My name is Victor De La Torre
and I’m in full support of this project because it would bring much needed jobs to families like mine who are struggling to continue to put food on our table, I been a member of LIUNA for 20+ years and this type of jobs could be the difference between having a roof over our families head and becoming homeless.
That is why i ask today to approve this project that is essential to this community.
I am a single father of 4 beautiful kids and without having a job to support them will definitely be a burden.
So I encourage you to approve this project.
Thank you for your time.

This project will bring well-paying career jobs for the local community. This project will allow someone to earn a pension, provide healthcare for themselves and their families, and ultimately earn themselves a career. These kinds of jobs are typically a 2 hour commute away. Having a job close to home means more time with their families and fewer risks while commuting.

Hello Mayor and Council Members,

I would urge your support for growth of the city. This project will create local jobs in our community and have a positive impact by providing good, livable wages with benefits for everyone. It’s crucial to back projects with developers who collaborate with the labor workforce, prioritize paying livable wages with benefits.
Thank you

This Project brings Jobs, Tax Revenues and Services to North Natomas and the Sacramento International Airport.
How could you not approve it!!

I fully support support this expansion and the growth opportunities that will impact many families with regional support and employment for years to come.

Professional and easy to work with.

I am a business owner and resident, and I support continued development in this area. The surrounding land has already been commercially developed, with the airport and the Metro Air Park located just across the freeway. Concentrating additional development here makes far more sense than expanding into new, undeveloped areas. The immediate creation of construction jobs, the long-term availability of mid- to high-income employment, and the increased tax revenue for the city collectively outweigh the environmental concerns identified in the Natomas Basin Habitat Conservation Plan (NBHCP).

I have been a resident and homeowner in North Natomas for over 23 years and I strongly oppose the Airport South Industrial Annexation Project due to the significant negative environmental and community impacts. The proposed development is in very close proximity to existing neighborhoods and schools and will increase air pollution, traffic congestion and strain infrastructure in a community that already struggles with these issues.

Sacramento already has some of the worst air quality in the country. Adding a large industrial development here will only make things worse, especially for the people living closest to it. With so much research showing the link between environmental damage and public health—and with fewer federal protections than ever—this is not the time to approve a project that pushes us backwards.

With no detailed plan, no clarity on where high-impact uses would actually be placed, and such a small separation between the project site and our homes and school, this proposal does not feel safe or appropriate for the people who live here. I urge you to vote no on this project.

The Airport South Industrial Project represents a critical step forward for Sacramento’s economic resilience and infrastructure capability. By strategically annexing and developing this land near the Metro Air Park and Interstate 5, we are not just building warehouses; we are unlocking a vital logistics hub that serves as a transformative economic engine for the region. At full buildout, this development is projected to deliver 5,400 long-term jobs and 3,700 construction job years, creating a stable employment base in a critical corridor. The fiscal impact is equally profound, generating over $10 million in annual tax revenue for the City and contributing more than $4 million in fees to the unified school district. In a region where demand for modern, efficient industrial space continues to evolve, this master-planned development ensures Sacramento remains competitive, reducing our reliance on obsolete facilities and securing our position as a premier supply chain leader in Northern California.

With reservations. First, the city would be involved to maximize opportunity for residents/property tax payers to provide input to improve the project. Second, Building 5 should be eliminated; it is too close to the residential area and mitigation measures are insufficient. Third, all land south of Bayou Way and west of the irrigation/drainage canal all the way to El Paso Blvd should be set aside by the developer with a permanent conservation easement permitting only wildlife habitat, park land and open space for the enjoyment of current and future generations. Local residents contribute millions of dollars in property taxes and sales taxes to the city and county. We need government to listen to what we want first, and to the developers second. The developers argument that the project “won’t work” without Building 5 and the described conserved area just doesn’t hold water. What they are really saying is that is reduces their profit. So what! It’s our turn to get our wishes respected.

I support the ASIA. I believe it would be a huge economic boost for the area.

This is a great opportunity for the local community that will bring some real benefits. The jobs this will create, both during construction and long-term. It will be a huge help to working families and the middle class in our area. These are good employment opportunities that people can actually build on. I'm especially excited about the $4 million going to our local schools. That's real money that will make a difference for our kids and teachers, whether it's better facilities, new equipment, or improved programs. Our schools need this kind of support. Between the infrastructure improvements, job creation, and the boost to our schools, this project is a win for the community. I hope to see it approved.

I'm fully supportive of this project because it will bring local jobs to our community and it will have a positive impact by offering good livable wages with benefits to all of us. It's important to support projects with developers who partner with the labor workforce, believe in paying livable wages with benefits, and support funding pensions for retirement.

eComment received by the City Clerk's Office prior to the meeting.

Hello Mayor and Council Members,

I would urge your support for growth of our city. This project is exactly what we need at this very time. It will bring much needed construction jobs to our area as well as long term permanent jobs. The proposed location is ideal for this type of project, as we only have so much land to choose from. Thank you for your dedication to our city and support of this project.

Mr. Mayor, Vice Mayor, and City Council members,

I fully support the Airport South Industrial Annexation Project. The Union Carpenters and apprentices who live in the area are ready and excited to work on this project.

Thank you.

I support the Airport South project because it represents the kind of community-focused development that creates real opportunities for local residents. Projects like this strengthen apprenticeship and training pathways, helping local workers build sustainable careers while the community benefits from quality construction, safer job sites, and long-term economic stability.

Additional questions that should be asked at tonight’s meeting.
The questions center around the emergency planning, preparedness, and responsive activities which The City is responsible for within the city limits:

1. Has the City Emergency Management/Preparedness group reviewed and commented on this proposal? If so, have all the issues that they raised been addressed? Are the concerns raised and answers provided available to the public to review? Specifically, but not limited to:
a. Evacuation routes in the event of flooding, fires, hazardous materials events, etc. which may be complicated by this development.
b. Response to an impending flood event and the movement of mass equipment to respond, such as in 1986; considering the condition of the existing roads, intersections, freeway accesses, etc.
c. Increased Building Inspection staff, including fire inspectors, to include the legally required continuing/ongoing inspections
d. Funds to continue to support those activities which will be a load to already stretched thin staff and funds

2. Has the Police Chief and her staff commented on this proposal? If so, are these materials available for public review and comment? Specifically, the ability to provide service in an increased area of Sacramento? Are there enough new officers to staff the existing positions and the new additional positions which would be required? Are additional funds from the developer going to be available to support equipment for those officers and related staff? Are the roads suitable for emergency response vehicles and personnel in the event of an incident like the one that happened in Stockton over the weekend?

3. Has the City Fire Chief and his staff commented on this proposal? If so, are these materials available for public review and comment? This proposed development brings additional hazards, threats, and potential unique response requirements to a predominately residential/agricultural area of Sacramento. Will the project proponent be providing funds to provide for increased staff, equipment, training, and facilities driven by the sheer size and complexity of the development? Without knowing who or what type of businesses are going to be in the development, City staff should assume that all occupants will be much like those in Esparto and create a potentially hazardous situation requiring resources from Mutual Aid partners and tremendous amounts of equipment to respond, water to address the fires, ambulances to evacuate the injured children in the nearby schools and residents who live in proximity to a hazardous materials event in the proposed development. Please remember that there won't be just one occupant, but many, so multiply the complexity of the potential and the response.

If answers are available, they would be invaluable to provide this important information about the potential impacts of the Airport South Industrial Project, specifically related to Emergency Management activities to the public for review and comment.

Respectfully yours,

Karen O’Haire

I oppose the development for many reasons. Some but not all are: Light pollution at night. Sound pollution 24 hours a day. Air pollution heavy machinery, trucks and forklifts all give off nasty smelling exhaust. Environmental pollution, litter, engin oil, transmission fluid etc. City resources used for county lands. The lack of enforcement, trucks parking wherever they what with zero enforcement. Traffic and safety concerns, it’s already a concern without this development how many people need to die? These are only a few of my concerns

Mayor McCarty and Councilmembers,

I have lived in North Natomas for many years, right beside the area proposed for the Airport South Industrial Annexation, and I urge you to vote NO.

These open fields are vital to our neighborhood’s health and character. Industrial development would add traffic, noise, and pollution—impacts that would harm residents of all ages and cannot be undone once the land is built over.

With unused industrial land available elsewhere, this project is unnecessary and shortsighted.

Please protect our community and vote NO.