Sacramento Bike Trail

Known as the City of Trees, Sacramento is home to bike trails, walking paths, and riverfront property. While these facets usually coexist peacefully, there has been tension recently with the push for property around the Pocket/Greenhaven area to be used to connect the scattered portions of the Sacramento Bike Trail.

Some bikers, hikers, and dog owners have been expressing frustration that the bike trail has yet to be finished, a sentiment the Sacramento Bee has portrayed in numerous articles – most recently, as part of the “Beyond Sacramento” series on October 14, 2019.

These articles typically frame the bike trail’s sporadic pathway as an inconvenience to the public at large. However, the articles fail to mention that the City’s attempt to exercise its power of eminent domain is adamantly opposed by several owners along the levee. The Bee, along with other publications, fails to address the legitimate concerns of these owners.  

Eminent domain is the process by which the government can take private property for a public use by providing compensation for the property owner. Sacramento City Council voted to allow Sacramento to utilize eminent domain to acquire rights to the property needed to connect the bike trail. It’s questionable whether the City even has eminent domain power over these properties – does a bike trail extension truly qualify as a public use in an eminent domain proceeding?

While owners will be compensated for the loss of ownership, many owners oppose the extension of the bike trail because it is their property being affected, there are over 40 miles’ worth of other bike trails within a 5-mile radius, and they’re being forced to relinquish ownership because city council failed to plan for this trail before hundreds of people purchased properties along the proposed path.

Nor does the Bee mention the source of the funds that the City will have to use so some people can use the levee for biking and hiking. The funds will be procured from Measure U, a general city tax which doubled in April 2019. The funds can be used for “any municipal purpose,” but the public was told the funds would be used for underserved communities. How much information has been provided to the public about how the City will pay for this trail? Is a bike trail truly the best use of these funds?

The trail still has many hurdles to overcome, including challenges to the right to take, which will ultimately be decided by the courts. If you, or anyone you know, has questions or concerns about the effect this proceeding could have on your property, please contact DNLC for additional information.