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

Comments

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

1. Dec 6, 2023 2:43 PM

   Ron O

   She “threatened” people just as much as you fragile right wingers claim WS “threatened” her and her ilk.
   Would have to compare the comments side-by-side. But I do know that based upon what I’ve seen, she hasn’t threatened anyone.
   I don’t pay much attention to what WS says.
   I’m not a right-winger. But if I was one, I wouldn’t hesitate to acknowledge it.
   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.”
   Didn’t see it. But I did see that Anoosh (from the Davis Phoenix Coalition) is involved in a recall of one of the Woodland school board members.
   The community laughs at people like you. Simping for neo-fascism, basically.
   Well, glad that someone gets some amusement out of all of this. (I know that I do, at times.)
   Let me know when you can define what a “man” or “woman” is. 🙂
2. Dec 6, 2023 2:53 PM

   Ron O

   Don Shor (from todays’ housing advocacy article in the Vanguard:
   A member of the audience asked “How can we maintain that small town feel and still deal with our housing issues?”
   The reply? “That small town feel is a euphemism for a segregated community.”
   (I would say that the Davis-connected buyer’s program at WDAAC was a far better example. Which, for “some reason”, did not seem to raise the hackles of some of the self-proclaimed progressive housing advocates.)
3. Dec 6, 2023 4:39 PM

   Alan C. Miller

   SUBJECT: “4 thoughts on “Council Approves Zoning Changes for Housing Element – But Buffer Now “Rail Thin””
   Rail thin? Not perhaps . . . wafer thin ?
   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GxRnenQYG7I&t=6s
   The result in this video clearly also what will happen to Davis when the wafer-thin buffer erodes away.
4. Dec 6, 2023 4:48 PM

   R Keller

   I’m SURE its just a coincidence that we were talking here on 11/27 and 11/28 about the Vanguard not posting its IRS filing as legally-mandated, and then the documents magically appeared on the Vanguard website in the past few days.
   The filings from 2021 and 2022 are both here now: https://www.davisvanguard.org/about-us/irs-filings/
   Interestingly, the metadata for the 2022 filing shows the PDF was created the morning of Friday 12/1/2023, Just 4 days after Al’s Whatever Thingy or Whatever It’s Called called attention to this matter.
   The filing raises more questions that it answers though.
   First of all, Davis Greenwald and the Vanguard are apparently living RENT-FREE. The 2021 Form 990-EZ filing shows Line 14: “Occupancy, rent, utilities, and maintenance” of $11,255. But the 2022 filing has a blank there. And the 2022 Form 199 California Exempt Organization 2022 Annual Information Return filing to the state of CA (none provided for 2021) also shows a blank for Part II, line #15 “Rents” expenses.
   So, there’s a big question about who paid Greenwald’s office rent in 2022 what they are got in exchange for it, and why this isn’t accounted for at all. RENT-FREE.
   The salary issue is even more messy. In 2021, Greenwald claimed he worked an average of 100 hours per week and reported compensation of $25,100 total, While I am not arguing that his time is worth any more than $5.02/hour (assuming 50 weeks worked per year), that’s still a screwy figure.
   However, by 2022, his time was apparently worth even less, as he claimed to work an average of 40 hours/week for a total compensation of $5,300. That’s $2.65/hour.
   He also supposedly paid Secretary Michelle Lagos $4,200 total for an average of 40 hours/week per year ($2.10/hour), which certainly seems like an egregious labor law violation at the very least.
   No other employees are listed in Form 990-EZ or in CA Form 199, Statement 1, Part II, Line 11 “Compensation of Officers, Directors, Trustees and Key Employees”. But under Part II of that same form he claims $41,277 in “Other salaries and wages” paid out. There is no indication who these were paid to. Apparently this wasn’t paid to “key employees”.
   Perhaps Robert Canning who comments here occasionally and who is is listed as an (uncompensated) Treasurer for the Vanguard has a better idea about where is money is disappearing to?
   Cross-referencing with the Form 990-EZ, that states under “Salaries, other compensation, and employee benefits”: $55,392. And then another $43,172 paid for “Professional fees and other payments to independent contractors.” There is no indication anywhere in the documentation who might be receiving these payouts.
   Among other things, I also found out the Vanguard operated at a deficit of $13,542 in 2022, which explains things like them recently begging for emergency donations to “meet payroll”.
   Things that aren’t explained though include stuff like no breakdown of their total revenue in 2022 of $138,510 (down substantially from $158,278 in 2021). Where did this $ come from? Is he illegally claiming his advertising revenue as not subject to tax? (note: The IRS views advertising as taxable trade or business activity for nonprofits). Who are his main supporters pushing his pro-development real estate interests agenda? At least the 2021 filing had a Schedule B attached to the Form 990 showing amounts from major contributors for $5,000 and up (though the names/addresses were blacked out. The 2022 filing posted doesn’t even have this.
   See this article for a previous call for the Vanguard to Provide transparency in its funding sources:
   “…we advocate that the Davis Vanguard (and any other non-profit news outfit) adopt the Institute for Nonprofit News’ “Ethics & Practices Policies”, particularly with respect to donor identity and funding transparency: “As a nonprofit, we will avoid accepting donations from anonymous sources, and we will not accept donations from government entities, political parties, elected officials or candidates actively seeking public office.“”
   https://www.davisite.org/2019/04/davis-enterprise-chastises-city-council-and-davis-vanguard.html
   In short, the Davis Vanguard’s long-delayed posting of IRS filings demonstrates some very questionable business and accounting practices, and large chunk of expenditures and receipts that are not explained. This should not be surprising for a publication that routinely violates federal nonprofit regulations and nonprofit journalism ethical guidance. David Greenwald runs it like a sweatshop content-farm, exploiting the labor of an army of poorly-trained unpaid interns to produce the vast majority of its articles, most of which are heavily plagiarized from unlinked sources using falsified byline location information (see this describing some of these practices: https://www.davisite.org/2019/04/a-problem-with-the-davis-vanguards-citation-practices.html)
   But hey, at least it’s RENT FREE!
5. Dec 6, 2023 4:53 PM

   Alan C. Miller

   Not an issue, RK. David is living RENT FREE — IN MY HEAD
   Or so I am told 😐
6. Dec 6, 2023 5:32 PM

   Ron O

   But hey, at least it’s RENT FREE!
   Man, that guy lives everywhere, rent-free. Even in other people’s heads (as someone else noted).
7. Dec 6, 2023 5:48 PM

   R Keller

   In his “Giving Tuesday” plea for more money to be spent on unknown budget items because his anonymous donors are apparently not giving him enough these days, David Greenwald states “For nearly 15 years, the Davis Vanguard has been training the next generation of progressive lawyers and journalists…” https://www.davisvanguard.org/2023/11/support-the-vanguard-on-givingtuesday-2
   What Greenwald’s “training” (he’s not actually a journalist and has no formal journalism training or educational credentials himself) consists of: apparently encouraging unpaid student interns to plagiarize full articles from legitimate news and other sources without attribution or links to the original source, and for the student intern to fake their location in the byline. Here’s a link on how unethical the latter is:
   “Datelines must be honest, and bylined writers must be where they say they are.”
   from The AFP Ethics Code of Editorial Standards and Best Practices https://www.afp.com/communication/chartes/12_april_2016_afp_ethic_final.pdf
   The Vanguard takes this warning from the NYU Journalism Handbook for Students: Ethics, Law and Good Practice and turns it on it head as its core business model!
   “CARDINAL SINS: PLAGIARISM: Journalists earn their living with words, and plagiarism—using someone else’s words as if they were your own—is, simply stated, stealing. It can take many forms. At its worst, plagiarism can be copying and pasting an article off the internet and slapping your own byline at the top. Or subtler: Lifting a quote from a wire service story or taking credit for another person’s idea.”
   https://journalism.nyu.edu/about-us/resources/ethics-handbook-for-students/nyu-journalism-handbook-for-students/
   Here’s one such example from the Vanguard from today, but they publish plagiarized articles with fake locations in the bylines every single day, usually multiple of these per day:
   https://www.davisvanguard.org/2023/12/nij-report-impact-of-false-or-misleading-forensic-evidence-on-wrongful-convictions/
   In this case, the author, Yana Singhal, is listed as a “Vanguard Court Watch Intern” and has a byline location of “WASHINGTON, DC” in the article. I can almost 100% guarantee that this location is not where the author actually wrote the article today, unless the Court Watch program just got a giant cash infusion to fly its unpaid interns around the country.
   Now: did this Vanguard intern actually do any reporting for this article? Oh, dear reader, need you ask? There are no links to any sources that might have been used, but a simple Google search of some of the quotes turns up this article published over a week ago: https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/impact-false-or-misleading-forensic-evidence-wrongful-convictions
   Here’s the original text of the plagiarized article starting from the 2nd sentence:
   “As of 2023, The National Registry of Exonerations has recorded over 3,000 cases of wrongful convictions in the United States. Organizations such as The Innocence Project work to free the innocent and prevent these convictions, so far exonerating 375 people, including 21 who served on death row.
   Dr. Jon Gould of the University of California at Irvine has claimed that faulty forensic science is partly to blame for some of these convictions.[2] As one of the architects of research that assesses the impact of forensic science on wrongful convictions, he has cited flawed eyewitness identification, confessions, testimony, police and prosecutorial conduct, defense lawyering, and forensic science as factors related to wrongful convictions.”
   And here’s the Vanguard plagiarized version that copied the original almost word-for word (but then also doing some “interesting” things like falsely directly quoting someone who had been paraphrased in the original article):
   “The National Registry of Exonerations has recorded over 3,000 cases of wrongful convictions in the United States, but different organizations have helped to overturn these convictions, according to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ). “The Innocence Project,” notes the NIJ, has exonerated “375 people, including 21 who served on death row.”
   However, “faulty forensic science is partly to blame,” according to Dr. Jon Gould at UC Irvine, who notes factors that can lead to wrong convictions include “flawed eyewitness identification, confessions, testimony, police and prosecutorial conduct, defense lawyering, and forensic science.” “
   The rest of the Vanguard “article” goes on to steal entire passages from the original article.
   Is this what Greenwald thinks “training the next generation” of lawyers and journalists” consists of?: teaching them to violate sacred journalistic principles. lie, and steal material directly from others.
   That this particular article I chose at random among dozens published in the last month that have egregiously plagiarized and used fake bylines did so at the expense of the original author, the National Institute of Justice… well as the great poet Alanis Morrisette once said:
   “And isn’t it ironic?
   Don’t you think?
   A little too ironic
   And yeah, I really do think”
8. Dec 6, 2023 6:38 PM

   Keith

   R Keller, good deep dive into the Vanguard financials and you ask some great questions. Will they ever get answered?
9. Dec 6, 2023 6:43 PM

   South of Davis

   I wonder how David was able to get around the CA minimum wage laws and pay his Secretary $2.10 an hour? I also wonder if he has proposals for his unpaid interns on file with the CA Division of Labor Standards Enforcement?
   “In California, unpaid internships are legal. However, employers have to comply with both state and federal laws in order to host an unpaid intern. Federal guidelines require that the internship benefits the intern, not the employer. California requires employers to submit a proposal for the internship to the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement (DLSE) for approval.”
10. Dec 6, 2023 7:26 PM

    Keith

    Hey, to Hell with this living RENT FREE in my head, I want at least $2.10 an hour.
11. Dec 7, 2023 9:30 AM

    Alan C. Miller

    SUBJECT: “Guest Commentary: My Critique of Village Farms” [Today’s Van Guard]
    Nobody cares what you think.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqC9iA9pnFQ
12. Dec 7, 2023 1:10 PM

    R Keller

    SoD said: “I wonder how David was able to get around the CA minimum wage laws and pay his Secretary $2.10 an hour? I also wonder if he has proposals for his unpaid interns on file with the CA Division of Labor Standards Enforcement?”
    1) maybe that person only worked part of the year? But then he didn’t hire anybody else to do that job (which included being “Internship Coordinator”)?
    2) good question! I have seen a lot of Vanguard internship posts and they never mention any money at all, but they do mention course credit as possibly being available. I’d also like to get my hands on records from the various universities to see if any of these “interns” are actually getting college credit for learning how to lie, steal, and plagiarize from Greenwald.
    I supposed Greenwald can value his own time at whatever he wants (and $2.65/hour is certainly a lot more than most of us would value his time) but it’s really curious that he would suppress his own salary in 2022. I wonder what the reason for that was? Maybe someone else in his household got a job, and he needed to keep his total household income below the threshold to still be eligible for his subsidized affordable housing?
    In any case, his 2022 IRS filing only accounts for salary/wages for “key employees” of $9,500 out of a total supposedly $55,392 paid for “salaries, other compensation, and employee benefits” and then another $43,172 paid for “Professional fees and other payments to independent contractors.”
    Who is this money going to? And are these really independent contractors, or is he directing their work while trying to skirt labor law and tax liabilities?
    Who wants to set up a meeting time to visit the Vanguard office as a group and inspect his nonprofit financial filings in person, as the public has a right to at any time? Will he immediately scream that he is “CALLING THE COPS!”? Who is paying his rent? How is he living RENT FREE? So many questions!
13. Dec 7, 2023 1:32 PM

    R Keller

    And to follow up on a previous statement, while California and federal employment law and guidelines provide for unpaid internships, the primary beneficiary has to be the intern, not the “employer”. And for example, the interns cannot perform work that any other employee would be expected to perform.
    Given that Greenwald uses his army of interns to produce a huge volume of the articles he publishes, this is a clear violation. They are pumping out massively plagiarized “articles” with falsified byline locations. He is either providing terrible training to the interns in proper ethical journalistic practices or is not providing guidance at all–either way, that is not fulfilling the primary educational and training goals for legitimate unpaid internships.
    Doing any of these things once is grounds for immediate termination in a legitimate journalistic organization (and a strong likelihood of never being able to secure a job in the field again), but it’s the basic business model for the Vanguard. We all know that Greenwald could never get a job at a real news organization, and he is ensuring that his interns will never be able to either.
14. Dec 7, 2023 9:42 PM

    Ron O

    R Keller: But what do you REALLY think of David and the Vanguard?
    🙂
15. Dec 7, 2023 10:25 PM

    Keith

    “I supposed Greenwald can value his own time at whatever he wants (and $2.65/hour is certainly a lot more than most of us would value his time)”
    I’m glad I read this at night and not early in the morning when I’m having my coffee. I would’ve needed a new keyboard.
16. Dec 8, 2023 12:15 PM

    R Keller

    Apologies to all for any coffee-related incidents!
    I think I should compile a spreadsheet listing all of the plagiarized articles published in the Vanguard by David Greenwald over a 30-day period. There are multiple every day. This one from today is just a stolen Sacramento Bee article that the Vanguard “article” doesn’t provide a link to (though at least in this one they actually mention the source is the Sac Bee, rather than their usual practice of stealing a whole article from an unnamed source). The whole thing is just a barely re-worked version of the Sac Bee article–just straight stolen material for Greenwald’s content farm.
    For example, check out the final sentence in the Vanguard “article” (there are many similar examples throughout): https://www.davisvanguard.org/2023/12/sacramento-city-pays-3-million-to-woman-blinded-by-indiscriminate-firing-of-rubber-bullet-officer-doesnt-pay-but-taxpayers-do/
    “Sacramento police records show the officer who fired the projectile was Jeremy Ratcliffe, and that he was exonerated, but no details.”
    And below is the original sentence in the Sac Bee that the Vanguard “writer” stole and then just deleted a few words from (I bolded the stolen words/phrases). This is still egregious plagiarism. The Vanguard is presenting someone else’s phrasing and work as their own. Simply deleting a couple of words does not change this –and in fact, this is possibly even worse as it demonstrates an intent to deceive,
    “Sacramento police transparency records show the officer who fired the projectile was identified as Jeremy Ratcliffe, and that he was exonerated; however, the records do not include details about the reasoning for the exoneration.”
    Conveniently, the author of the Vanguard’s article is listed as “By The Vanguard Staff” so we don’t know the identity of this particular plagiarizer. It’s classic Greenwald though. Again, this is not a bug, it’s a feature–the core business model of the Vanguard relies on this kind of theft and deception.
17. Dec 8, 2023 1:19 PM

    Alan C. Miller

    Once you’re done with your spreadsheet, make some use of it and send it in a group email to all of those who were plagiarized, and suggest they file a class-action or joint lawsuit against the Vanguard. Then maybe the people of Davis could all wake up from our long, dark, underbelly nightmare.
18. Dec 10, 2023 11:23 AM

    Keith

    Today’s Vanguard article looking for donations.
    “The Vanguard Needs to Raise $16K More in December”
    Comments are closed.
    Gee, I wonder why? LOL
19. Dec 10, 2023 3:53 PM

    R Keller

    Comments are closed so that no one can ask Greenwald why he doesn’t pay his “interns,” but exploits their names/images/likenesses for his craven fundraising pleas.
    The just-posted Vanguard 2022 IRS filings show a big drop-off in revenues from 2021. And this latest post hints that revenues have declined even more in 2023.
    interestingly, Greenwald claims a “shoestring budget of $160,000.” But his 2022 IRS 2022 filing shows total revenue of only $138,510 vs expenditures of $152,052. He was unable to provide even a basic breakdown of where the vast majority of that money went, and he provided no transparency whatsoever about his revenue sources.
    He has to be praying for a Measure J campaign that he can advocate for to try to boost his revenues.
20. Dec 12, 2023 8:37 AM

    Ron O

    From todays ongoing “sprawl for schools” series of articles in the Vanguard:
    These are the key points of dispute:
    1. The district MUST accept students from parents who work in the school district boundaries—i.e. DJUSD or UC Davis.
    (As noted in the article, that’s only true if space is available. If a school or two is closed, space “won’t” be available for out of district enrollees.)
    2. Once a student is in the school district, they cannot be removed.
    (No one is suggesting removing current students.)
    3. Closing a school won’t solve the problems of declining enrollment.
    (Right-sizing the school system will. It is beyond ludicrous to suggest that the city’s size should be “adjusted”, rather than the size of the school district.)
    4. The school district cannot charge out-of-district students a fee for the parcel tax.
    (That’s the exact reason that the school district should not remain “oversized” for the purpose of accommodating out-of-district students.
    Also, the parcel tax will go farther, if there are fewer students. Which the school district and the Vanguard refuse to acknowledge.
    School districts in surrounding communities would also receive more funding per pupil from the state, if DJUSD stopped poaching students for its own self-centered purposes.
    I’d suggest that no one takes whatever DJUSD or the Vanguard claims at face value. DJUSD has a vested self-interest to avoid “right-sizing” – even though their continued resistance to do so ultimately harms Davis and surrounding communities.)
21. Dec 12, 2023 9:49 AM

    Ron O

    Just happened across the following:
    “S.F. schools likely to cut 900 jobs as district faces $400 million deficit”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/sfusd-budget-job-cuts-18547236.php
    And yet, some still claim that there’s a shortage of teachers despite a significant STATEWIDE decline in enrollment.
    To which I would imagine that the teacher’s union would prefer to say, “more sprawl for all”.
22. Dec 16, 2023 9:45 AM

    Alan C. Miller

    SUBJECT: “” [tuddayuz Vanguardd]
    “Arnold did stun us four years ago when it ended up being Brett Lee rather than Will Arnold who declined to seek reelection.”
    I know I was stunned. Like stepping on a stingray walking barefoot on the beach on a cold night. Stunned.
    Home audience: where you stunned? Where were you when you heard the news? We’ll take your calls . . . after this message from Pamprin.
23. Dec 17, 2023 9:22 AM

    Ron O

    From today’s Vanguard housing article:
    Part of my reason for writing yesterday’s column is my frustration over the failure of the Davis community to engage and step up to solve OUR problems.
    It’s not likely that you’re going to get agreement regarding what those problems are, or if they’re actually problems in the first place.
    I recall now a conversation I had on here with a member of the former group (do not want to solve) who suggested that Davis do what large cities on the coast are doing. I assumed at the time, they meant, fail.
    Probably referring to me. But it’s not the cities that will fail – it’s state officials who will. The problem being that they’re trying to force something (mostly on behalf of their business allies) that cities don’t want, and which doesn’t pencil out.
    It’s the goal itself that’s a problem. In fact, the goal actually hasn’t been defined (other than to “just grow, baby”).
    The irony of course is that San Francisco’s failure is actually adding to the valley’s problem.
    If one is going to make that argument, then why should the valley accommodate San Francisco’s “problem”? Especially since remaining in San Francisco and the Bay Area is the most environmentally-friendly alternative, and is where the jobs are (or were?) located.
    Does the state actually want to force sprawl, instead?
    So is the suggestion from said commenter for the city of Davis to force the state to come babysit for them?
    If they think they have the manpower and ability to take on cities across the state in a declining housing market (and also aren’t worried about backlash), then go ahead and try. Seems to me that we’re already about halfway through the current round of failed housing targets in the first place.
    So rather than look to San Francisco, maybe Davis should look to the other side of the causeway.
    Not sure if you noticed, but Sacramento sucks. You could probably fit 10 San Franciscos inside of its sprawling boundaries.
    Though it has always had relatively affordable housing in parts of the city.
    But for those who think that Sacramento is doing a good job and is accommodating their “need”, my suggestion would be to move there. Seems pretty simple, doesn’t it?
    (At least Sacramento is not the worst city in the country, and has good access to some nicer areas.) But most newcomers probably look in Roseville, Folsom, Rancho Cordova, Elk Grove, Natomas, etc.
    Sooner or later Davis is going to have to cross the peripheral gauntlet or risk losing Measure J.
    Again, I would ask if the state’s goal is to force sprawl outside of city limits. I ask because that was never the state’s plan. Perhaps that question needs to be asked in court if any entity tries to challenge Measure J. Hopefully, any potential court challenge will drag on for years, regardless. And won’t necessarily result in any immediate peripheral approvals, regardless.
    If Measure J (and similar measures in other parts of the state) are really that vulnerable, some entity would eventually challenge them regardless. I’d suggest not operating out of fear, and be ready to defend it. In the unlikely event that it’s eventually overturned, I suspect there will be a backlash the likes of which haven’t been seen before.
    Regarding San Francisco’s apparent resistance to forced growth, I believe that some of the supervisors behind that are YIMBYs, themselves. (Would have to look into that.)
    Ultimately, cities and organizations throughout the state might increasingly need to band together to take on state officials. United we stand, as they say. (That is, if the housing downturn doesn’t increasingly lay bare the state’s failure in the first place.)
24. Dec 17, 2023 12:22 PM

    Ron O

    There’s a couple more housing articles today in The Chronicle, which has increasingly become more blog-like (advocacy, rather than reporting). Who knew that this trend would result as a result of the demise of hard-copy newspapers?
    Not sure if everyone can see these articles, but I’ll briefly describe them:
    The first one below notes the migration to Sacramento, from San Francisco. But does so in a rather humorous, light-hearted manner:
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/san-francisco-sacramento-18550426.php
    (Again, I would ask if this is a desirable result, given that it’s more environmentally-sustainable to remain in the Bay Area vs. the continuing sprawl of what the author labels as “Sacramentafrisco”. (Doesn’t have quite the ring of some other nicknames.)
    The other article is more closely related to The Chronicle’s increasing role as a blog for development:
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/build-to-rent-housing-18551960.php
    The article above is essentially a gushing endorsement of corporate purchases of entire developments of single-family housing – which is now coming to Fairfield.
    No mention of the fact that this type of purchase is driving UP housing prices, nationwide – especially for traditionally “affordable” houses. Which has caught the attention of Congress, regarding potential legislation to discourage it. (As a side effect, such measures would probably have the effect of crashing the housing market nationwide, as corporations are forced to sell their properties over a 10-year period.)
    Again, none of which is even mentioned by The Chronicle.
    https://www.vice.com/en/article/jg5nex/congress-members-push-to-ban-hedge-funds-private-equity-from-buying-family-homes
25. Dec 17, 2023 1:14 PM

    Ron O

    I think the following is what David is referring to, in regard to The Chronicle’s article (to follow the “lead” of San Francisco). Below is another perspective, regarding that:
    “Planning Commission agrees to end public input on many housing developments
    Narrow 4-3 votes ends the ability of community activists to call out unscrupulous landlords and speculators.
    The density bonus plan, under State Sen. Scott Wiener’s SB 35 and SB 423, allows for streamlined approval and additional density for housing that includes a modest percentage of affordable housing, below what San Francisco until recently required.
    Since almost every developer building market-rate housing in the city is going to use that bonus, the commission in essence gave the department staff the ability without public input to approve any new market-rate project.
    Several speakers pointed out an essential problem: The law doesn’t allow this sort of approval if the property had tenants living in it who were evicted or otherwise forced out—but San Francisco has no way to track that information.”
    https://48hills.org/2023/12/planning-commission-agrees-to-end-public-input-on-many-housing-developments/
26. Dec 17, 2023 1:19 PM

    Ron O

    And one more.
    Folks, the YIMBYs aren’t good people. They (for the most part) are the same development interests that have always existed, but have found a new “sheep suit” to wear. (Try saying that 10 times in a row.)
    https://48hills.org/2023/12/check-the-record-preston-and-his-progressive-colleagues-are-not-against-housing/
27. Dec 17, 2023 3:42 PM

    Ron O

    Just happened-across the following, as well. I must be on a “housing market” feed, on the Internet.
    “I had resigned myself to renting for life in California, but I asked a financial planner about another idea: moving somewhere I can afford to buy”
    Right – you need a financial planner to tell you that, apparently. Did they also advise you to give up avocado toast? 🙂
    Though comparing Los Angeles with “California” in general is not valid in the first place.
    But glad to see that you mentioned state income taxes as a factor, as well.
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/realestate/i-had-resigned-myself-to-renting-for-life-in-california-but-i-asked-a-financial-planner-about-another-idea-moving-somewhere-i-can-afford-to-buy/ar-AA1lym8v?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=NMTS&cvid=c907e818ad724d43b5dae2e3a99b92c7&ei=23
28. Dec 18, 2023 1:32 PM

    Ron O

    More confirmation that the U.S. population growth is significantly declining, and may soon result in a shrinkage of the increasingly-ageing population.
    “While the US population has managed to avoid an outright drop, population growth reached an unprecedented low of 0.12% in 2021.”
    (Pretty sure that Davis has been growing faster than that.)
    https://www.businessinsider.com/us-population-decline-worker-shortage-labor-birth-rates-immigration-economy-2023-5#:~:text=And%20there%20are%20fewer%20young,the%20replacement%20level%20for%20decades.
    I was “tipped off” to the article above via a link in another article (below), regarding the reasons that young people are increasingly choosing to not have kids. (Though I would disagree with them that climate change will cause an “ending of the world” scenario. I suspect there’s some “brainwashing” or lack of perspective regarding that.)
    https://www.msn.com/en-us/lifestyle/parenting/i-m-never-having-kids-all-my-gen-z-friends-agree-we-won-t-be-parents-in-a-world-like-this/ar-AA1lFv3N?ocid=hpmsn&cvid=76dc0fb1a1434d48aa858d1a4c321557&ei=17
29. Dec 18, 2023 8:28 PM

    Ron O

    One more housing article, which shows how “effectively” rent control can work (in my opinion, at least). The guys in these two apartments certainly lived to a ripe old age, without getting priced out of S.F.
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/rent-controlled-apartments-18540894.php
30. Dec 19, 2023 10:07 AM

    South of Davis

    I think that a big reason that many young people today are not having kids is that there is just no way to even have a life for their kids even close to the life they had today even with a husband and wife working full time (at good jobs) My wife grew up in Palo Alto in a home her parents bought for under $100K and her Mom didn’t need to work. She went to Castilleja High School that cost about $3K/year and the family of five could ski at Squaw Valley (now Palisades Tahoe) for $30/day. Thirty years ago if a husband and wife both had good jobs they could buy a house in Palo Alto for ~$500K send their daughter to Castilleja for $9K /year and ski at Squaw for ~$100/day. Today a decent house in Palo Alto costs over $3 million tuition at Castilleja is ~$60K/year and it costs over $800 to buy lift tickets for a Mom, Dad and three kids to ski for the day (+ the ~$5/gallon gas to get there and back). P.S. To Ron if rent control works so well why not do it for other stuff. Think how great it would be not to just pay 1980’s rent in SF but to also go out to a nice dinner for 80’s prices and pay 80’s PG&E rates and buy a nice new car for <$10K…
31. Dec 19, 2023 12:39 PM

    Ron O

    South of Davis:
    Pretty sure that the guys in that article appreciated rent control ($800/month, in a good location).
    If the goal is to prevent existing residents from getting priced out, I don’t know of anything more effective than rent control. And it doesn’t seem to have dragged down San Francisco, since it’s been in effect for decades at this point. (Unlike the more-recent problems that San Francisco has been experiencing.)
    Although dinners at nice restaurants, ski trips, and cars cost more, those type of purchases might be viewed as more of an “option” than a “necessity”. Though one could argue that folks can always move to a cheaper locale as an option, too.
    I suspect that about half of Davis residents moved from a more-expensive locale.
    The only new vehicle I bought (and still have) cost less than $10K – brand new.
32. Dec 21, 2023 12:24 PM

    Ron O

    “Jiminy Cricket”.
    If anyone wants to see the Vanguard’s type of comments “on steroids”, take a look at Beth Bourne’s Facebook page.
    Most of the time, Beth is the most sane/logical one on there. Though I ultimately come down on the side of “none of my business” – either way. Or at least, none of my concern.
    I think I’ll stick with sprawl.
33. Dec 21, 2023 1:16 PM

    Ron O

    Well, the corporate YIMBYs aren’t going to like this:
    “The number of people living in California fell below 39 million this year, according to new census estimates, the lowest count since 2015.”
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/population-exodus-2023-18566180.php
    Now, what’s all this talk about accommodating a “need”, in a state that’s LOSING population? Let alone trying to encourage them to move to new sprawl, within the state.
    Just goes to show that no matter how many laws the a-holes in Sacramento attempt to pass on behalf of their corporate masters, you can’t fight “change”. Nor should you “fear it”, as folks like David Greenwald, Scott Wiener, and UCD’s own Chris Elmendorf apparently do. (Perhaps the latter has time to think about this when commuting FROM San Francisco to UCD.)
    (Haven’t used “corporate masters”, before. Thought I’d change it up.)
    Interestingly-enough, New York had a larger population drop than California, by percentage.
    https://www.sfchronicle.com/california/article/population-exodus-2023-18566180.php
34. Dec 21, 2023 2:11 PM

    Ron O

    I already know that few would agree with me regarding the following, but I view it as as corruption in action. Public funds should not be used to privatize land. I, for one, do not ask the governments of my ancestors in Europe to “return” whatever land I think is owed to me. For all I know, my ancestors were cheated out of some land, there.
    The purchase came from both private funds and public grants, and was organized by the tribe and the nonprofit Conservation Fund, after the Australian landowners put the plot up for sale in 2022, the tribe said. The California State Coastal Conservancy also provided financial support.
    https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/california-land-bought-by-tribe-18568505.php
    Now, if these grants were used to purchase private land for ALL Americans, I’d be all for it.
    Folks, just because they claim to be “Native Americans” (unlike anyone else born in the U.S.) should not mean that they get free land that might otherwise be used for the benefit of all (including wildlife).
    Get your head out of your arses, or the U.S. will continue paying “reparations” to anyone/everyone who has a skin color other than “white”. And it will ALWAYS come at the expense of land that would otherwise be public.
35. Dec 21, 2023 4:37 PM

    Ron O

    Well, that’s five comments from me in a row, when including the comment in the other article. Now six.
    Just call me “Walter”, I guess.
36. Dec 22, 2023 7:48 AM

    Ron O

    From today’s article in the Vanguard regarding the Temecula school district:
    David: “I think one of the key points is that the right has tried to seize the mantel of free speech, but it’s a selective mantel as best as the long discussion with Keith showed last week.”
    It’s not the nebulous “right” that has a selective mantel these days. It’s institutions, including libraries and the ACLU itself.
37. Dec 22, 2023 12:00 PM

    keith

    Ron, I’m obviously living in David’s head rent free!
38. Dec 22, 2023 12:55 PM

    Ron O

    Keith: I’m (sometimes) apparently living in there, as well.
    Truth be told, anyone who puts forth an opposing argument lives there (in David’s head). Sometimes, entire articles devoted to that.
    The problem, though, is that it never ends (once you participate). Same points and counterpoints, day-after-day.
    I do feel more free, since leaving the Vanguard. And I can still put forth counter-arguments on here, without getting personally attacked.
39. Dec 22, 2023 4:36 PM

    Alan C. Miller

    The real problem, is that even with you living free in other people’s heads, and their living rent free in yours, there is STILL a fucking housing crisis! Go figure!
40. Dec 23, 2023 5:27 AM

    Keith

    “there is STILL a fucking housing crisis! Go figure!”
    There will always be a housing crisis in Davis, what else would the Vanguard have to write about day after day 24/7 ?
41. Dec 24, 2023 1:19 PM

    Ron O

    And the war between Beth Bourne (and her supporters), vs. David/Kendra (and their supporters) continues to heat up (on both the Vanguard, and Beth’s Facebook page).
    Good – that ought to keep David occupied for awhile.
    But it is a perfect example of what occurs online, these days (purposeful misrepresentation of others’ comments). In other words, a great big waste of time, convincing no one of anything.
    But I don’t think that any of these comments are going to stop the lawsuit against the library, which underlies the most important issue. That issue is not dependent upon David’s claim that Beth is losing (local) support.
42. Dec 26, 2023 10:03 AM

    Ron O

    Yeap, it’s continuing on Beth Bourne’s Facebook page.
    Mostly, I see an attempt to shut down Beth, using any combination of words at their disposal. And since Beth apparently doesn’t delete comments, they remain on there.
    Beth must have an extremely thick skin, to not be bothered by it. On her own Facebook page, no less.
    Some of these people must have gotten a lump of coal for Christmas.
43. Dec 31, 2023 9:19 AM

    Ron O

    From today’s (and yesterday’s) “Beth-Bashing” article in the Vanguard.
    Though you could also insert “support sprawl”, or “free the criminals who harm others” in place of Beth:
    David: “People were like, if you think the best idea is to ignore it, why do you keep reporting on stuff? Well, I’m not in the same position as an activist. My job is to cover what’s happening.”
    Did you actually believe that about yourself and the Vanguard, when you typed it – repeated twice at this point? If so, your lack of acknowledgement regarding what you actually do is far more concerning than your activism, itself.
    Seems unlikely that even David’s supporters would agree with his self-analysis regarding what he does, and what the Vanguard is.
44. Dec 31, 2023 10:15 AM

    Ron O

    Don Shor, in regard to the same Beth-bashing article referenced above:
    “School officials should do the bare minimum to meet the information demands.”
    Kendra’s response:
    “I think Don’s ideas to do the bare minimum in terms of compliance is a good one.”
    I gather that they’ve already taken that approach.
    Perhaps those associated with DJUSD think that’s a “winning strategy” in regard to hitting-up the community for even more money, and in regard to their support for sprawl (rather than “right-sizing” the school district).
    Don Shor:
    “There is no reason to engage with people who don’t act honestly, who try to conceal their real motives and goals, and who vilify community members to try to rile up the populace.
    You don’t negotiate with bullies, nor do you pretend they are reasonable people.”
    Apparently, some local businessmen have about as much ability to self-analyze as David Greenwald does, when he reports “the news”.
45. Dec 31, 2023 11:22 AM

    Alan C. Miller

    RO, I had the very same say what? reaction to DG saying his job is to report the news, as his excuse for not practicing what he preached. Even worse, he then goes on to say the job of the Vanguard is activism, which conflicts with what he just said about his job being to report, and since the job is activism, he should stop engaging with BB. I seriously wonder if his mind is unraveling.
    I did send a contribution to the Vanguard today, and earmarked it for DG to go in for surgery to have his head removed from his ass. If another 175,000 of you donate a dollar like I did (the processing fees are probably higher), then the cranial-rectal detachment surgery could be a success. Give today to the Davis Vanguard!
    And as for New Year? Bah Humbug. You thought 2020,2021, 2022 and 2023 were bad? 2024 will be the year some angry bozo detonates a nuke. That’ll change the world.
46. Dec 31, 2023 3:08 PM

    Alan C. Miller

    SUBJECT: “Sunday Commentary: As 2023 Ends, the Battle for Trans Rights in Davis Continues” in 2day’s NYavis NYanguard
    Don Shor December 31, 2023 at 9:50 am
    Somehow, I sense that the tactic of attacking community members, teachers, and counselors by name, and allowing your friends to make highly insulting and nearly libelous comments about them, isn’t really working to further the community discussion that is ostensibly desired. The social media algorithm is dwindling, and the replies are just from the echo chamber at this point, except for a few brave souls who try to correct the more blatant misinformation.
    Oopsy, Plant Man! 😐 The algorithm undwindled. Check out today’s episode of the *greatest online entertainment in Davis, Beth Bourne’s Facebook Page.
    *The greatest, if you enjoy the spectacle of unlikable, narcissistic extremists from both ‘sides’ of the issue trying to destroy each other with words, while trying to shut down the other ‘side’ from being able to use words.
    Fun! Fun! Fun!
47. Dec 31, 2023 4:18 PM

    Keith

    “except for a few brave souls who try to correct the more blatant misinformation.”
    If Don Shor is talking about Beth’s FB page several of the her most vociferous detractors are hardly brave souls as they post under fake aliases.
48. Dec 31, 2023 4:37 PM

    Alan C. Miller

    “hardly brave souls as they post under fake aliases.”
    Kinda like the ‘brave’ anarchists who protest in mobs and deface the campus while wearing masks like their face-covers gurus, the ‘brave’ KKK (black instead of white face coverings) while soiling their (color unknown) diapers
49. Dec 31, 2023 4:57 PM

    Ron O

    The greatest, if you enjoy the spectacle of unlikable, narcissistic extremists from both ‘sides’ of the issue trying to destroy each other with words, while trying to shut down the other ‘side’ from being able to use words.
    Fun! Fun! Fun!
    Seems to me that this is par for the course in just about every political blog, and every comment section in media these days.
    Except (for the most part) the Davisite. (Though we do go after the Vanguard on here.)
    In any case, I’m glad that I quit commenting on the Vanguard, at least. And there’s no way I’m going to start commenting on Beth’s Facebook page.
    It does seem as though there’s some very unhappy people in the world. And most of the anger seem to be of the “first-world” variety (no actual suffering which explains their unhappiness.)
    Reminds me of road rage – people getting upset with others for no actual reason.