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

<

>

Measure Q was a “bait and switch”

By Elaine Roberts Musser

During the 6/3/25 City Council budget discussion, I stated: “There will be no Measure Q revenue left to frontload funding for roads and bike paths as promised in the Measure Q ballot language. This would be a bait and switch scam, an abject betrayal of voters who approved Measure Q.” Mayor Vaitla responded: “This accusation of bait and switch is inappropriate.…” I beg to differ.

Bait and switch consists of a misleading statement intended to deceive voters, that is likely to influence voters, and will probably result in harm.

Let’s take a look at what happened with Measure Q funding. The ballot statement, signed by all five sitting City Council members, declared Measure Q is: “To support essential city services, such as…pothole repair… and bike path maintenance”. Notice it did not mention employee raises. The City Council knew the specific ballot language about roads/bike paths was apt to convince voters to approve Measure Q. Yet the City Council spent Measure Q funds on employee raises, but nothing on roads/bike paths. That deception will result in the city’s abysmal roads/bike paths deteriorating further at exponentially greater cost.

As the budget is finalized on 6/17/25, the only way the City Council can nullify the Measure Q bait and switch is to cut costs in other areas of the budget – and redirect that funding towards roads/bike paths. Then, and only then, can Mayor Vaitla with justification, claim there was no bait and switch.

Posted by

davisite2

on

in

, , ,
Davisite logo

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

Comments

4 responses to “Measure Q was a “bait and switch””

  1. Roberta L. Millstein

    To further support what Elaine Roberts Musser says here, I am fairly certain at the time that there was a well-publicized survey of Davis citizens showing that repairing roads and bike paths were the #1 things that Davis citizens wanted. So, the City Council would have known that any promise to repair roads and bike paths would have been persuasive to voters. I also recall pretty clearly that anyone who tried to say “but there is no guarantee of that” was met with some version of “trust us.”
    Well, this is where trusting the City Council has gotten us. More money for employees and roads continuing to deteriorate. Same old, same old.

    Reply
  2. Roberta L. Millstein

    Here is a quote from the LTE from then-Mayor Josh Chapman. Notice what he lists first:
    “Measure Q meets infrastructure needs such as improving our roads and greenbelts, helps first responders continue the high level of service we all expect, provides support to parks and recreation programs, and supports our downtown businesses and local economy.”
    https://www.davisenterprise.com/forum/letter-back-measure-q/article_710f26e2-9559-11ef-b0aa-df7f2715a4f0.html

    Reply
  3. Greg Rowe

    I fully understood that the ballot measure itself could not be specific in how the revenue would be expended, because that would have, I believe, required a 2/3 “yes” vote. I believe that the strategy was to be vague in how the revenue would be expended so that the measure could be passed with a 50% + 1 vote. I supported the measure on the basis of assumptions that a significant portion of the revenue would be devoted to improving roads and bike paths. Given what has transpired in recent City Council budget discussions, I wish that I could take back my “yes” vote.
    As a former local government employee, I fully understand the need to keep pay and benefits competitive with other jurisdictions, but wish that the intent to convey pay increases of the recent magnitude had been disclosed during the Measure Q campaign.

    Reply
  4. donna lemongello

    that’s why I voted no, more waste, just how we got here. they snowed us again. 1% from 8.25-9.25% should be for roads and bike paths. They would rather someone really get hurt on some of the really bad bike paths first. That’s why I pick me route carefully. But of course I have to find out first where to avoid.

    Reply

Leave a comment