‘Not NIMBYS’: Why East Sacramento residents oppose Alhambra project | Opinion

In “Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith,” Anakin Skywalker delivers a line as he transforms into Darth Vader, “If you’re not with me, then you’re my enemy.”

That’s the playbook developers and their allies are using in Sacramento’s housing debate today. Agree with them, and you’re on the side of progress. Question them, and you’re labeled a “NIMBY” — dismissed, caricatured and fed into a narrative that paints residents as villains standing in the way of solving California’s housing crisis.

We’re watching this play out with the Alhambra redevelopment project. 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 meant to prevent exactly this kind of mismatch.

Residents didn’t 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.

I have lived in East Sacramento for 43 years, and I’m not afraid to say that I oppose the proposed redevelopment of the former Mary Ann Bakery site on Alhambra Boulevard. That doesn’t mean I oppose development. The property is an eyesore, and I agree it needs to change.

What I, and many of my neighbors, 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’s housing crisis.

If that were true, the housing they’re building would reflect the need that supposedly justifies their power.

Across Sacramento, most new housing is market-rate, often at prices that remain out of reach for many working families. That’s not a matter of opinion, it’s found in the data: According to the Kidder Mathews Research Group, 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.

Projects continue to be marketed as essential, urgent and beyond reproach because of California’s broader housing crisis. Political pressure by developers is at work here — not state housing laws. The state has made it easier to develop housing, and harder for cities to deny projects.

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’t disappear just because they’re inconvenient to acknowledge.

Anyone who drives the Alhambra corridor or has seen spillover traffic from other Sacramento projects knows how quickly “manageable” projects become daily gridlock. Sacramento’s aging wastewater system is already under strain, 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 — issues that should be fully addressed before anyone is living there, not after.

These aren’t fringe objections or anti-growth talking points, they are basic expectations for responsible development. (“Responsible” being the key word).

Because of NIMBY backlash, however, there’s 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.

Let’s be honest about those incentives. Developers are not nonprofits. They build what is most profitable, 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.

But that’s the situation we are in, partly because of developers funding local officials. Just look at the 2024 mayoral race: Mayor Kevin McCarty raised more than $1 million, mainly from developers, realtors and other related entities. City Councilmember Phil Pluckebaum, who represents East Sacramento and Midtown, was largely funded by developers in his 2024 campaign.

We need more housing, but growth without balance isn’t progress — it’s displacement, strain and missed opportunity. Growth that overrides zoning, outpaces infrastructure and dismisses community input isn’t bold leadership. It’s a shortcut with consequences.

If the Alhambra project continues to move forward as a template, it will be the canary in the coal mine for cities across California. It shows what happens when the balance tips too far — when local voices are diminished, and when profit is too easily mistaken for public good.

Developers can keep calling themselves our saviors, but believing you’re the hero doesn’t make it so, and Sacramento residents must recognize when a story is being told from only one side.

Dr. Will Green is a retired psychiatrist who practiced in the Sacramento area for 52 years. A 47-year resident of East Sacramento, he volunteers with the UC Davis Botanical Conservatory and Arboretum Teaching Nursery, helps lead community tree-planting efforts in McKinley Park, teaches at the A. Warren McClaskey Adult Education Center and serves as treasurer and cofounder of the East Sacramento Preservation Neighborhood Association.