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

<

>

Al’s Corner – December 2023 (was some blah blah blah about “Taking Tuesday”)

SUBJECT:  "Support the Vanguard on #GivingTuesday"  [Monday's Van Guard]

I have a rule for Taking Tuesday — if someone asks me for money, or even uses the cringe phrase "Giving Tuesday", I never give them any money ever, and furthermore attempt to take money from them.  On Monday, the Van's Guard mentioned giving Tuesday, with open comments.  Did someone not consider that closing comments would be a good idea, given past experience?  Oh, yeah, you got rid of that pesky Alan Miller guy.  Still . . .

KO say:  "I’m curious David, how much salary do you draw yearly from the Vanguard?

DG say:  "Not much considering how much work I put in"

KO say:  "That’s not an answer.  I don’t know all the rules but is your salary supposed to be public info because you’re a non-profit?"

KO say:  "What, no response?"

WS say:  "If he does give a current dollar figure, will you somehow attack him like a good right winger Keith?  On the most recent IRS Form 990 publicly available, it listed David’s 2019 reportable compensation as a paltry $17,300 for an average 100 hours per week. The reason this information is likely so old is because of IRS staffing shortages and funding shortfalls. Guess who historically has been responsible for the lack of funding. It wasn’t the Democrats."

ACM calculate:  17300 / (52 x 100) = $3.33/hr.   ACM say:  I have to agree with DG here re:  "not much considering".  That's like 1/4 minimum wage!  How/why does WS know how many hours DG works on average?  And we need to elect a Democrat for President so we can get more up-to-date DG salaries for KO.  We have a Democrat?  Oh, so the lack of funding was due to not always having a Democrat President.  Yeah, I hear where you are coming from, man 😐

KYE say:  "Not that I really care about David’s salary (I find this kind of personal question in an open forum distasteful….if you’re a donor…then maybe a private request would be better).  But I’ll comment for academic reasons because I find the question interesting.  Salaries in general (total) are listed publicly on an IRS form 909.  Basically a non-profit has to list it’s top 5 in compensation employees and contractors if they’re paid over $100K.  A “Key Man” employee (a director, org executive, etc…) has to be listed if over $150K.  The filings for form 909 for the Vanguard are listed online up until 2020.   I believe David is both Executive Editor and CEO of the Vanguard.  The only thing about the Vanguard’s filings I can’t figure out is the income source.  The filings list all contributions as “contributions, gifts, grants and similar amounts received”.  I wonder if the ad revenue is listed as donations so their advertisers receive tax deductible donation benefits?"

AND THEN THE TERRIFYING, OMINOUS NOTE:
 

"Comments are closed."

It didn't come from the Moderator, it was JUST THERE!   Oh.  My.  God.

But remember folks, "Comments are never closed, here at Al's Corner!"

It's giving Tuesday, and I don't want your stinkin' cash . . . just your comments.  On Giving/Taking Tuesday.  On DG's paltry compensation.  On closing comments.  On good-right-winger "somehow attacks".

And if anyone does ask you for money today, be a good little scrooge:  and don't give them any 😐

Posted by

Alan C. Miller

on

in

, , , ,
Davisite logo

Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

Comments

99 responses to “Al’s Corner – December 2023 (was some blah blah blah about “Taking Tuesday”)”

  1. Roberta L. Millstein

    For the record (in case this comes up):
    The Davisite doesn’t want your money. The Davisite will not accept your money.
    No one at the Davisite receives any money for their involvement with the Davisite.

  2. Alan C. Miller

    RM say: “No one at the Davisite receives any money for their involvement with the Davisite.”
    This makes us morally superior 😐

  3. Roberta L. Millstein

    AM say, “This makes us morally superior :-|”
    I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader.

  4. Keith

    I had to laugh at KYE’s response “I find this kind of personal question in an open forum distasteful” but then proceeds to comment.
    And then there’s WS’s comment where he spews his usual ‘right winger’ and it’s the Republican’s fault bullshit.
    On the Vanguard’s website IRS filings go through 2020, so where’s 2021 and 2022?
    I doubt it’s because of a lack of IRS funding.
    I found this link about 501c3 reporting requirements.
    https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/question-are-nonprofits-finances-public-information-28028.html
    Question
    I work for a 501(c)(3) nonprofit corporation. Are its financial statements available for public viewing — especially regarding management salaries?
    Answer
    Indeed. Nonprofits are required to submit their financial statements and other information — including the salaries of directors, officers, and key employees — to the IRS. (For information on who is considered a key employee, see IRS Form 990 and its instructions.)
    The IRS and nonprofits themselves are required to disclose the information on Form 990 to anyone who asks. Nonprofits must allow public inspection of these records during regular business hours at their principal offices.

  5. Ron O

    The refusal to take money greatly reduces the chances that anyone associated with the Davisite is beholden to development/business interests.
    I’ll assume that this column can function as “Al’s Corner” for the rest of the month, so I’ll note the following (in regard to today’s ongoing series of articles in the Vanguard regarding “sprawl for schools”).
    In that article, David quotes Mike Harrington (as follows):
    “I think this can be summed up neatly in a recent letter from former Councilmember Michael Harrington— “developers try to blow open our borders with junk sprawl neighborhoods” and “the schools are used by them as reasons to vote for the new projects.”
    In the same letter from Harrington, as I noted a few weeks ago, he argued, “The policy I strong disagree with is the one where they invite in hundreds and hundreds of out-of-town families to fill up our school buildings so the DJUSD doesn’t have to make hard choices to close a school (or two), and lower our taxes.”
    Amen to that. But I would go further than Mike Harrington does, and would conclude that it’s not just development interests who are behind this – the “sprawl for schools” effort also includes some of those associated with the school district, itself.
    Of course, no one wants to lose their job, but the function of schools is to serve the community; not the other way-around. I don’t know why anyone would even question that.
    Perhaps if the school district spent more time managing its finances (and less time trying to shut down free speech), it wouldn’t be facing a perceived problem.

  6. South of Davis

    I wondered if the Davis Vanguard 501c3 info would pop up on Google but I didn’t find them, but this Davisite story did pop up:
    https://www.davisite.org/2018/07/irs-complaint-against-vanguard.html
    Does anyone know if anything ever came of the complaint? I have always found it hard to believe that a “political” site like the Davis Vanguard could be a 501c3.

  7. Ron O

    Forgot to add:
    As the size of the school district contracts, the existing parcel tax will go farther since it is not affected by enrollment declines or school closures.
    As such, a higher portion of parcel tax money will be available for each student, as enrollment declines and/or a school is closed.
    This fact (basic math) is consistently ignored by the district and David Greenwald. One cannot count on self-interested entities to objectively present facts.
    The situation is not unlike communities that “resist” military base or prison closures, though that tends to affect a much larger percentage of a community’s population (compared to closing down a school).
    I will resist any other comparison between “schools and prisons”, though some have suggested there’s a direct “pipeline” between the two.
    For sure, the buildings themselves often look similar to prisons, and they both restrict access (for enrollees and visitors).
    The last two sentences are an attempt at humor, based upon reality.

  8. Alan C. Miller

    “Nonprofits must allow public inspection of these records during regular business hours at their principal offices.”
    And if they don’t, the public is permitted to jam their foot in the door.

  9. South of Davis

    Ron wrote:

    This fact (basic math) is consistently ignored by
    the district and David Greenwald.
    The district and David know basic math and they also know about gaslighting, if they tell people that closing a school where every kid costs more than we get from the state will actually “cost” the district money (totally ignoring the fixed cost of running the school, revenue from selling the school site or the annual property tax income the school site would provide if it was sold) to close a school people will start to believe it.
    Anyone that knows well educated “kids” in their 30’s today knows that most of them are childless (we are not going back to the 1960’s where almost every $20K Streng home in Davis had three or four kids playing in the backyard). We are also not going back to a time when you can buy a home in Davis with one normal income (many of the $20K Streng homes are now over a million):
    https://www.zillow.com/homedetails/1114-Kent-Dr-Davis-CA-95616/16520127_zpid/

  10. Keith

    “Anyone that knows well educated “kids” in their 30’s today knows that most of them are childless”
    SOD I think you hit on something here. Maybe the problem is Davis is too educated and liberal to produce enough children to fill its bloated oversized school system.
    It might be time to face reality and downsize.

  11. R Keller

    Here’s the story behind the last time someone tried to inspect the Vanguard’s records as provided for in federal law:
    Davis Vanguard IRS Disclosure Problem
    PART I: Vanguard Slams the Door on Required Public Disclosures
    https://www.davisite.org/2019/05/davis-vanguard-irs-disclosure-problem.html
    And:
    Davis Vanguard IRS Disclosure Problem
    PART II: Obfuscation and Misdirection
    https://www.davisite.org/2019/05/davis-vanguard-irs-disclosure-problem-1.html
    In retrospect, one of the funniest things is David Greenwald screaming “I AM GOING TO CALL THE COPS!” as he slammed the door in my face.
    Another funny thing is his hired-gun attorney being completely clueless about IRS nonprofit records disclosure requirements, and the records magically showing up on the Vanguard’s website with them falsely claiming they were there all along.
    Who’s up for another visit? It’ll be “fun”! 🤣

  12. R Keller

    The Vanguard regularly violates federal nonprofit laws, but my guess is that they are such a small-time rinky-dink operation, that the IRS hasn’t bothered to investigate despite well-documented complaints like this from 2022:
    New IRS Complaint Against Non-Profit Davis Vanguard News Service: ‘It is unfair and illegal for the Vanguard to receive tax-free status and revenue to develop a website and then use that website to campaign for/against certain candidates’
    https://californiaglobe.com/articles/new-irs-complaint-against-non-profit-davis-vanguard-news-service/amp/
    And this:
    Attorney Says Non-Profit Davis Vanguard News Service ‘Continues to Violate’ Despite IRS Complaint
    https://californiaglobe.com/fr/attorney-says-non-profit-davis-vanguard-news-service-continues-to-violate-despite-irs-complaint/amp/

  13. Alan C. Miller

    RK say: “Who’s up for another visit? It’ll be “fun”! 🤣”
    I think we should get everyone together who’s been banned from the Davis Vanguard comments section and march over to the Davis Vanguard world headquarters and jam our foots in the door and have a party! I’ll bring the Jew’s harp. Or maybe I’ll just bring a harp, since a Jew bringing a Jew’s harp might be redundant.
    Note: that guy who posted the geo-coordinates of another commenter (also now banned, of course) is excluded from the party, because unlike Beth Bourne’s antics, that actually is doxxing.

  14. South of Davis

    R Keller wrote:

    my guess is that they are such a small-time rinky-dink operation,
    that the IRS hasn’t bothered to investigate
    The reason that they have not been instigated is that they are not conservative. Like BLM David could take Vanguard $$ buy a house in El Macero and fill the garage with gold Rolls Royces and as long as he keeps writing about the “school to prison pipeline” and how every UCD student of color is afraid to “drive while black or brown” in Davis he is good to go.
    https://www.npr.org/2017/10/27/560308997/irs-apologizes-for-aggressive-scrutiny-of-conservative-groups#:~:text=In%20a%20legal%20settlement%20that,applications%20for%20tax%2Dexempt%20status.

  15. Ron O

    If anyone shows up at the Vanguard requesting records (with their foot in the door), I’d suggest using the same type of device that Daffy Duck used (at around the 3:15 minute mark).
    https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x606gx5

  16. Alan C. Miller

    I hope you all had a wonderful “Taking Tuesday”. Was anyone able to convince the Davis Vanguard to write them a check?

  17. R Keller

    AM said “ I think we should get everyone together who’s been banned from the Davis Vanguard comments section and march over to the Davis Vanguard world headquarters and jam our foots in the door and have a party!”
    Let’s do it! Perhaps can find out Greenwald’s most recent salary (hint: he makes sure to keep it below the threshold that would make him from ineligible for his subsidized housing, but he makes sure to gets lots of non-salary compensation from the Vanguard).
    By the way, I just noticed that Shwe hypothesized that the reason that Vanguard hasn’t posted IRS forms that the Vanguard is required to file with the IRS and that the Vanguard is required to make available to the public is that the IRS doesn’t have enough funding! Where does he come up with these bizarre rationalizations? Shweeeeeeee!!!!

  18. Alan C. Miller

    Shweeeeeeeee!!!!
    “Greenwald’s most recent salary . . . he makes sure to keep it below the threshold that would make him from ineligible for his subsidized housing, but he makes sure to gets lots of non-salary compensation from the Vanguard”
    Non-salary compensation? DO TELL !!!

  19. South of Davis

    I don’t know anything about David’s “Non-salary compensation” but pretty much every “charity” does what it can to make the staff “salaries” low.
    Like UC most charities will pay a modest “salary” but then cover the cost of a car, housing, club memberships and even build you a $30K dog run.
    https://www.sfgate.com/education/article/Free-mansions-for-people-of-means-UC-system-2595754.php

  20. Alan C. Miller

    SUBJECT: “Commentary: Davis Isn’t the Only Place with a Housing Mess, But Emulating Others Doesn’t Seem Viable” by David Greenwald in the Guard of the Van on November 30, 2023
    “I keep asking the same question . . . “
    You also keep writing the same article.

  21. Alan C. Miller

    DG concludeth: ” . . . and frankly, we need the housing like yesterday.”
    For some reason I hear this in a stereotypical, over-dramatized, Moon Unit Zappa, San Fernando Valley Girl accent. ” . . . like . . . yestdardaaayyyyy.”

  22. Ron O

    “A few months ago I asked one of the chief opponents of housing how the city can expect to meet state requirements. The simple answer they gave was do what the large coastal cities do.”
    I believe David is referring to me with that comment (referenced in the article that Alan M. referred to, above).
    The “problem” is that David is making an incorrect assumption regarding what this actually means.
    What it actually means is that cities along the coast are going to submit plans that will never come to fruition. And that they will likely continue “re-using” those unrealized plans in future housing elements.
    “Penciling-out” would be even less-likely in a place like Davis.
    As David himself noted, the new owners of Trackside apparently can’t even make housing “pencil out” (as already approved), even though they only paid $2 million for the entire property!
    And then there’s University Mall, where the owners abandoned housing altogether, as well. Really? There’s no “demand” for housing right across the street from UCD? (I guess not – at the level of return that would make it “pencil out”.)
    A more-relevant question is whether or not the state intends cities (outside of the coastal areas) to continue sprawling outward. Is that their goal? And, do they look at cities that are surrounded by farmland as “targets”? (Seems highly unlikely that the answer to those questions is “yes”, or that this is codified anywhere.)
    Watch how this all changes in the future, as folks like Newsom, Wiener, and Bonta “move on” (out of the loop).
    And if they actually have any significant success in the meantime, watch the reaction – especially from folks living in wealthier coastal communities. (See Proposition 13, as an example of what happens when government officials fail to heed the concerns of the populace.)

  23. Ron O

    From the SF Gate article referenced by South of Davis:
    “Schwartz also said the homes are important to help chancellors cover the high cost of living in California, where many chancellors otherwise wouldn’t be able to afford homes on their university salaries.”
    It never ceases to amaze me regarding how many folks “can’t afford the high cost of living in California”, (even a chancellor?) while houses are simultaneously selling for substantial amounts.
    Might I conclude that such claims are complete and total b.s.?

  24. Alan C. Miller

    Newsflash: It’s expensive to live in California.
    Unless you live in Venice Beach. In a tent.

  25. Ron O

    A rare moment of agreement with Richard McCann (in the same Vanguard article referenced above), who essentially notes the same thing I did:
    “The truth is that Davis might technically meet the state requirements but we will actually build only a small % of the above goals.”
    The difference being that I view that potential result in a “positive” light. (Statewide, for that matter.)
    But the “downside” is that the state’s probable failure means that the populace may never become sufficiently “riled up” to remove control from the state.

  26. Alan C. Miller

    RO say: ” . . . the populace may never become sufficiently “riled up” to remove control from the state.”
    I’m riled.
    Join Our Neighborhood Voices, who’s goal is to remove control from the state, mainly by state initiative. They are having a meeting tonight on Zoom 7-8pm for those interested:
    https://t.e2ma.net/click/a76c7m/m0hqrakc/a7mx59b
    “There has never been a more important time to stand up for your neighborhood. All across California, corporate developers are using a loophole called the “Builders Remedy” to bulldoze single-family homes and build high-rise projects in their place — all while leaving local representatives and neighbors like you powerless to stop it. These Builders Remedy projects are increasing traffic, raising taxes and displacing our neighbors – but we are fighting back.”

  27. R Keller

    Ron O: you can mark yourself safe from agreeing with McCann today. It was actually David Thompson who made the remark that
    “The truth is that Davis might technically meet the state requirements but we will actually build only a small % of the above goals.”
    I personally find it amazing that Greenwald has been writing about housing issues for years and he still doesn’t understand basic principles about meeting RHNA numbers. The sites that the City of Davis is rezoning are considered 100% available for low-income housing by the CA Dept. of Housing and Community Development because the sites meet the minimum “safe-harbor” density threshold (for Davis: 20 units/acre). It doesn’t matter that it’s not realistic that they’ll actually be built out as low-income housing. The State of California has declared that density = affordability, so this is the system.
    One could say that this is all a dumb paper exercise, and one would be correct. But Greenwald is too dumb to realize the dumbness of it all, and he’ll just go right on regurgitating the same dumb article over and over.

  28. Ron O

    Thanks for the correction, Rik.
    For what it’s worth, I view you as a person who is actually interested in Affordable housing, and I respect you personally. As I do with others who comment on here.
    I don’t expect any two people to share the exact same views, regardless.
    But make sure you put on some steel-toed boots, the next time you visit the Vanguard’s offices if your foot is going to be in the doorway. 🙂

  29. Keith

    Alan writes:
    “Join Our Neighborhood Voices, who’s goal is to remove control from the state, mainly by state initiative.”
    Here’s what Shweeee thinks of ‘Our Neighborhood Voices’ :
    Walter Shwe December 1, 2023 at 10:02 pm
    “CAVE Syndrome = Single-Minded Anti-Development Obstructionists
    I appreciate someone bringing to my attention the self-polluting and traffic contributing NIMBY obstructionist group called Our Neighborhood Voices.”
    https://www.davisvanguard.org/2023/12/commentary-the-failure-of-the-market-underlies-the-problem-of-affordable-housing/#comment-477472

  30. Alan C. Miller

    RK say: “But Greenwald is too dumb to realize the dumbness of it all”
    Now THAT is a statement.

  31. Keith

    “But make sure you put on some steel-toed boots, the next time you visit the Vanguard’s offices if your foot is going to be in the doorway. :-)”
    And have your phones out so you can get a video.

  32. Ron O

    Unfortunately, David Greenwald is not “dumb” at all – he writes in an effort to “convince” others.
    That’s why he doesn’t present a complete picture (regardless of the issues that he latches onto).
    He’s likely aware of what David Thompson, Rik, myself, and others have pointed out (including the mayor of San Francisco). In fact, I’m pretty sure that David Greenwald himself has acknowledged this reality:
    The push by the state to force cities to grow will (for the most part) fail.
    But I would add that any “success” that the state does have will likely lead to the demise of the state’s control.
    San Francisco in particular is LOSING population – which is causing housing prices to undergo a significant correction. One might expect that YIMBYs would welcome would welcome that reality. (That is, if they were trying to present an honest argument.)
    Of course, most of these types also purposefully ignore the connection between jobs and housing, which is why they supported developments like DISC.
    Business interests (e.g., the technology industry) are financially supporting the YIMBYs. As such, they have a vested interest in forcing growth.
    In other words, they’re straight out “growth monkeys”, and will latch onto any reason to support growth even if it conflicts with their own arguments. No amount of “brainpower” can overcome the obvious conflicts in their own arguments.

  33. Ron O

    From today’s ongoing effort to undermine Measure J, in the Vanguard:
    “Is Legal Services gearing up to challenge Measure J?”
    I’d ask “who” is funding these a-holes, in regard to such a potential challenge?

  34. R Keller

    Just more wishful thinking from Greenwald. He REALLY wants someone to legally challenge Measure J. Meanwhile, he still doesn’t understand the basics about how meeting RHNA numbers in Housing Elements works.
    The City of Davis is proposing rezoning a number of properties at the minimum density required (20 units/acre) that meet the minimum size threshold (0.5 acres per parcel), so they meet State of CA requirements to count as available for low-income housing. It’s as simple as that.
    The City wouldn’t be able to count development proposals for the various Measure J annexations in this round anyway because they are simply proposals. That doesn’t mean there are any grounds for challenging Measure J because of “constraints” in this HE round—there aren’t really, because the City is able to more than meet RHNA requirements by simply rezoning 20-something acres.
    My prediction: this third draft of the HE gets approved by HCD. The City could have gotten it approved in the 1st round if they hadn’t appointed a developer-friendly Housing Element Committee, and had their sh*t together in the first place. Instead, they had a terrible process that bypassed a robust public participation component and that produced a bad product.
    This is all a dumb paper-pushing exercise anyway. Meanwhile, the City of Davis has sat on its hands for years in terms of actually addressing affordable housing policy that would produce actual affordable housing units, as opposed to the free-market fantasies of Greenwald, McCann, Tim Keller, and others that if you only removed all regulations and expanded Davis 2 to 3 times its current population, it would be an affordable housing paradise.
    As for what the City should be focused on if it was actually interested in affordable housing, see: Comments on Inclusionary Multifamily Rental Housing Ordinance Review
    January 17, 2023
    https://www.davisite.org/2023/01/comments-on-inclusionary-multifamily-rental-housing-ordinance-review.html
    And: Recommendation to the Davis City Council for Changes in Davis’ Affordable Housing Ordinance
    June 27, 2023
    https://www.davisite.org/2023/06/recommendation-to-the-davis-city-council-for-changes-in-davis-affordable-housing-ordinance.html

  35. Ron O

    ” . . . if you only removed all regulations and expanded Davis 2 to 3 times its current population, it would be an affordable housing paradise.”
    Made me laugh out loud, even with no one to hear me.

  36. South of Davis

    I laugh even louder when I read “if rents were a little lower the “homeless” would be living in apartments and not under the new bike ramp to Olive Drive”. P.S. My left of center friends always get mad at me when I point out that the poor and the homeless always seem to find money for booze, cigarettes and tattoos. They also spend a lot on spray paint (the “homeless” living under the Olive bike ramp recently “decorated” their “home” painting the concrete bike ramp and the fence behind it using a LOT of paint)…

  37. Alan C. Miller

    SOD, How do you know homed people didn’t paint the Olive bike ramp? Huh? Huh? Where you there? Huh?!!!!! 😐

  38. Ron O

    From today’s “school crisis” article in the Vanguard:
    David: The problem as I have attempted to explain many times over the last five years, is that approach won’t work because it doesn’t solve the problem which is the actual decline in enrollment.
    You can “explain this” as many times as you want, but the decline in enrollment would not be a problem if the school system itself was right-sized to match the actual needs of the community.
    David: The permanent solution or at least the long term one (since permanency does not exist in this world) is to plan for housing so people with families can afford to move here and people can afford to move here or live here when they start families.
    What you’re suggesting is that the community has to grow to meet the desires of an oversized school district.
    You also seem to be claiming that the size of the school system is “permanently fixed”, while also noting that nothing is permanent. How does that make any sense?
    There’s another problem with your “solution” as well. Unless housing turns over frequently, families age-out of the system in a relatively short period of time. This will occur with new housing, as well.
    Woodland (which has no “shortage” of new housing) is also experiencing declining enrollment in much of the pre-existing city, due to families ageing out of the system. In fact, this is occurring throughout most of California, and it is not a “problem” except for those who “resist change”.
    David: The second problem with this approach is that declining enrollment is not the reason why we have a parcel tax. The parcel tax is in place primarily because the school district is disadvantaged by the state funding system which prioritizes (and btw, rightly so) school districts with higher percentages of low income and disadvantaged students.
    The parcel tax is in place because the cost for each student EXCEEDS the amount received by the state. And yet, your solution is to add “more” students (each of which increases the structural deficit).
    The parcel tax would go farther (resulting in MORE MONEY FOR EACH STUDENT) if there were fewer students, since it is not dependent upon the number of students.
    In addition, by “poaching” students from other districts, you’re essentially acknowledging that you don’t care about the students and school systems in those other communities. By enrolling them in Davis schools instead, you’re not only depriving other communities of state funding, you’re also ensuring that less funding is provided by the state due to the difference in state reimbursement levels that you described.
    David: The reason why closing a school is not going to help the problem is that the issue of declining enrollment is an ongoing process.
    Why is it a “problem” that this is an “ongoing process”? Again, the size of the school system is not permanently “fixed” – except in the eyes of those who resist change.
    David: The problem in essence is not that the schools are too large, it’s the relative population is slowly declining year over year—and removing out of district transfers and reducing the size of the schools won’t do anything to stop that.
    Your claim is downright bizarre.
    Again, you’re claiming that there aren’t enough students for a school system that is TOO LARGE in comparison to the community’s actual needs. And your “solution” is to keep feeding that system, rather than having it adjust to meet the actual needs of the existing community.

  39. K Smith

    It’s hilarious and pathetic and sad that David Greenwald and his blog is apparently living rent free in the heads of so many people who frequent this site.
    And I’m sure many of these big, strong conservative types (snicker) here lambast others for operating on the basis of emotion.
    You can’t make this up.
    Rent free! 😆🤣😂😆🤣😂😆🤣😂😆🤣😂😆🤣😂😆🤣😂😆🤣😂😆🤣😂

  40. Ron O

    David Greenwald does not allow free speech on his blog, but he does allow trolls to attack others.
    So when one has something to say in opposition to his advocacy, it’s better to do so where it’s actually allowed.
    Some believe that David Greenwald has influence (e.g., with local politicians). And since he’s presenting one-sided views (and not providing a complete analysis), there is no “balance.”
    If you think that only “conservatives” oppose Greenwald’s development advocacy, you’re sadly mistaken. Ask R. Keller, if you don’t believe me. His foot is probably still healing to this day, as a result of Greenwald closing his door on it when challenging the availability of the Vanguard’s tax returns. 🙂
    Regarding the library’s illegal shutdown of free speech, I must have missed the meeting when self-proclaimed progressives decided to oppose free speech. (Not just at libraries, but also at college campuses.)

  41. South of Davis

    I have never heard that David lives “rent free”. Last I heard he lives in “affordable” (aka “taxpayer subsidized”) housing across the street from $1mm+ homes (while getting paid by developers to push the paving of more farmland to build even more $1mm+ homes). P.S. To Allen, I don’t know that “homed people didn’t paint the Olive bike ramp” (Maybe the “homed people” that have been leaving trash and stolen bikes around the homeless camps to make the homeless look bad for years are now also bringing spray paint).

  42. Alan C. Miller

    No SOD, David must have moved out of that house, because as KS says, he is living rent free in my head. I just wish he’d stop waking me up at 3:00am so he can write the next crappy housing article in the Vanguard. Can we compromise on 5:00am, David? After all, the rent IS free.

  43. Alan C. Miller

    . . . and also, David, would you stop chaining your bike to my ear?

  44. Ron O

    Comment from Richard McCann, in regard to the fake “school crisis” mentioned above:
    But further, anyone proposing to close schools (especially multiple ones if we shut off the 1,000 interdistrict transfers) MUST propose which specific schools will be closed and then go to every public meeting that discusses those closures. If they are unwilling to do that then they are just poseurs with no legitimate standing in the discussion.
    Happy to do so – but truth be told, it doesn’t matter “which” ones to me. Nor does it matter to anyone else (except for a relative handful of parents/teachers at a given school).
    To paraphrase Spock (Star Trek), “the needs of the many (the community at large) outweigh the needs of the few.”
    Just name the time/place where this will be discussed.
    But perhaps the school district can arrive with independently-arrived (objective) financial analyses, at those meetings, showing an honest accounting of the resulting cost savings. As well as “which” schools they’d recommend for closure based upon the community’s actual needs. (Yeah, right.)
    The interdistrict transfers are less of a concern than the ongoing campaign regarding “sprawl for schools”.

  45. K Smith

    It’s rich that Alan is melting down in the last post of the other thread over a supposed threat from WS (which doesn’t even amount to a threat, LOL). And the thread has now been shut down for some reason.
    What happened to your vaunted “free speech” stance?
    WS’s words do not indicate he meant physical, violent harm.
    Maybe he just meant he hopes the local M4L chair will become an pariah dog in her community and neighborhood and among her former friends for what she is stirring up?
    Free speech has consequences and from what I understand, the local M4L chair is experiencing it in spades right now.
    Boo hoo fucking hoo, guy. Cry me a fucking river over what WS supposedly “threatened.”

  46. Alan C. Miller

    KS say: “What happened to your vaunted “free speech” stance?”
    I haven’t banned anyone, nor censored anyone. The very few rules are posted. As per these rules, I took out the names of a few of the people WS targeted on a few comments months ago, so people could see what WS was doing, but the targets not named. Nothing more.
    If I didn’t do this, this page would break down to the same sort of vacuous, childish, vile name-calling that is found on Beth Bourne’s Facebook page.
    As for your speculation about WS’s intent, I was asking WS to clarify as it wasn’t clear. Why are you speculating on another person’s intent? Let them respond.

  47. Ron O

    WS’s words do not indicate he meant physical, violent harm.
    Beth Borne never threatened anyone.

  48. Ron O

    Free speech has consequences and from what I understand, the local M4L chair is experiencing it in spades right now.
    Seems to me that the local library is the entity that is feeling the brunt of it, as a result of their own actions.

  49. Keith

    “Free speech has consequences and from what I understand, the local M4L chair is experiencing it in spades right now.”
    Denying free speech has consequences too as evidenced by the lawsuit brought against the library.

  50. K Smith

    “Beth Borne never threatened anyone.”
    She “threatened” people just as much as you fragile right wingers claim WS “threatened” her and her ilk.
    At the August Woodland Joint Unified School District board meeting, she spewed a load of nonsense about how for the “parents, teachers, librarians, and therapists” who indoctrinate “children” with gender ideology “your time is coming.”
    You are all hypocrites. But sure, lose your shit over WS’s basically anodyne comment.
    The community laughs at people like you. Simping for neo-fascism, basically.