<\/p>\n
Demas Enterprises is planning to build a six-story 312-unit market-rate apartment complex in Sacramento along Alhambra Boulevard between 30th, C and D streets. East Sacramento residents oppose the six\u2011story Alhambra redevelopment, citing zoning, traffic, infrastructure and environmental concerns in Sacramento.<\/p>\n
HRGA<\/p>\n
In \u201cStar Wars: Revenge of the Sith,\u201d Anakin Skywalker delivers a line as he transforms into Darth Vader, \u201cIf you\u2019re not with me, then you\u2019re my enemy.\u201d<\/p>\n
That\u2019s the playbook developers and their allies are using in Sacramento\u2019s housing debate today. Agree with them, and you\u2019re on the side of progress. Question them, and you\u2019re labeled a \u201cNIMBY<\/a>\u201d \u2014 dismissed, caricatured and fed into a narrative that paints residents as villains<\/a> standing in the way of solving California\u2019s housing crisis.<\/p>\n We\u2019re watching this play out with the Alhambra redevelopment project<\/a>. A proposed six-story, block-long building will be dropped into a neighborhood defined by one-story homes. It even requires bending or outright bypassing long-standing zoning protections<\/a> meant to prevent exactly this kind of mismatch.<\/p>\n Residents didn\u2019t oppose it blindly. We just wanted engagement. We read the plans, cited city code and asked questions about scale, traffic mitigation, safety and impact. But our concerns were ignored.<\/p>\n I have lived in East Sacramento for 43 years, and I\u2019m not afraid to say that I oppose the proposed redevelopment<\/a> of the former Mary Ann Bakery site on Alhambra Boulevard. That doesn\u2019t mean I oppose development. The property is an eyesore, and I agree it needs to change.<\/p>\n What I, and many of my neighbors<\/a>, are concerned about is something else entirely: The growing trend of developers bankrolling local campaigns and steam-rolling communities to maximize profits while ignoring zoning laws, infrastructure limits and environmental realities, all while presenting themselves as the heroes of California\u2019s housing crisis.<\/p>\n If that were true, the housing they\u2019re building would reflect the need that supposedly justifies their power.<\/p>\n Across Sacramento, most new housing is market-rate, often at prices that remain out of reach for many working families. That\u2019s not a matter of opinion, it\u2019s found in the data: According to the Kidder Mathews Research Group<\/a>, vacancy rates in the Sacramento multifamily market have climbed to about 7% since the start of the year, and new units are taking longer to fill.<\/p>\n Projects continue to be marketed as essential, urgent and beyond reproach because of California\u2019s broader housing crisis. Political pressure by developers<\/a> is at work here \u2014 not state housing laws. The state has made it easier to develop housing, and harder for cities to deny projects.<\/p>\n Nothing in state legislation, however, prevents the city from requiring a project to comply with its numerical standards (in this case, a 35-foot height limit). The impacts don\u2019t disappear just because they\u2019re inconvenient to acknowledge.<\/p>\n Anyone who drives the Alhambra corridor or has seen spillover traffic from other Sacramento projects knows how quickly \u201cmanageable\u201d projects become daily gridlock. Sacramento\u2019s aging wastewater system is already under strain<\/a>, raising legitimate questions about how additional density will be supported over time. And at this specific site, there are unresolved environmental concerns tied to what lies underground \u2014 issues that should be fully addressed before anyone is living there, not after.<\/p>\n These aren\u2019t fringe objections or anti-growth talking points, they are basic expectations for responsible development. (\u201cResponsible\u201d being the key word).<\/p>\n Because of NIMBY backlash, however, there\u2019s been a broader shift in how decisions are being made and who gets to influence them. The system is increasingly treating residents as obstacles rather than stakeholders, and developers as default solutions rather than interested parties with financial incentives.<\/p>\n Let\u2019s be honest about those incentives. Developers are not nonprofits. They build what is most profitable<\/a>, not what is most needed. Right now, that means market-rate and higher-end units, not affordable housing. Calling this a solution to the housing crisis ignores both economic reality and lived experience.<\/p>\n But that\u2019s the situation we are in, partly because of developers funding local officials. Just look at the 2024 mayoral race:<\/a> Mayor Kevin McCarty raised more than $1 million, mainly from developers<\/a>, realtors and other related entities. City Councilmember Phil Pluckebaum, who represents East Sacramento and Midtown, was largely funded by developers<\/a> in his 2024 campaign.<\/p>\n