Sacramento is debating what to do with its beloved zoo. We have an answer.
READ MORE
Elk Grove’s ‘Legacy Moment’
Residents are watching in real time Elk Grove’s evolution from a suburb of Sacramento to a self-defined regional destination. A flurry of new projects are reshaping and redefining this city of nearly 180,000.
Expand All
Elk Grove’s ‘legacy moment’: How a city transforms from a bedroom community to a destination
Sacramento is debating what to do with its beloved zoo. We have an answer.
How Elk Grove built a reputation for community and quality of life through cooperation
‘I wish this was around when I was younger.’ See Elk Grove’s big new park near city center
The Sacramento City Council will host a public discussion this week about the fate of the Sacramento Zoo, which is looking to expand and relocate from its cramped quarters in William Land Park.
It’s fair for Sacramento residents to have a say in the fate of a zoo considered a cherished civic amenity for generations. But there is an appealing alternative that would solve the zoo’s space issues and preserve an asset for our region: Move the zoo to Elk Grove.
Leaders of the Sacramento Zoo are already negotiating with Elk Grove, a city that is on the move with a can-do attitude and a desire to grow and expand.
Sacramento would lose little by ceding an expanded zoo to Elk Grove. On the contrary, such a move would allow the city to focus its financial and other resources on more pressing priorities while keeping the zoo alive, thriving and just a short drive south of Sacramento.
This shouldn’t be complicated. Nor should it be framed as a loss for Sacramento. This is a potential win for our region and for Elk Grove, which has arrived as a thriving community whose success is a regional success.
If zoo leaders can reach an agreement with the city, an expanded and improved facility would be located on a 60-acre lot in southern Elk Grove, at the intersection of Kammerer Road and Lotz Parkway.
The space would be much larger than the current 15-acre Land Park location, where the zoo has been based for more than 90 years. Zoo leaders have warned they are in danger of losing their accreditation due to outdated habitats.
The Elk Grove site makes sense for that city, and it makes more sense than any other site in Sacramento.
The only real option in Sacramento is North Natomas Regional Park. Sacramento was eyeing that location for the zoo late last year, but elected officials led by Mayor Darrell Steinberg wisely paused that discussion. It would be an equity issue for other parts of the city if Sacramento put the zoo in Natomas, where the City Council already approved a $14.4 million North Natomas Community Center and Aquatic Complex. City leaders from communities lacking such amenities rightly questioned why Natomas should benefit from an aquatic center and a zoo while other neighborhoods are overlooked.
There is also the question of cost. Should Sacramento commit $50 million or more in public dollars to the zoo when it’s also facing bigger projects such as improving Sacramento’s waterfront?
Considering these questions does not reflect badly on Sacramento leaders. It reflects a desire to do what is best for the capital city of California and for the Sacramento region. This is not a potential defeat. It’s a potential victory.
As Yousef Baig of The Bee’s editorial board wrote in September: “We should be cheering for Elk Grove to pull this off. It’s a prime destination for families, home to one of the largest single school districts in the state and one of the fastest-growing economies nationwide.”
Elk Grove has a dynamic mayor in Bobbie Singh-Allen. Elk Grove is marked by a culture of cooperation among its political and community leaders. If it lands a zoo, it would be only a 20-minute trip from the capital. Meanwhile, Sacramento can focus on its top priorities while feeling good that its zoo is thriving in a broader Sacramento region, one big enough and mature enough to share amenities in a way that benefits us all.
BEHIND THE STORY
MOREWhat are editorials, and who writes them?
Editorials represent the collective opinion of The Sacramento Bee Editorial Board.
They do not reflect the individual opinions of board members or the views of Bee reporters in the news section. Bee reporters do not participate in editorial board deliberations or weigh in on board decisions. The same rules apply to our sister publications, The Modesto Bee, Fresno Bee, Merced Sun-Star and San Luis Obispo Tribune.
In Sacramento, our board includes Bee Executive Editor Colleen McCain Nelson, McClatchy California Opinion Editor Marcos Breton, opinion writers Robin Epley, Tom Philp, LeBron Antonio Hill and op-ed editor Hannah Holzer.
In Fresno and Merced, the board includes Central Valley Executive Editor Don Blount, Senior Editor Christopher Kirkpatrick, Opinion Editor Juan Esparza Loera, and opinion writer Tad Weber.
In Modesto, the board includes Senior Editor Carlos Virgen and in San Luis Obispo, it includes Opinion Editor Stephanie Finucane.
We base our opinions on reporting by our colleagues in the news section, and our own reporting and interviews. Our members attend public meetings, call people and follow-up on story ideas from readers just as news reporters do. Unlike objective reporters, we share our judgments and state clearly what we think should happen based on our knowledge.
Read more by clicking the arrow in the upper right.
Tell us what you think
You may or may not agree with our perspective. We believe disagreement is healthy and necessary for a functioning democracy. If you would like to share your own views on events important to the Sacramento region, you may write a letter to the editor (150 words or less) using this form, or email an op-ed (650-750 words) to opinion@sacbee.com. Due to a high volume of submissions, we are not able to publish everything we receive.
Support The Sacramento Bee
These conversations are important for our community. Keep the conversation going by supporting The Sacramento Bee. Subscribe here.
