The Sacramento Zoological Society announced last week that it would not move forward with the relocation, citing concerns over the financial viability of the project. Rendering courtesy of City of Elk Grove

SACRAMENTO REGION, CA (MPG) – A highly anticipated plan to relocate the Sacramento Zoo to Elk Grove has been shelved, prompting disappointment among city leaders and residents who had hoped the $300-million project would bring economic and cultural benefits to Elk Grove. 

The Sacramento Zoological Society announced last week it would not move forward with the relocation citing concerns over the financial viability of the project. The decision ends a multi-year partnership with the City of Elk Grove, which had already invested approximately $4.5 million into land acquisition and planning for the project, according to city officials. 

“It was disappointing. There’s no other way to say it,” Elk Grove Councilmember Rod Brewer said. “We enthusiastically supported the project and had been working to excite the public on bringing the zoo to Elk Grove. Even with some of the rumors and financial uncertainty, I didn’t expect this outcome.”

The proposed relocation was intended to address major challenges faced by the Sacramento Zoo at its current 14-acre site in William Land Park. The Elk Grove plan included a phased buildout on a 65-acre portion of a 100-acre parcel the city had purchased specifically for the project on Kammerer Road.

Phase one alone would have spanned 28 acres, about already twice the size of the existing zoo, and featured large, open habitats including a savannah exhibit with multiple species such as giraffes, ostriches, antelopes, and a full pride of lions. 

The decision ends a multi-year partnership with the City of Elk Grove. Rendering courtesy of city of Elk Grove

“The current zoo only has one rhinoceros. The new zoo would have had as many as six, all in a shared environment,” Brewer said. “This was going to be an entirely different level of experience.”

The new facility would have also expanded conservation efforts and created more immersive visitor experiences. It was expected to draw as many as one million in annual visitors and $249 million in economic impact in its first five years of operation, according to Elk Grove officials. 

In a news release, Mayor Bobbie Singh-Allen called the decision to shutter the zoo move as “disappointing.” 

“This is a deeply disappointing outcome for all of us who believed in the vision for the zoo and what it could have meant for our community and the region,” Singh-Allen said.

Despite Elk Grove fulfilling its obligations under the cost-sharing agreement and drawing up preliminary designs, the zoo ultimately chose to recommit to its Sacramento location. Officials from the Sacramento Zoological Society cited slow fundraising progress and financial instability as primary factors in pulling out of the deal.

The Zoological Society had raised $17.5 million in pledges, only $1.9 million of which was actual cash on hand. The Zoological Society was supposed to raise $50 million in actual cash donations before the shovels went into the ground in 2027. The $1.9 million in cash that was received by the city already will be returned to the Zoological society who will then return it to the donors. 

“When both of those things didn’t mesh, I definitely understand why they walked away,” Brewer said.

Elk Grove leaders made clear that the decision was not theirs and emphasized their readiness to continue the partnership if the situation changed.

“They decided to pull back. We didn’t say, ‘Don’t ever come back,’” Councilmember Darren Suen said. “If they wanted to talk about it again, or if someone else wanted to re-engage, we wouldn’t turn them away.”

Though disappointed, both Brewer and Suen remained optimistic. The land acquired for the project remains untouched, and its value has increased, Brewer said, and could yield returns if the land is sold or repurposed.

Both viewed the zoo’s departure as a potential opportunity to pursue other developments or revisit the zoo project in the future if leadership changes. Zoo Director Jason Jacobs, a key figure in the partnership, left the post in October. Interim CEO, Robert Churchill has been in the seat since.

“We weren’t just taking a calculated risk on a civic amenity. We were trying to sustain something iconic for the region,” Suen said. “Sometimes things don’t work out, but the plans are still there. If the climate changes, we can dust them off.”

Phase one alone would have spanned 28 acres, about already twice the size of the existing zoo. Rendering courtesy of City of Elk Grove

Many Elk Grove residents had looked forward to the zoo as a positive addition to the community. The city’s desire for more regional attractions made the zoo plan particularly appealing.

Outside of Safeway at the corner of Laguna and Franklin Boulevard, several residents voiced disappointment with the projects demise. 

“It’s disappointing, I would have liked it to move here,” said Elk Grove resident Aaron Wells.

Bruce Wallace, another resident, echoed the sentiment: “It would have been a lot of jobs for Elk Grove. It’s a shame it fell apart.”

Others were more measured in their reaction. 

“I know a lot of people were looking forward to it moving here, but yeah, it’s not the worst thing that it’s not,” said Mark Cramer, also of Elk Grove. “The cost was always a problem for me and I’ve talked to a few people that were unsure of the traffic it might add.”

Still, Elk Grove city officials stressed that they’ve learned from the experience and will remain focused on bringing a similar project to Elk Grove. 

“We weren’t trying to swing for the fences or grab the spotlight,” Suen said. “We analyzed the zoo opportunity like we do every other project, with our residents in mind. That will always be our focus.”

While the zoo won’t be coming to Elk Grove, councilmembers highlighted ongoing efforts to develop other projects and amenities in the city. 

“The desire to bring attractions and amenities that families and individuals can enjoy hasn’t changed,” Brewer said. “We’re going to keep our options open. We’re not in a hurry and we’re certainly not desperate.”