Innovation without gentrification? • SN&R Extra Aggie Square is coming to Oak Park, like it or not

The promise and pitfalls of Aggie Square in Oak Park

The
housing crisis came for Tanya Faison on Dec. 13.

That
day, the founder of Black Lives Matter Sacramento received a 60-day
notice from her landlord to vacate the three-bedroom home with $1,250
monthly rent that she’d lived in for nearly four years near central
Oak Park.

“His
reasoning was that he wanted to do upgrades, and he wanted to do them
at any time of the day or night and he wanted to do them himself,”
Faison told SN&R. “So he did not want me there while he was
doing that. I’m assuming he’s either going to sell the place or
he’s going to rent it for more money.”

These
days, either selling or raising rent is common in Oak Park, which has
been a flashpoint in Sacramento’s housing crisis. Already,
wholesale gentrification has occurred in north Oak Park, where homes
sell for an average approaching $450,000. Central and south Oak Park
have remained more affordable, though the gap is closing, with
residents like Faison being displaced.

Now,
an ambitious project touted by local leaders might push housing costs
in Oak Park and surrounding areas even higher.

Aggie Square—a public-private partnership announced in 2018 between the city, UC Davis Health, private industry and other groups—could bring thousands of jobs related to health care, technology and research. Leaders hype the possibilities of Aggie Square, which could total more than $500 million of investment and feature research for cancer, autism and Alzheimer’s disease.

It’s
planned for 12 acres at UC Davis Medical Center near north Oak Park
and Elmhurst, and ground could break on the first
phase of construction as early as next year.

But
neighborhood representatives and activists including Faison have
concerns that the project could also bring more detrimental impacts.

Property values rise

Michael Blair has seen both the good and bad of gentrification in Oak Park. Blair, the founder of South Oak Park Community Association, paid $120,000 for his house 16 years ago.

He’d
pay twice as much today, with houses in south Oak Park having sold
for a median of $240,000 since the beginning of 2019, according to
Sacramento property appraiser Ryan Lundquist. Further north, median
prices since the beginning of 2019 are higher: $276,750 in central
Oak Park and $431,200 in north Oak Park.

Blair has seen some benefits as property values have risen in his neighborhood. The 40 Acres complex at 34th Street and Broadway in north Oak Park opened in 2010 and is part of a bustling commercial district.

“I’ve
asked people, I’ve said, ‘Hey, it’s 9 o’clock at night. Would
you feel safe standing right here?’ They say, ‘Yeah,’” Blair
said. “And I say, ‘Okay, if it was 20 years ago, 9 o’clock at
night, would you feel safe?’ They’re like, ‘Absolutely not.’”

“With gentrification comes the safety and that’s the positive part,” he added. “But then there’s the negative piece as well, whereas you don’t know the faces, the community changes. People with longtime legacy, standing in the community are forgotten.”

Blair,
who serves on an Aggie Square advisory council, is concerned that the
project will cause further gentrification in Oak Park.

“I’m not confident that it won’t,” he said. “I think it will. I think any improvement you make in this area is going to cause some level of gentrification.”

“I think any improvement you make in this area is going to cause some level of gentrification.”

The mood has been mixed at community forums that Oak Park Neighborhood Association has held about Aggie Square in January 2019 and last month, said Adrian Rehn, the association’s vice president.

“I’ll
say there’s some people in the community who are very excited about
this community amenity that is going to be built on the border of Oak
Park in the next few years,” he said. “And then there’s others
who are very concerned about the gentrification and the potential
displacement that it may cause.”

The
roots of housing inequity in Oak Park date to the middle of the 20th
century, when racial covenants and mortgage redlining helped
transform the neighborhood. Oak Park went from 6.5% non-white in 1950
to 48% non-white in 1970, according to a 2009 article in the
International Journal of Urban and Regional Research by UC Davis
researcher Jesus Hernandez.

“Fears
of high risks for lenders, based on the area’s rapidly changing
demographics, led to a systematic disinvestment by financial
institutions from older inner-city communities,” wrote Hernandez,
who declined to be interviewed.

That
disinvestment later led to financial opportunity in Oak Park. Faison
cited work that began under former Mayor Kevin Johnson, who owned
numerous properties in the neighborhood, as well as banks and real
estate companies that snagged homes at rock-bottom prices after the
2007-09 recession.

Rehn
said the three-bedroom, one-bath house that he shares with two
roommates in north Oak Park sold for $90,000 in 2009. Today, it’s
worth more than three times as much.

“If
you were to look at housing costs and housing prices four years ago
in central and south [Oak Park], I think you’d be even more
shocked,” he said.

Jobs without displacement?

Amid
the rising prices in Oak Park, local leaders including Mayor Darrell
Steinberg and Barry Broome, executive director for the Greater
Sacramento Economic Council, began planning Aggie Square. A new UC
Davis chancellor, Gary May, arrived in 2017 from Georgia Tech, where
he’d served as a dean and helped build Tech Square in downtown
Atlanta.

David
Yoakley Mitchell, operations director for the Atlanta Preservation
Center, said Tech Square has been positive for many people. But it’s
helped signal the change in downtown Atlanta, too.

“So
much of the residential spaces of downtown Atlanta have been replaced
with businesses,” Mitchell said.

Mitchell’s
group lamented the near-demolition of the historic Crum & Forster
Building, with only its facade remaining. “Once they’ve decided
they gonna do something, they gonna do it,” he said.

Broome,
who went on a 2017 trip to Atlanta with local leaders including
Steinberg, said he didn’t see displacement of residents around Tech
Square. He said his group fought to locate Aggie Square in Oak
Park—not the railyards north of downtown or the former Sleep Train
Arena site in Natomas, where others wanted it—because of the jobs
it can bring.

And
gentrification’s not a bad thing to Broome. “There’s a big
difference between gentrification and displacement,” he said. “I
mean, every economic developer’s goal is gentrification, not
displacement. Gentrification—meaning wages go up in the
neighborhood, job opportunities go up in the neighborhood, tax income
goes up in the schools.”

But
to Fabrizio Sasso, executive director of the Sacramento Central Labor
Council, gentrification and displacement of people are inextricably
linked.

“I
don’t know of a project or an area in cities that I’m familiar
with that have been gentrified that need not include displacement,”
Sasso said. “I’d like to see what their plan for that looks like,
because I don’t think that one can happen without the other.”

And
he sees potential for displacement with Aggie Square.

“We
know what this brings,” Sasso said. “And how the city responds,
that’s what we’re going to be looking at.”

Potential and promises

There
does not appear to be a consensus on the impact of Aggie Square.

“The
reality is Aggie Square could be the best thing for the neighborhood,
and it could be the worst thing for the neighborhood,” said
Sacramento City Council member Eric Guerra, whose district is
directly east of UC Davis Med Center. “But for us to do nothing
doesn’t improve our situation in the commercial corridor.”

Certainly,
the job potential is high. The city’s chief innovation officer
Louis Stewart says he’s heard figures ranging from 2,000 to 10,000.

“If
the city does what it’s supposed to do properly surrounding Aggie
Square, there’ll be many more jobs that are tangentially related to
the project, versus directly related to the project,” said Stewart,
who has been in the loop as entities like IBM and the Alice Waters
Institute for Edible Education have come into the fold for the
project.

Steinberg
said he refuses to accept that there must be a choice between
economic development and affordable housing.

“We
must have both,” the mayor said. “And I’m aware of the risks or
the threat of gentrification as we aggressively build more economic
and job anchors in the our community. But we are just as aggressive.”

He
pushed the City Council to vote in January to create an $100 million
affordable housing trust fund, using some money from the Measure U
sales tax increase that voters approved in 2018.

Broome
said the construction of 2,500 units of housing “would be enough to
avoid any potential displacement due to Aggie Square.” Guerra noted
that more than 100 vacant parcels have been identified along Stockton
Boulevard.

But
there’s some question of how far funds might go. Steinberg noted at
a Feb. 6 program hosted by the Urban Land Institute that each unit of
affordable housing costs an average of $400,000 to construct. That
would equal only 250 units from the $100 million, but the mayor is
proposing that 30% of all affordable housing the city helps fund
should cost less than $100,000 in public money.

“We
need an efficiency housing revolution in California, and I’m
talking about quality housing,” Steinberg said. “But housing that
is smaller, less expensive, easier to manufacture. We have a single
housing prototype and wonderful for the people who are lucky enough
to win the lottery and I mean the housing lottery.”

Even
a UC Davis official—Hendry Ton, the university’s associate vice
chancellor for health equity, diversity and inclusion—has questions
about Aggie Square causing gentrification and displacing residents.

“I
think there’s a lot of questions about that and I certainly have
questions about that as well,” Ton said. “I think that the
potential is that if the people in Aggie Square and the university
are thoughtful and careful and collaborative about this, this can be
a very significant force for good in the neighborhood.”

So
far, however, collaboration hasn’t exactly been smooth, with
officials and residents clashing on plans to ensure the neighborhood
benefits from the project.

A
group connected to the California Endowment’s Building Healthy
Communities initiative, known as Sacramento Investment Without
Displacement, has been working on a legally binding community
benefits agreement for Aggie Square.

A January draft of the agreement called for local hiring from nearby zip codes, anti-demolition policies to protect homes and enrollment of at least 50 percent of Medi-Cal recipients living within five miles of Aggie Square.

“We believe that this project has a lot of potential to be successful. But it also has a lot of potential to displace working families.”

“We want to see Aggie Square be successful,” said Gabby Trejo, who has been working on the agreement and serves as executive director of Sacramento Area Congregations Together. “We believe that this project has a lot of potential to be successful. But it also has a lot of potential to displace working families. And we want to make sure that working families in our region are protected.”

City
leaders have yet to commit to a community benefits agreement,
however. Guerra and Councilman Jay Schenirer, who didn’t respond to
a request for comment, are instead working on a letter of intent,
which city leaders declined to provide.

“I’m
less concerned about the type of document and more concerned about an
honest agreement… that will last longer than whatever we call the
agreement,” Guerra said.

But
Trejo and Sasso said the letter is insufficient. “We’ve
seen other folks be bad actors in that things are promised and then
they’re never delivered,” Sasso said.

Representatives
for developer Wexford Science and Technology,
which will retain ownership in the project once it’s built and
lease space to UC Davis, weren’t available for comment.

Bob
Segar, a planning director for Aggie Square and UC Davis, also
stopped short of committing to a community benefits agreement,
saying, “We need to take things issue by issue.”

But
he said he cares about retaining the character of the local
neighborhoods.

“It’s
not trying to radically change the nature of neighborhoods,” Segar
said. “It’s hopefully mapping that investment in a place that
pretty much everybody’s agreeing can benefit from that investment.”