Davisite Banner. Left side the bicycle obelisk at 3rd and University. Right side the trellis at the entrance to the Arboretum.

Month: February 2023

  • Those ‘pesky’ City Commissions

    Scooby-gang-1969By Roberta Millstein

    As a Gen-Xer, I grew up watching a lot of fairly silly cartoons, Scooby-Doo among them.  The plot of Scooby-Doo was pretty much always the same.  The main characters would ask a lot of hard questions, and always end up unmasking the “bad guy,” who would utter a phrase along the lines of “if it weren’t for those pesky kids!”

    Reading Item 5 of tonight’s City Council agenda makes me feel like I am in an episode of Scooby-Doo.  Commission meetings are too long, the staff report suggests.  They duplicate efforts, staff implies.

    Yet it was the commissions who asked hard questions about DISC.  They asked, for example, about the carbon emissions from the project and better ways to mitigate them.  They asked about the percentage of affordable housing.  They asked about the number of trees and protection for burrowing owls.  They asked about the effect of the project on our downtown.

    These were hard questions that were not asked by staff and not asked by the City Council.   They all ended up being issues in the campaign that resulted in voters rejecting the DISC project.

    Now, it seems, staff would like to reduce the power of those “pesky” commissions with all of their questions.

    Are the commission meetings really too long?  One easy way to make them shorter would be to put a time limit on presentations by developers and others; we can expect that commissioners have read the provided written materials.

    Are the commissions really duplicating effort?  As evidence, staff provides a table where different commissions weigh in on the same topic.  What staff fails to mention is that they are looking at different aspects of the same topic.  For example, when Open Space & Habitat looks at a park, it considers habitat values. Rec & Park considers recreational values. Tree Commission looks at the number and species of trees.  Yes, these can overlap, but they are distinctive issues that require distinctive expertise. There is no duplication.

    Commissions are treated as pesky by those who have to answer their hard questions, but commissions keep the democratic process in Davis strong.  If we want to revisit the commissions, let’s at least involve them – something that was not done for this meeting.  Our past and present commissioners can provide needed insight into this process.

  • ChatGPT is Woke

    Two articles today in the Davis Vanguard about ChatGPT. 

    But ChatGPT is woke:

    ChatGPT goes woke!

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11646463/Conservatives-test-AI-ChatGPT-uses-responses-prove-going-woke.html

    One quote:

    "Developing anything, software or not, requires compromise and making choices, political choices, about who a system will work for and whose values it will represent."

    I certainly don't agree with some of the political views used as examples in the article, but clearly a political bias is shown when the machine calls out writing about subjects as being 'inappropriate'.  If you can't see how this could so easily be manipulated by whomever is in power, you aren't being real about the concerns.

  • Pay attention to your food

    By Susan Pelican

    from James Corbett (check him out!):via Organic Consumers Association…

    "As consumers of heavily processed, chemically treated, GMO-infested gunk, we in the modern, developed world have "solved" the problem of hunger that plagued our forebears since time immemorial by handing our food sovereignty over to a handful of corporate conglomerates.

    The result of this handover has been the creation of a factory farming system in which genetically engineered crops are doused in glyphosate and livestock are herded into tiny pens where they live their entire lives in fetid squalor, pumped up with antibiotics and growth hormones until they are slaughtered and shipped off to the supermarkets and fast food chains….

    But as bad as things may be, they're about to get even worse. As crisis after crisis disrupts the food supply, the "solution" to these problems has already been prepared. New technologies are coming online that threaten to upend our understanding of food altogether. Technologies that could, ultimately, begin altering the human species itself.”

    Many of these are rolling in from Universities, including UC Davis (see the Sac Business Journal edition on new startups in the Sacramento Region) and include technological "advances" like Davis' Gotham Greens, (sold at Nugget in Davis)… -a high rise greenhouse which purports to save water (hydroponic) and land (??) AND is in PARTNERSHIP WITH UC DAVIS).

    Know about this and invest your $ and your health in farmers markets, organic produce, eggs, milk, meat and bread.

  • Davis Enterprise should promote better discourse

    The following was sent to the Davis Enterprise to be published as a letter to the editor, but as of the time of this posting they have declined to publish it.

    Edit: The letter finally appeared in the 12 February 2023 print edition, but I don't believe that it ever appeared online.

    By Roberta Millstein

    The recent article, "Planning Commission OKs R&D facility for Second Street" elicited a number of comments on the Davis Enterprise's Facebook page where the article was posted. Of these comments, the one that was picked as the "Editors' choice for the web comment of the week" stated "In a town that's absolutely jam-packed with know-it-alls somebody will come up with an objection."

    Why did the Editors pick this comment out of all the others?

    Surely the 2nd Street project is exactly the sort of infill project that most Davisites preferred when they voted overwhelmingly to defeat the sprawling peripheral DISC project. I for one have no objection to it.

    Will someone object? No doubt. Name me one issue that all Davisites agree on. I am guessing that there is no such issue.

    But that isn't really the point of the "Editors choice" comment, is it? The point is to denigrate Davisites who dare to raise objections to developer's projects. Or maybe it's just to denigrate Davisites more generally.

    So, I ask again, why would the Editors choose to reprint this comment in the newspaper? Is this the sort of discourse that the Davis Enterprise wants to promote? And if so, why?

    We can do better and so can the Davis Enterprise.