By admin 
Carmen Lugo announced to the Sacramento County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday that she knew they’d already made their mind up about the Upper Westside Project.
Read more California’s Legislature is eager to close another prison. Newsom may not be
So Lugo made a symbolic gesture, displaying a $75 check that she gave to former Sacramento Mayor Heather Fargo to go toward a lawsuit to fight the project. If completed, the project could add 25,000 residents to unincorporated land west of Natomas that is currently largely vacant.
Following more than three hours of meeting time devoted to presentations by county staff and project representatives and approximately 75 public commenters, the board voted 5-0 to approve the long-running and controversial Upper Westside Project.
That doesn’t mean, though, that a 25,000-resident development will spring up on unincorporated land west of Natomas anytime soon, as the project seems likely to draw an environmental lawsuit.
What is the Upper Westside Project?
A planning document prepared by county staff laid out how the project would transform more than 1,500 acres of land. The project area totals more than 2,000 acres, with around 550 acres being kept as an agricultural buffer.
As for the rest of the land, roughly 800 acres could go to residential development, with 6,140 units planned. Another 136.5 acres could go to mixed-use commercial or employment, with an additional 3,216 dwellings. Much of the rest of the land could be used for schools, parks or open space.
County staff, led by planning director Todd Smith, gave an extensive presentation during Tuesday’s meeting with supervisors periodically asking questions.
Serna, who lives in Westlake near the project area and is not running for re-election, has been openly supportive of the project and urged Smith at the beginning of the presentation to try to answer questions that had come up over the past 8-1/2 years about the project.
“I think doing the right thing is understanding that we are way behind the eight-ball of housing of all types,” Serna said shortly before the board voted on a motion he made to approve the project.
Serna was not the only supervisor to speak positively about the proposed development, with chair Rosario Rodriguez saying, “It’s an exceptional proposal.”
A number of speakers were also enthusiastic about the project, such as Shay Jorn who said, “I ask that you give this amazing gift to Sacramento.”
Dennis Crabtree identified himself as a pastor and also voiced his support. “I really feel that this project would create a lot of jobs for people with disabilities,” Crabtree said.
Speakers were fairly split between support and opposition of the project, with applause from the audience for each side as public comment proceeded. That said, the emotional high point of the meeting might have come from Fargo, who asked everyone in opposition to stand. About half the room stood.
Read more Who are the 2026 James Beard culinary award winners from California?
“You need to know that the community opposes this project,” said Fargo, who represented the Natomas area on Sacramento City Council before serving as mayor in the 2000s and has been a major voice over the years for the area’s environmental conservation.
Fargo decried that speakers during were only given one minute for comment on the item on Tuesday. “We really feel that we have not had a fair process here,” Fargo said. Her comment was followed by applause.
David Loy, an attorney for the First Amendment Coalition said via email Tuesday that public agencies are legally allowed to limit comment time during meetings, provided they apply this to everyone.
Others also questioned how much time was allotted for those opposing the project, such as Flojaune Cofer, who is running to replace Serna on the board and appears likely to advance to the November general election.
“If we had heard a complementary presentation from those that opposed, that could have rivaled the 2-1/2 hours we almost heard from those in support we might have heard some of the very legitimate concerns about this project and also some additional alternatives,” Cofer said.
Cofer urged the board not to move forward with the project.
“It’s not ready for prime time,” Cofer said.
What happens next
Among those who spoke during public comment was Alicia Guerra, an attorney for Buchalter Law Firm who said she was appearing on behalf of the city of Sacramento.
Guerra told the board that she had concerns that the county had not satisfied a public noticing requirement to the city under the Brown Act and that her group had submitted “significant comments.”
She left the meeting shortly after speaking, but spoke briefly with The Bee outside. Asked a question related to the possibility of a lawsuit under the California Environmental Quality Act, Guerra replied, “We’ll see what happens.”
Aside from a lawsuit, even people in support of the project voiced that there could be work ahead. Supervisor Pat Hume suggested implementing a fee program related to the project. But Hume also said, speaking in general terms, “This is the type of project that should move forward.”
Nick Avdis, an attorney who spoke on behalf of the project’s land ownership, said during a presentation during Tuesday’s meeting, “Today’s action … will not put a single shovel in the ground. Significant permitting, analysis and regulatory oversight are ahead of us.”
That might not be enough for public commenters like Gary Delhan, who pointed toward the supervisors’ dais.
Read more Gavin Newsom tried courting the right, but Trump came for him anyway | Opinion
“This is your legacy,” Delhan said.
Source: Sacramento County
This story was originally published June 16, 2026 at 6:52 PM.