[The following message was shared with the Davisite for posting]
December 16, 2025
TO Mayor and City Council and Planning Commission
FR David J Thompson
RE Please Do Not Certify the Village Farms Application nor the Project Individualized Plan (PIP)
With so many unanswered questions still on the table and even newer projections which are still not sufficiently clarified I do not feel that the Village Farms proposal and its PIP are factual enough to deserve certification or approval at this time.
The newly released city staff report for Village Homes still includes a fourth fire station. It also adds a public safety center for police and EMS for good measure. It is estimated the fourth fire station alone would cost the city $3.5 million per year. God only knows how many more millions of dollars the addition of police and EMS at that spot would set the city back!
Where in the heck does city staff think the money for all this is going to come from? Last I looked there was no money tree in the back of City Hall. Nor do taxpayers have unlimited pockets. Many citizens are struggling just to make ends meet, as Mayor Vaitla has noted often enough, especially in light of what is going on at the federal and state level.
Additionally, City staff is trying to claim the city’s General Plan requires a fourth fire station, which is a patently false assertion. The general plan called for an analysis of fire facility needs, not construction of a 4th fire station.
The next fairy tale spun by city staff is that the Fire Department or the City Council itself already made the decision to build a 4th fire station. Where does staff get this tarradiddle from? First, the October 30, 2018 City Council minutes prove otherwise – the City Council just flat out didn’t make such a commitment. Second, the Fire Department has no authority to approve such an undertaking.
If the City Council wants this development project to pass a measure J/R/D vote, then any mention of a public safety center and 4th fire station should be completely removed. Any lame attempt to supposedly set aside a parcel for “public safety”, to disguise the real intent to build a fourth fire station, will not fool anyone.
You mentioned your need to curtail your exposure to politics and reading news as it often becomes too much.
I offer you an opportunity to recharge. Come down to the Saturday Davis Farmers Market between 8 and 1 and table with me as I pass out free “Love Your Neighbor” lawn signs.
As strangers walk by my booth I call out “Free lawn signs!” And “Make your neighborhood a friendlier place!” Like a carnival barker. Rudely, Intruding into their conversations, texting, or thoughts of their shopping lists.
In response I get not ignored, but smiles, hundreds of smiles. And people responding, “glad you’re here!” And “Thanks— I’ve got a sign.” “I wish I had a lawn- I live in an apartment” or “You inspire me.” Half the people respond somehow. And I get hugs from total strangers every Saturday.
About once a Saturday, someone, usually from Davis who has seen me before, will spontaneously offer a donation so someone else can have a sign, often as they live in an apartment or have a landlord that forbids signs. (Hey city council- this is social equity: why does Davis allow HOA or landlords to forbid signs, even in windows. It makes places impersonal, an abridgement of speech for renters.)
Today: an older homeless man pushing shopping cart came by. The cart was filled with empty soda cans and liquor bottles he was collecting presumably to recycle for cash. He stopped across from me in the market, slowly read my signs, and then came over to give me $1.17 in change as a donation.
I frequently have heartfelt conversations with strangers who reflect they struggling to maintain their equanimity in face of The Darkness. People from out-of-town express regret that the 18×24 lawn signs won’t fit in a suitcase. Thought my signs don’t flag they are political everyone “get it” that these values a refutation of Trumpism.
Today a visiting UCD alumna now living in “deep red” Iowa suggested I was needed there to table. Someone from rural Nevada told me about her neighbors…first demurring on a “Love Your neighbor” sign afraid it would upset them …then came back and took one.
These Saturday mornings’ experiences are like no other I have had in my entire life giving out my Love lawn signs. “Love is one thing you get more of when you give it away.”
Heads up for Davis City Council “workshop“ on Village Farms, Tues, Dec 16, approx 7:20 PM. This is an opportunity for you to let the city know your views on the project.
Item 6: Staff recommends the City Council conduct a public workshop on the Village Farms Davis project (VF) applications, as follows: a. Receive Staff presentations on the proposed project; b. Receive Applicant presentations on the proposed project; c. Take public comment; and d. Consider the following project applications and documents and provide feedback:
i. Pre-General Plan Amendment, including provisions for Baseline Project Features as required by Chapter 41 of the Davis Municipal Code; and ii. Pre-Zoning and Preliminary Planned Development; and iii. Development Agreement.
IN PERSON PUBLIC COMMENTS: Speakers will be asked to line up at the podium and state their name for the record. Comments are limited to no more than 2 minutes per speaker.
WRITTEN AND VOICEMAIL PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Submit written public comments to CityCouncilMembers@cityofdavis.org. Emails are distributed to City Council and staff. To ensure the City Council has the opportunity to review information prior to the meeting, send emails by 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date.
Submit comments by voicemail prior to the meeting: Call the city’s dedicated phone line 530-757-5693 to leave a voicemail message for public comment. Staff will play comments during the appropriate agenda item. Comments will be accepted from 12:00 noon until 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Voicemail public comments will not be accepted after 4:00 p.m. Speakers will be limited to no more than two minutes.
Note: You must leave a separate voicemail for each item you wish to comment on. Please indicate your name and which item you are speaking about.
A portion of the Village Farms DEIR (contained in the Utilities and Services chapter) is being recirculated because the City, as the “lead agency” in the EIR process, has received a last-minute report from Brown and Caldwell dated November 7. This report indicates that the City’s existing Wastewater Treatment Plant (“WWTP”) is perilously close to exceeding its maximum flow capacity and needs to be upgraded to meet the City’s wastewater treatment permit issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This information was not known by the City when they prepared and circulated the current Village Farms DEIR for comment.
However, since the new information impacts the analysis of the Village Farms project’s impact on the City’s WWTP, the City determined that the portion of the Village Farms DEIR addressing Utilities and Services needs to be recirculated with the updated information for public comment prior to consideration of the revised FEIR for certification by the City.
Unfortunately, the City has done a poor job explaining this need to the public when they recirculated the portion of the DEIR needing additional comment. Two questions immediately come to mind that should have been answered by the City in more detail and explained better when the DEIR was recirculated.
1) What Information Came to Light that Necessitated the Recirculation of the Portion of the Village Farms Davis DEIR?, and
2) Is this Process Proper and Legally Compliant with CEQA and State Regulations Regarding Public Noticing and Subsequent Consideration by the Planning Commission and the City Council?
The following discussion addresses these questions.
At last night’s Planning Commission meeting, I was the only (!) oral commenter, via the call-in option. I raised a series of concerns about the process and timeline for evaluating the Village Farms proposal, which I will paste in below. Yet neither staff nor any member of the Planning Commission chose to acknowledge the existence of my concerns, much less respond to them. I will let the reader decide whether I am making a mountain out of a molehill (possibly) or whether the Planning Commission shirked its duty by not even discussing the concerns.
As background, the sole point of the meeting was to decide whether to “continue” the Dec 2 meeting until Dec 17, to “to allow for the final negotiations of the project’s draft development agreement to be completed such that the Planning Commission can take action before the draft is forwarded to the City Council for consideration.”
Here is the slightly longer version of my comments that I emailed to members of the Planning Commission prior to the meeting, differing primarily in the second paragraph which I had to cut for time in my oral comments.
Urge the Yolo County Board of Supervisors to postpone the Dec 9th vote on Cemex’s application to extend the Granite Capay Mining and Reclamation permit another 10 years. Send your comments to clerkoftheboard@yolocounty.org and Lucas.Frerichs@yolocounty.gov
Almost 30 years ago, I participated in the Cache Creek “gravel wars”. We believed the aggregate industry could mine gravel and reclaim mined areas. The County adopted the Cache Creek Area Plan (CCAP) which included reclamation requirements prioritizing reclamation of farmland, then secondarily habitat.
Well, after all these years the reclamation hasn’t worked out too good. Turns out it is very difficult to meet the “healthy soil” requirements of the Surface Mining Reclamation Ordinance. It takes a long time to accumulate enough soil to put back to recreate an ag field. And when the soil is stored so long it loses its mojo according to a soil assessment by consultants House & House. The assessment identified one reclaimed ag field produced only wheat but before it was mined it produced sunflower, corn, tomatoes and peppers.
Habitat reclamation is sad too. Deep pit mining was supposed to result in recreational lakes in a proposed Cache Creek Parkway. Turns out the stagnant water in the pits has high levels of methyl mercury that precludes recreational use—also not too good for fish and water fowl. The Cemex application adds two more, larger (204 acres) deep pits. Some of the pits are into the water table so ground water goes into the pits and evaporates from the surface further depleting ground water. Lakes were not the natural ecosystem of the Creek—riparian floodplain was.
Davisite 