Soroptimist financial literacy series begins Jan. 24
Arnold calls $465mil I-80 Widening “Insanity"

Sierra Club Endorses No on Measure M - No on the Floodwall in Woodland, CA

(From press release) Citing “the potential to induce sprawling growth”, the “potential adverse impacts on prime farm land”, “lack of proper public process”, devastating environmental and social outcomes including climate change, air pollution, and loss of biodiversity, the Sierra Club announces its opposition to Measure M in Woodland CA on the March 5, 2024 Special Municipal Election Ballot. Measure M is a vote to allow the construction of the Lower Cache Creek Flood Risk Management Project or, as it is referred to locally, the “Floodwall”.

In 2004, a majority of Woodland voters passed Measure “S”, which added a section to the Woodland Municipal Code that provides that the City shall not fund or take any action that supports the Lower Cache Creek flood barrier or a “substantially similar structure”.

A "No" vote on Measure "M" will keep that prohibiting language in the Woodland Municipal Code in its current form as originally enacted by Measure “S”, and will not allow City Council authorization for the construction and funding of the Lower Cache Creek Flood Risk Management Project.

The Lower Cache Creek Flood Risk Management Project consists of a 5.6 mile massive earthen structure from 6 ft to about 16 ft above grade, depending on its location, and the existing topography of the land. It will run east-west just north of the northern urban limits of the City of Woodland connecting to an existing levee on the Cache Creek Settling Basin.

The endorsement of the opposition to this ballot measure follows an extensive evaluation process by the local Sierra Club Yolano Group Management Committee, the Sierra Club Mother Lode Chapter Political and Executive Committees, and the Sierra Club California Local Measure Review Committee.

The Sierra Club has long-standing official policies designed to preserve farmland by minimizing urban sprawl onto farmland and maximizing intensive infill development. The Sierra Club opposes sprawl as a pattern of increasingly inefficient and wasteful land use with devastating environmental and social outcomes.

“While the Sierra Club is supportive of efforts to protect urban areas from the adverse effects of flooding, this project actually provides protection to only a small number of homes in Woodland that are currently in the 100-year floodplain mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). However, it greatly increases the risk of flooding to farmers of 6,000 acres of prime farmland on the northern “wet-side” of the proposed Floodwall. These farms are put in a functional bypass threatening their homes, wells, buildings, and equipment in the even of a future flood”, stated Alan Pryor, Chair of the local Sierra Club Yolano Group in whose area the project is located.

“Additionally, the proposed Floodwall would remove many square miles of farmland to the east and southeast of Woodland from the existing 100-year floodplain which lands are currently owned by speculative land developers and which could lead to sprawling growth away from the Woodland City center. This project is inconsistent with official Sierra Club land use policies encouraging conservation of farmland and infill development and discouraging sprawl”, added Mr. Pryor.

For more information please contact Alan Pryor by phone at 916-996-4811 or by email at [email protected].

Thanks for all you do for the environment,

Alan Pryor
Chair
Sierra Club Yolano Group

Comments

Ron O

"The Sierra Club has long-standing official policies designed to preserve farmland by minimizing urban sprawl onto farmland and maximizing intensive infill development."

Happy to hear that, but only if it was true and consistent (e.g., in regard to Covell Village, Act II).

Though they're on the right track regarding the floodwall.

I left the recent Sierra Club meeting sometime before the discussion regarding how far (the extent) of the floodwaters into Davis (if the floodwall isn't built). Can anyone provide information regarding that?

Roberta L. Millstein

For the 10,000th time, the Sierra Club has not taken a position on Village Farms yet.

Ron O

For the 10,000th time, the Sierra Club has not taken a position on Village Farms yet.

Right, but it apparently has taken a position on sprawl (which the local chapter doesn't acknowledge in regard to Covell Village).

So, you'll probably hear about this for 11,000 times (or more).

Roberta L. Millstein

which the local chapter doesn't acknowledge in regard to Covell Village).

This again falsely implies that the local chapter has taken a position on Covell Village. It has not.

Ron O

This again falsely implies that the local chapter has taken a position on Covell Village. It has not.

No, it does not imply that. Not in the least.

Put more simply, it asks that the Sierra Club defines sprawl BEFORE considering sprawling proposals, rather than after-the-fact.

South of Davis

Does anyone know if the "farmers of 6,000 acres of prime farmland on the northern “wet-side” of the proposed Floodwall" are also opposed to the "Floodwall"?

Alan Pryor

No on Measure M is also endorsed by the Yolo County Farm Bureau. And farmers and their families and their suppliers are the officers and the supporters of the No on M campaign.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)