Sheriff's Office Inviting the Public to Presentation and Q&A on Proposed Correctional Campus - Wednesday, August 5, 2026, at 5:30 p.m.
- Elisa Ballard
- 7 days ago
- 3 min read
The Shasta County Sheriff's Office stated in a Media Release that the public and media are invited to a community meeting to discuss the proposed Corrections and Rehabilitation Campus (CRC) Project. Sheriff Michael Johnson will present project specifics, address concerns, and engage in a question-and-answer session following the presentation.
The community meeting will be held on Wednesday, August 5, 2026, at 5:30 p.m. at the Shasta County Board of Supervisors Chambers located at 1450 Court Street, Redding.
The site consists of adjacent parcels (including APN 050-050-010) between Eastside Road/Highway 273 to the west and the Sacramento River to the east. It borders the River Ranch neighborhood (about 96 homes) to the southeast, with the city’s wastewater treatment plant nearby to the northwest and the Kapusta Open Space to the south. The county leased it from the City of Redding for 30 years (essentially rent-free, with a potential $1 purchase option later) for a Corrections and Rehabilitation Campus / Alternative Custody Campus. Plans include expanding the Alternative Custody Program (day reporting/public service/vocational training without on-site housing for many participants), a Male Community Re-entry Program (around 100 beds), and potential future jail capacity (sometimes described as over 1,200 beds or half the site set aside for it). An Environmental Impact Report was identified as a next step after the lease.
Lawsuit specifics
The River Ranch Neighborhood Association filed suit on February 27, 2026, in Shasta County Superior Court against the City of Redding (with Shasta County involved as a real party in interest), Case No. 26CV-0210023 (also referenced in related dockets). It is a petition for writ of mandate challenging the lease approval.
Core claims:
The city improperly relied on a categorical exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) instead of preparing a full Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the lease and underlying project.
Approvals are being carried out for the project in a " piecemeal " manner by focusing only on the surplus-land lease without analyzing the full intended use as a correctional campus (ACP expansion + reentry facility + potential large jail).
Potential significant environmental impacts on sensitive wildlife/riparian habitat, wetlands, groundwater, flooding, traffic, noise, safety, property values, and the character of the adjacent residential neighborhood along the Sacramento River. Residents have noted ponds, creeks, and wildlife (e.g., otters, beavers, bald eagles) on the site.
Relief sought: Vacate the lease agreement and require proper CEQA compliance (full EIR or equivalent) before further development, or otherwise halt the project pending review. Neighbors have also expressed a preference for preserving the land as open space connected to Kapusta Open Space for trails and habitat.
Status (as of mid-2026 reporting): The case advanced to court hearings (including April 27, 2026, before Judge Ryan H. Birss in Department 64). Parties engaged in meet-and-confer and settlement discussions; a CEQA settlement meeting was noticed, and further status hearings were set (e.g., June 15 and later dates into June/July). Discovery issues (including property inspection demands) were litigated. As of the latest available coverage, the matter remained pending with ongoing negotiations; no final resolution is detailed in the sources reviewed. County and city have maintained that procedures were followed and that a full environmental review would occur before construction.
The project originated from Sheriff Michael Johnson’s proposals in early 2025 (partly in response to Proposition 36 capacity concerns), and was followed by actions by the Board of Supervisors and the Redding City Council on the lease in summer/fall 2025. Local coverage (including from Shasta Unfiltered) has documented neighborhood opposition and the CEQA dispute extensively.
