Elk Grove's reduced sized Project Elevate proceeds with land sale, but could a CEQA lawsuit be on the horizon?
Those storm clouds came in the form of comments submitted by the law firm of Adams, Broadwell, Joseph, and Cardoza.
During the Wednesday meeting of the Elk Grove City Council, a land sale was approved that moves the city's long-delayed Project Elevate forward. By a 4 - 0 vote (Councilmember Kevin Spease was absent), the city sold the taxpayer-owned 20-acre parcel on Elk Grove Boulevard for $4 million to El Segundo, Calif.-based CenterCal Acquisitions.
The project, which has a long and tortured history, seeks to transform the vacant parcel into a mixed-use development. Among the proposed amenities are high-end retailers and boutique-style lodging.
During Elk Grove Economic Development Director Darrell Doan's presentation, it was acknowledged that the city's grand vision for Project Elevate has been scaled back. Notably, the most significant reduction was the elimination of the residential component.
"The original concept vision had extensive residential in it," Doan said. "We've worked with two different developers and our own architect and engineers, and what we determine and what we believe is that residential is not a slam dunk because the type of residential this project deserves is a dense urban, vertical product you find in downtown areas."
He added, "The market is telling us we may not achieve that today." Details of the sale and escrow timetable can be viewed here.
Not surprisingly, Mayor Singh-Allen and the city council praised the plans. Notwithstanding their optimism, ominous storm clouds appeared on Wednesday that could hinder the project's advancement.
Those storm clouds came in the form of comments submitted by the law firm of Adams, Broadwell, Joseph, and Cardoza.
According to their website, the Sacramento firm "represents labor, community, environmental health and environmental justice organizations and other public interest groups working to reduce or avoid exposures to polluted or hazardous air, soil and water, to address the lack of access to parks, open space, and other public services. ABJC advises clients working to improve the poor land use planning practices and deficient environmental review processes that are too often the source of these problems."
In their letter, the firm notes the correspondence to the city was on behalf of their client, the Sacramento-Sierra Building and Construction Trades Council, and urged the city council to withhold approval and the sales agreement, arguing that execution of the contract itself constitutes an "approval" under CEQA that requires full environmental review before the city can legally commit to the project's substantial development terms.
SSBCTC attorneys emphasize that the agreement compels the developer to construct a 100-room hotel, at least 100,000 sq ft of retail space, and 10,000 sq ft of flexible second-floor uses, all commitments that they argue fall squarely within the CEQA definition of a "project" and trigger the statute's requirement for prior environmental analysis.
The letter states that if the city proceeds without CEQA compliance, it faces the risks not only of litigation but also potential delays and additional costs should a court later find the agreement approval invalid. SSBCTC cites California Supreme Court precedent (Save Tara v. City of West Hollywood) to underscore that even if subsequent discretionary approvals remain, entering into a detailed, binding contract is tantamount to project approval for CEQA purposes.
Also speaking during the public comment period was attorney Kevin Carmichael, who repeated the claims in his law firm's letter that the city is not following CEQA mandates. See Carmichael's entire commentary in the video below.
Immediately after public comment closed with Carmichael's remarks, Councilmember Darren Suen asked City Attorney Jonathan Hobbs for reassurance.
"I respectfully disagree with my colleague that this is the approval of the project - it is not under CEQA," Hobbs said. "What you're doing is selling a piece of property for a developer who may develop it."
Notably, on behalf of their client, Adams, Broadwell, Joseph, and Cardoza have successfully compelled several large projects to adopt project labor agreements. These agreements compel all on-site work to be performed by union members.
ChatGPT asked, What is Elk Segundo, California-based CenterCal Acquisition's experience and history of dealing with project labor agreements?
A brief summary is below. Read the complete analysis here.
Public records show no instance in which CenterCal has actually signed a project-labor agreement (PLA).
When PLAs have been requested on its projects – most notably the 2nd & PCH retail center in Long Beach (2017) – the developer chose to proceed without one after the city attorney said a PLA could not be imposed on a private project, despite lobbying by the Los Angeles/Orange County building-trades coalition CREED LA.beachcomber.newsbeachcomber.news
On other West-Coast projects (The Veranda in Concord, The Collection at Riverpark in Oxnard, Bridgeport Village in Oregon, Mountain View Village in Utah, etc.) meeting minutes, staff reports and press coverage mention prevailing-wage compliance and local-hire goals but never a formal PLA. Where local unions have spoken during entitlement hearings – e.g., Concord (2020) and Rohnert Park’s new downtown plan (2024) – CenterCal has promised to “work with the trades” yet has stopped short of committing to a PLA.
