said a major problem for local governments is how to encourage robust economic development and wage growth for residents while ensuring the surrounding communities don’t become gentrified.
Kaplan wants to ensure future housing developments are not subject to a community benefit agreement.
“I would support and entertain the idea that we make it very clear that single-family housing development, multifamily, standalone projects … are not part of the [agreement],” Kaplan said. “We’re already falling behind. We’ve got eight years to build 45,000 units, which is an obnoxious amount yearly, and we’re not even getting close to building that many units.”
District 4 Councilmember Katie Valenzuela echoed some of Sacramento Investment Without Displacement’s concerns.
“I see this as a way to create greater predictability and certainty for developers so they know what’s expected of them before they come into the community,” Valenzuela said.