SacForums.com - The Sacramento, CA Online Community
Link to SacForums | Tell a Friend | Set as Startpage | Add to Favorites | Download Forum App


SacForums.com - The Sacramento, CA Online Community

Your ad here for about $1 per day! Click here for current rates and options.
Join SacForums.com


HOME

FORUMS

MEMBERS

CALENDAR

BLOG

DEALS

SPONSORS

REGISTER


Get Social with
SacForums.com:



Sacramento Forums: Some Making Push For Arden-Arcade To Become City - Sacramento Forums

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Some Making Push For Arden-Arcade To Become City Rate Topic: -----

#1 User is offline   Eric 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Administrators
  • Posts: 1,899
  • Joined: 24-October 06
  • LocationSacramento, CA

Posted 13 February 2007 - 09:20 AM

Some Making Push For Arden-Arcade To Become City

Quote

Elk Grove and Citrus Heights are just a couple of the new cities in Sacramento county and now there could be another sudden city on the way. Some are making a push for the Arden-Arcade area to become a city, but this would mean a big loss of money for Sacramento.


Video at link below:

http://cbs13.com/loc..._044004101.html
0

#2 User is offline   davidmauss 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 12-February 07

Posted 14 February 2007 - 03:33 AM

I think it would be terrible if Arden-Arcade became a city. As a Citrus Heights resident, I'm all for places in Sacramento County becoming cities, but I don't think Arden-Arcade is a case like Elk Grove or Citrus Heights. For one, it really doesn't have its own identity, and its fairly difficult to discern where exactly it is in relation to Sacramento. I know county services can be kind of lame, but maybe they would be better served by annexing themselves onto the city of Sacramento rather than striking it out on their own?

Anyone else have any opinions on this?
0

#3 User is offline   Eric 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Administrators
  • Posts: 1,899
  • Joined: 24-October 06
  • LocationSacramento, CA

Posted 14 February 2007 - 08:55 AM

I don't really have an opinion on the issue itself... the name perhaps... :o

Here's some info off of their site (ArdenArcadeCity.org)

Quote

    Arden Arcade is the unincorporated 13 square mile area located between Ethan Way on the west and Mission Avenue on the east, north of Fair Oaks Boulevard, and south of Auburn Boulevard. Based on the 2000 Census, the population of Arden Arcade is more than 78,000 persons. There are about 3,000 businesses located in Arden Arcade.


Posted Image
0

#4 User is offline   Eric 

  • Advanced Member
  • Group: Administrators
  • Posts: 1,899
  • Joined: 24-October 06
  • LocationSacramento, CA

Posted 14 February 2007 - 02:12 PM

I saw some of their signs today as I was heading down Arden Way (corner of Arden & Watt) and it appears that they made a typo in their URL - they have ardenarcadecity.com listed, which should be ardenarcadecity.org as I've noted above. I just sent them an email to let them know :o
0

#5 User is offline   CrazyMo 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 163
  • Joined: 30-October 06

Posted 15 February 2007 - 10:14 PM

DOH! Those signs aren't cheap! And it doesn't look good as far as the attention to detail needed to run a city!
0

#6 User is offline   davidmauss 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 12
  • Joined: 12-February 07

Posted 16 February 2007 - 04:20 AM

That would be a weird chunk of county to designate a city. I still don't think it's really unique enough to justify being anything more than an area. Like I said before, I think it should just be annexed by the city of Sacramento. Adding it on the Citrus Heights would be nice though, too.

Maybe it could be its own burrough?
0

#7 User is offline   attagirl 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: 08-May 07

Posted 29 May 2007 - 12:03 PM

As the smaller areas in a city start to grow there is no choice but to make them their own cities. I know that people are not wanting to live in suburbs but it is going to happen, and it needs to be done at one point or another. What does it take to determine if an area is capable to become a city.
0

#8 User is offline   wburg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 64
  • Joined: 18-April 07
  • LocationMidtown Sacramento

Posted 29 May 2007 - 12:43 PM

Considering that the area is surrounded by Sacramento on three sides, becoming part of Sacramento makes more sense than trying to form their own city. The street map seems designed to optimize the amount of sales-tax-generating zones, including the Watt, Arden and El Camino retail corridors and the car dealerships on the southern side of Auburn. So while there are defined urban corridors and low-density residential areas, it doesn't seem like they would have any room to expand, unless they wanted to try to absorb Carmichael. And, like any suburban-pattern city, there isn't a definable "downtown" or city center.

Sacramento's city limits are very unusual--we are a K-shaped city. By consolidating the Panhandle, Arden-Arcade and the South Sacramento corridor, we would be a much more consolidated city, bring more people into the urban boundary, and be able to provide better services in those neighborhoods, simply by expanding current facilities to serve neighborhoods that are already nearby.
0

#9 User is offline   fk310 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 13
  • Joined: 02-June 07

Posted 05 June 2007 - 12:36 AM

I think the main concern is mostly about tax allocation rather than preserving some form of community identity. Really, they should just focus on having more of Arden's taxes return to the community specifically than creating a new city out of nowhere. Come on, Arden Arcade sounds more like a run down teenage hangout than a bonafide city.

I am hoping Sacramento will soon eclipse other cities in California in population and subsequently status, so I don't want to see its population diluted at all.
0

#10 User is offline   becks882008 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 11-November 08

Posted 11 November 2008 - 10:54 PM

I strongly support the city of Sacramento's effort in annexing Arden Arcade. Why not? We all have to work together to better Sacramento. It's a regional problem, and it's not fair that us Sacramentans have to deal with the problems. While others just sit back and enjoy what our city has to offer.Yes, you would pay a little more on your utility bill,but why not take part and identify yourself with the capital city? Yes still uphold your Arden Arcade pride, Sacramento is made up of many different neighborhoods. Why not take pride in Sacramento, instead of wanting to incorporate every piece of the county into cities that leach off Sacramento. Also, how absurd would it be for such a small area surrounded on 3 sides like Arden Arcade be a city?? With borders being Ethan Wy,Auburn,Fair Oaks,etc. That has to be the biggest joke ever, like saying Natomas wants to incorporate.(before it was annexed)oh, and I would say 90%of people wouldn't know Arden Arcade is it's own city anyway. They think it's Sacramento, and how weird would it be to see a fat City Limit Sign right at El Camino and Ethan Wy???
1

#11 User is offline   MaryOse 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1
  • Joined: 01-November 10

Posted 01 November 2010 - 03:44 PM

I support Cityhood for the Arden Arcade area unconditionally. We have the ability and wherewithal to assume responsibility for our own municipal services - including public safety, infrastructure and economic development - while living within our means, with a balanced budget and ample reserves every year - with no new taxes, no new debt and no burdensome overhead. Every independent expert and accountable public official including our own County Supervisors agreed. Our other alternatives are dismal: (a) continue to rely on the broke and indebted County to maybe some day stop by and improve our neighborhoods and business environment instead of stripping off our revenues and using them elsewhere, or (:D get absorbed by the City of Sac with its similar economic condition, already analyzing moving money from assets into the general fund (horrible!), and voter willingness for new taxes to make ends meet. Why would we choose either of those alternatives that will lead to continued deterioration of our community? The best government is local government, which is what we're talking about here: a replacement (not more) government with local leaders whom we choose who are accountable to their neighbors, making decisions that affect all of us. We can do better. We deserve better. There is no better time than now: Let's stop the bleeding and start building our community and civic pride. The risk lies in doing nothing, continuing the status quo. Opponents know this and have chosen to avoid public debate since being called on their "misrepresentations." They can't support their claims - they have no independent experts, only haphazard guesses and emotional ploys. BTW, we can call ourselves anything we want. Change is hard, but this time it's the only reasonable choice, and it's a GREAT one. Vote YES on Measure D so we can grow together. Thank you.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users






Site Links:

SacForums.com
Enter Forums
Forum Rules
Events Calendar
Deals
Sponsors
Advertising
Help Promote
Link To Us
Link Partners


Sacramento Info:

Sacramento News
Sacramento Weather
Sacramento Traffic
Sacramento Gas Prices
Sacramento Web Cams
Sacramento Jobs
Sacramento Real Estate
Sacramento Classifieds
Explore Sacramento
Ask Sacramento



SacKingsGear.com


All Content Copyright © 2014 SacForums.com - All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Site Map | Contact Us