Am I the only one that's bothered by Fresno being slightly bigger? (San Diego: sales, city hall)

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by KC6ZLV

Cheap? Placer and El Dorado have the most overpriced new homes in the region.

Your facts won't stop the "new Urbanist" dogma!

[CeJeH]

Originally Posted by NickB1967

Sacramento County is coming around more recently as Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, and Rancho Cordova have all incorporated, and I do suspect North Highlands and Arden Arcade will one day either see the light and incorporate themselves, or be annexed by the City of Sacramento, if the City of Sacramento can ever decide that the revenue benefits of the additional commerical and industrial regions outweigh the addition of "unprogressive" (sic) people into their city.

I really don't see Arden-Arcade or North Highlands being cities. North Highlands is more separate than Arden is from Sacramento because of its location on the other side of McClellan, but it's still just a suburban enclave. It doesn't necessarily make it a city. I honestly believe both of these areas would be better off annexed by Sacramento. North Highlands is more of a stretch than Arden-Arcade is but there's nothing about either of these places that says "city" to me. Elk Grove sprouted up separately over 100 years ago from Sacramento and should be its own city. However, Arden has always been a suburban extension of East Sac. They're integrated in many spots in multiple ways, they share a long border. The address for the area is Sacramento. I think it's a natural fit.

Personally I would like to see North Highlands and all other areas on the north side annexed, but I know this is not an opinion shared by many other people. I think areas like Antelope, NH, Foothill Farms, and even places like Rio Linda and Elverta would be better served in the future as all being apart of 1 master plan by the same municipality that could implement smart growth strategies and quality of life principles for each specific neighborhood without them having to be under the control of a County Governmwnt which was never really designed to take on such tasks.

[chessgeek]

Originally Posted by CeJeH

Anybody that has spent any time in Sacramento and Fresno knows unquestionably that Sacramento is the bigger city. Our metropolitan population is 2.5 times bigger than Fresno. We have more big city amenities and more of a big city feel. Even our fledgling under-developed downtown blows downtown Fresno out of the water. But for the last 2 decades or so, Fresno city limits has been just slightly larger than Sacramento's, and it bugs me.

The most recent Census Data from 2010 shows Sacramento as having a population of around 467k people in an area of just over 100 sq miles. Fresno is listed at around 495k people in about 112 sq miles. This gives Fresno the edge as being the largest inland city in California and the largest city in the Central Valley. Fresno overtook Sacramento in population in the 2000 census and has maintained a lead of about 30,000 people since then.

I know that this is a dubious honor and is relatively meaningless, but it annoys me that Fresno of all places has this distinction over Sacramento, which is in my opinion the superior city. Can't we just annex Arden/Arcade and South Sac and get this over with?

I had no idea South Sac was not included in the Sacramento population. That is probably a good idea.

[wburg]

Neither is West Sac.

[CeJeH]

West Sac is in a different county.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by CeJeH

I really don't see Arden-Arcade or North Highlands being cities. North Highlands is more separate than Arden is from Sacramento because of its location on the other side of McClellan, but it's still just a suburban enclave. It doesn't necessarily make it a city. I honestly believe both of these areas would be better off annexed by Sacramento. North Highlands is more of a stretch than Arden-Arcade is but there's nothing about either of these places that says "city" to me.

What says "city potential" to me is that they have the commercial and industrial revenue base to make it work, if the community citizens put their minds to it, like Citrus Heights and Rancho Cordova did. But that is a question of political will. Of course, it is also a question of political will for the City of Sacramento to annex. Once upon a time, I didn't see Citrus Heights or Rancho Cordova as cities either. But here we are....

Originally Posted by CeJeH

Personally I would like to see North Highlands and all other areas on the north side annexed, but I know this is not an opinion shared by many other people. I think areas like Antelope, NH, Foothill Farms, and even places like Rio Linda and Elverta would be better served in the future as all being apart of 1 master plan by the same municipality that could implement smart growth strategies and quality of life principles for each specific neighborhood without them having to be under the control of a County Government which was never really designed to take on such tasks.

No disagrement there. Again, it has always puzzled me why the city gentry of 1950's Sacramento were so head-in-the-sand, but they were. It is a striking contrast to San Jose, where I grew up, whose city manager and successive mayors were gung ho about annexing any development and not allowing much at all to happen in Santa Clara County without them.

[NickB1967]

Originally Posted by CeJeH

West Sac is in a different county.

This. By law, a municipality cannot cross a county boundary.

[CeJeH]

And as far as new cities sprouting up in Sacramento County to fix the "uncity" problem, I think that's a bad idea. Rancho Cordova so far has been very successful as its own city, mostly due to having plenty of open land available to expand into and having a solid business backbone to generate tax revenue. However, Citrus Heights and especially Elk Grove have seemingly gone backwards since incorporating. EG has grown a ton but with that growth has come a lot of new problems caused by an increase in population, a lack of business and employment opportunities to serve that new population and a lack of quality leadership to lead the city in the right direction (I think the 1st 2 mayors they had were ex-Sherrifs, and I believe 1 of them is currently in prison for mortgage fraud). Citrus Heights has been slowly shrinking in population over the last decade+ and also suffers from a lack of tax base from the business side, mostly due to the decay of Sunrise Mall (another failing mall that's causing its city problems-what a shock).

I don't think the answer is for every single suburb and semi-suburb to incorporate into its own city. I don't want Sacramento County to turn into LA county by having Arden-Arcade, North highlands, Fair Oaks, Carmichael etc all becoming separate cities. I think a lot of their problems can be solved by joining the city that they all sprouted around in the 1st place which is Sacramento.

The last time I brought this issue up someone mentioned that city-county consolidation had already been strongly shot down decades ago, and that's good. I don't want that either. There's no reason why Wilton, Rancho Murieta, Walnut Grove, etc should be included in the city. I'm not arguing for that. I just think that the "uncity" areas, small unincorporated suburbs, and open land that's immediately adjacent to the City of Sacramento should all be annexed and controlled by the city government so that they can all be under 1 government with a unified plan. As of now all of these areas are under control of a large county government which is employed to address the needs of a large number of people that live in a variety of different environments and situations, and many of the more urban population centers would benefit from having more representation in a smaller, more centralized form of government than what they're represented by currently.

[wburg]

My point in mentioning West Sacramento was to point out that just because an adjacent neighborhood bears the city's name does not mean it should be part of the city. We annexed North Sacramento (formerly a separate city) in the 1960s and that neighborhood is still in rough shape.

[KC6ZLV]

Originally Posted by NickB1967

But what makes Sacramento County such an odd duck is that the development was mostly unincorporated county land (a.k.a., the "un-City"), while in every other California county development was mostly, and in some counties entirely, either (1) annexed by an adjacent municipality, or (2) incorporated in itself as a municipality. Why Sacramento City proper didn't do what San Jose, Fresno, and other California cities did from 1945 forward has always puzzled me.

Sacramento County is coming around more recently as Citrus Heights, Elk Grove, and Rancho Cordova have all incorporated, and I do suspect North Highlands and Arden Arcade will one day either see the light and incorporate themselves, or be annexed by the City of Sacramento, if the City of Sacramento can ever decide that the revenue benefits of the additional commerical and industrial regions outweigh the addition of "unprogressive" (sic) people into their city.

It was the pattern of development that did it. Most cities expanded outward from a central downtown area, and those areas had one or several defined business sectors or companies that the city grew outward from a central point. Proximity also is important. The distance between Folsom and Sacramento is considerable. Especially considered so in the past. Some of the articles I've read about in regards to major historical events in Folsom (building Folsom Dam, the hydro-electric plant, bringing electricity from Folsom to Sacramento) that were written from a Sacramento-centric perspective would have made you think Folsom was out there somewhere near Area 51. Citrus Heights, although closer to Sacramento, is still a fair distance away. These places were far enough away that people who lived out there also worked out there and likely only went into Sacramento for items they couldn't find in those communities. After WWII and the growth of retail chains, they had less reason to go to Sacramento because they could now buy appliances in Carmichael. It was also at this time when real suburban development occurred, but Sacramento and the outlying communities still had open spaces between them. Compare that to Fresno and you will see a very different story. Fresno and Clovis and you have two populated places 6 miles apart. That is about the distance from Downtown Sacramento to Watt Avenue.

Arden-Arcade wasn't annexed because it is one of those areas where the people don't want to be annexed. Every city has those, and over time they usually end up as county "islands." They usually aren't as extensive as Arden, and that may have been an effective geographic barrier for annexation to the east of Arden.