WEST SACRAMENTO, CA (MPG) - This is going to be a series of articles about the Port of West Sacramento. On a project that started in 1947, it took until 1963 before the Sacramento-Yolo County Port was open. At that time the Port commission consisted of 5 people: 2 from Sacramento County, 2 from Sacramento City and 1 from Yolo County. In 1987 the City of West Sacramento (COWS) incorporated but there were still no seats on the Port Commission for representation of West Sacramento.

In 1992 the Port Commission added two seats to include representation for the City of West Sacramento. This brought the commission to have 7 seats: 2 each appointed by Sacramento County and Sacramento City, 1 appointed jointly by Sacramento County and Sacramento City, 1 appointed by the City of West Sacramento, 1 appointed by Yolo County. Sacramento had full control of the Port, even though it is in West Sacramento, Yolo County.

Though the work done trickles out to Sacramento, it did not affect anywhere else like it did in the very town it is located. In 2006 the City of West Sacramento took over through Assembly Bill 2939. The Port Commission was consolidated and eliminated Sacramento City and County. The Commission now would consist of 5 members who would be appointed by City Council, 4 from West Sacramento, and 1 from Yolo County. With the change in governance, it became the Port of West Sacramento, and it changed the requirements about money changed. It no longer went to Sacramento.

The Port is the largest single owner of land in West Sacramento, currently owning 292 acres. A Riverfront Enhancement Fund (REF) had to be developed and it was to be managed by City of West Sacramento (COWS) and Yolo County. The new governance also established new rules about the sale and use of Port property, as well as where the money for these sales must go. For the first 10 years it was supposed to go as follows: 1st $50M to Port, Next $23M to the REF and the next $27M to be equally shared between the Port and REF. (The Lowe’s property sold for $8M in 2006.)

In addition, the 2006 re-structure states that for the first ten years, the Port shall not sell or lease more than 10 acres North of Southport Parkway and West of Lake Washington for non-maritime (Water related) purposes unless a finding has been made that the transaction is necessary to maintain financial viability of the Port. It also stated that the percentage from real estate sold between ten and twenty years that had to go into the REF would decrease by 10% each year until the year 2026. In other words, in 2026 the City (who is in charge and in control of the money) will not have to share the money from the land sale with the Port. The City of West Sacramento will get it all.

Recently, 3 of the 5 commissioners were City Councilmembers with County Supervisor Oscar Villegas as the Chair of the Commission. However, the fourth seat came up for appointment. As previously reported, Tim Campbell, President of the International Longshore & Warehouse Union (ILWU), Local 18, applied to be appointed to that seat on the Commission. Tim has decades of experience and lives and breathes the Port. He knows the ins and outs about every aspect of the Port.

At the April 4 City Council meeting, some 25 people got up and spoke to the City Council about the value of appointing Tim. When public comment ended, each of the City Councilmembers spoke about how touching and moving the comments were (even bringing some members to tears) and what a valuable resource Tim is. One of the speakers was even a former Assemblymember that helped write AB 2939. In the end, however, the appointment went to our Mayor Pro-tem Quirina Orozco, making the entire Port Commission (with the exception of Supervisor Villegas,) City Councilmembers.

The West Sacramento News Ledger intends on following this through. What does this mean about funding meant for the Port? Will the Port be closing? What does it mean for land development? Does the development plan include improvements and maintenance on the Port and deep-water channel? How does this affect our flood plan? Did the City Council plan for all commissioners to be councilmembers so there is no resistance in what is coming?

There is a recent land sale that is under scrutiny and there is documentation showing Port funds being diverted to add funds to other projects, like the Mike McGowen Bridge. Why isn’t dredge money being used to dredge? (By going 5 ft. deeper, the Port could handle a huge increase in business.)

In addition, how does the Port affect West Sacramento economically? What kind of changes would a shutdown cause? How will changes affect traffic? Why would the City move forward with development that could hinder the growth of the Port when growth of the Port would be so significant? We will get the answer to these questions from both sides and bring them to you in upcoming papers.

If you have questions that you would like answered about the Port, please contact the News Ledger at (916) 371-8030.