It’s A “May” Day for Village Farms

Words Do Matter

By David Thompson

To: Citizens of Davis on May Day
From:  David J Thompson. Affordable Housing Advocate
Re: Recent words used by or about Village Farms

Text in recent mailer from Village Farms reads as follows:

“Davis Needs Housing – Village Farms is the Answer, Housing for All…construction of 360 Permanently Affordable Homes.”

140 high density rental apartments very low-income families (max income family of 4 = $31,450)

140 high density rental apartments low-income families, (max income family of 4 = $83,900).

80 permanently restricted for sale units for moderate income families (max income for family of 4 = $136,800.

As a long-time co-developer of affordable housing in Davis, I see a real problem in getting these units being built except  possibly as high density apartments with a very hard to get substantial subsidy. These will not be single family homes and there is no subsidy for this income group.

These “360 Permanently Affordable Homes” imply houses, however 280 of these units would be apartments, not houses only for lower income qualified residents. Also, this developer is not building any of these affordable units except he “may” build 100 lower income affordable rental apartments in the last phase (Phase 3) in 10 years or more down the road. But he “may” not. Let me explain this disingenuous affordable housing “plan”.

In the heated arguments about the Affordable Housing at Village Farms none of the pro-Village Farms side have dared mention the loophole word “May”.  As it is ‘May Day’ I thought what better time to discuss the critical meaning in the legal Development Agreement between the City and Village Farms of the word “May”.

Cambridge Dictionary https://dictionary.cambridge.org › dictionary ›

MAY meaning: 1. used to express possibility,

…the use of the word “may” in the section below appears to me a massive loophole in the claims and promises being made.

DA. Section 7.2.‘Notwithstanding the above, if the City determines that construction of the 100 lower income units is infeasible for any reason, City ‘may’ elect to request Developer to construct the units. (my bolding of may DT)

1. So, if the City decides not to request the developer to build these 100 affordable apartments, then in essence those 100 apartments will never be built at all.
2. If the City asks the developer to build them and the developer says no thank you as in point #1. Those 100 lower income apartments will never be built at all.
3. The City apparently signed a legal contract that potentially allows ZERO results for the empty promise of those100 units of affordable apartments.
4. Why did the City not have a guarantee by executing stronger and actionable legal language? Such as:

“that if the City has determined that construction of the 100 lower income units is infeasible that City requires that Developer shall construct the 100 lower income units.”

Google AI.

Use may for choices (“You may leave”) and shall/mustfor requirements (“You shall pay”). 

Outrageous Claims and Promises related to Village Farms

1. Vanguard 04-29-26 ‘It gives teachers, local work force, young families, and UC Davis employees a real shot at living in the city where they work with small market rate townhomes starting in the $400,000s range.”

2. Davis Enterprise, 04-08-2026 Letter to Editor. “The first phase will build 1,000 starter homes priced between $400,000-$500,000. That’s 1,000 families who would now be able to afford a home here.

Why is this language of $400,000-$500,000 houses not in any of the City legal documents if these statements are true so that they actually materialize?

Will the authors of these claims in the media ask Village Farms to legally verify if the statements (1 and 2 above) are true?

If Village Farms refuses to verify these claims, will you let the public know?

Because of the nature of the constantly changing and differing information campaign and the unverified extreme claims of its supporter/boosters,

I ask you to join me in voting NO on V.