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

Author: davisite

  • Rebranding at UC Davis: New Mascot is the Ca$h Cow$!

    DALL·E 2023-04-01 00.08.16 - a cow mascot adorned with a graduation cap and a stack of cash in its hoovesDAVIS, CA – In a stunning announcement today, the University of California, Davis revealed that it would be retiring its current team nickname, the “Aggies," in favor of a new name that better reflects the school's commitment to undergraduate students and the hefty tuition bills they pay. 

    Effective immediately, the university's new nickname and mascot will be the “Ca$h Cow$.” The decision was reportedly made after a lengthy debate among university administrators about how to best celebrate the financial contributions of out-of-state and international students. 

    "We felt it was important to honor our biggest contributors," said Chancellor Dairy Dismay. "We want our students to know that they're not just a number, they're a dollar sign," added Dismay. "And what better way to show them that than by making our mascot a literal representation of the financial burden they're shouldering?"

    Reaction to the news was mixed on social media, with some observers praising the university for embracing its financial realities, while others criticized the decision as cynical and tone-deaf.

    (more…)

  • Will City Council stop broadcasting and recording commission meetings?

    Dear City Council Members,

    I am writing in regard to agenda item 3F “Terminate COVID Local Emergency.” Please pull this item from the consent calendar so you can discuss how this will change commission meetings and consider directing staff to propose methods for continuing to broadcast and record commission meetings.

    While COVID had many negative impacts on our community an unexpected benefit was forcing us to rethink how we held our public meetings. Though the first City Council meeting was some what rocky with the “Zoom Bombers” in the end Zoom meetings created a great benefit for commissions and the public. Thanks to holding Zoom meetings it was easier for the public to attend commission meetings in real time and once the City began making the recordings available on the City website, it meant the public was able to watch meetings after the fact too. This created a excellent example of open government.

    Further, Staff reported that having the recordings from the meetings aided greatly in writing accurate minutes for Commission meetings. Considering at times in the past the city website has lacked minutes for past meetings even over several years times, having the video of meetings raised the bar for public access to public meetings in Davis.

    Now with the local emergency order ending I have learned from staff that there is no plan to continue broadcasting or recording many commission meetings. Letting this opportunity for public access fall to the wayside would be a mistake.      

    I believe the City of Davis can continue to broadcast commission meetings and archive recordings at relatively moderate costs. For several commissions the meetings can take place in conference rooms and standard conference room teleconferencing systems are sufficient to allow staff to continue to broadcast commission meetings over zoom. This would also allow staff to continue to use zoom to record these meetings.

    One question you may ask is does this mean remote commenters must be supported in the future? Using zoom to broadcast and record meetings does not necessitate making remote public comments available, but the council could decide to continue to allow this. There certainly is merit to allowing remote public comment for commission meetings in order to increase public opportunities to comment for people who cannot come to a meeting in person. Whether the council chooses to allow for public comment or not is certainly worthy of council discussion and a good reason to pull this item from the consent calendar for Council consideration.

    In closing let me again ask the council to pull item 3F and direct staff to provide options for continuing to broadcast and record City of Davis Commission meetings. Continuing the enhanced public access discovered under the emergency order is certainly worth council and staff consideration.

    Best Regards,

    Colin Walsh

    Vice-chair of the Tree Commission speaking for myself.

  • Comments on Inclusionary Multifamily Rental Housing Ordinance Review

    Rik Keller, Housing Consultant and Affordable Housing Advocate

     

    Davis City Council comments 1/17/2023

    Item 5: Inclusionary Multifamily Rental Housing Ordinance Review 

     

    I have comments on the product and process:

     

    1) It is an overly simplistic, opaque study with bad assumptions.

    • The pro forma analysis has a lot of “black box” qualities: Doesn’t show the calculations used or major assumptions, so it is not possible to adequately vet, double-check, and critique the methodology, assumptions, and calculations.

      • The study doesn’t use a sophisticated pro forma analysis: it is very crude and basic and doesn't allow changes in parameters of things like number of stories, unit sizes, and parking construction types and configurations.

      • Because of this simplistic and opaque approach, it doesn’t offer flexibility in analysis or running different scenarios beyond the very limited canned ones shown.

    • One terrible assumption: it considers one major parameter as given—the underlying land price. 

      • If even the 100% market units don’t reach the 12% IRR threshold in the pro forma, then that tells me that the land price assumption is too high because we have had recent development proposals for multifamily development

      • The fact is that land value varies by its scarcity and demand.

      • This is a massive flaw as the City’s own density, parking, and inclusionary requirements have large effects on this parameter and hence development feasibility.

      • If you increase affordable housing requirements, you reduce the bidding demand price for land

      • In reality, land costs are not fixed and are influenced by the IRR that projects can achieve. If you make more affordable units required, that should actually lower land costs because the rate of return is now lower.

    • Another issue: bringing up reducing/eliminating development/impact fees as the only feasible way to make projects work. If projects don’t cover their own impact costs, you are increasing City debt and subsiding developer profits. I’m shocked that this is the only solution put on the table by the consultants.

    • There is also a statement on page 39 that “No incentives are needed in a policy that requires 15% – 25% of small, workforce units.” However, there is no data or analysis provided for this assertion. 

      • In actuality, small units don’t usually end up providing affordability. The most expensive components of units are the kitchens and HVAC systems. Small units have much higher per square foot costs.

      • The City of Davis has seen this inefficiency in the exorbitant proposed rents for the Olive Drive Mixed Use Project even after eliminating parking requirements.

     

    2) Ironically, one good thing about the study is that it shows the City’s planning failure in targeting densities and incentives to get maximum production of affordable units.

    • It states “Downtown’s new form based code does a great job at removing barriers to development. Unfortunately, this limits our options to offer development incentives as part of the policy.” and the “Residential high density zone encourages development that is denser than what is typically seen in areas outside of Downtown Davis and already removes commonly known barriers to multifamily development.”

    • But a terrible assumption of the report is that the City can’t modify its density and parking requirements so that they can be used as incentives for increased affordable housing requirements.

      • If you allow too much default density and reduce parking requirements in a given zoning district up front, you have given away for nothing incentives that you could offer for affordable housing production.

     

    3) There is a failure in City’s process with the Housing Element Update lead to this.

    • It has now been almost 5 years since the City scrapped its Affordable Housing Ordinance (AHO) for its interim ordinance that drastically weekend Inclusionary requirements.

    • After breaking deadlines multiple times, back in May 2021, staff stated that it would finally provide a “comprehensive update” to the AHO as part of the HEU. But the HE just ended up kicking the can down the road further.

    • The very limited nature of the report under review right now demonstrates the need to comprehensively address housing policy, not do it piecemeal like this.

    • We must think holistically:

      • The City lost an opportunity with the HEU, and needs to to re-group with actual affordable housing advocates leading policy rather than an advisory group stacked with development interests that pushed failed free-market trickle-down approaches.

      • A proper approach is to carefully craft incentives such as increased density and reduced parking requirements that offset affordability requirements. Simply having large allowable densities and allowing by-right development without strengthening affordability requirements is bypassing half of the equation. Density does not necessarily (and usually doesn’t) equal affordability. Providing half of the equation in terms of incentives without receiving the other half in terms of actual commitments to affordability is missing the point.

     

    Conclusion: This study is a poor excuse for a comprehensive analysis of the City’s actual policy option for increasing affordable housing production. The analysis put its thumb firmly on the scale to try to justify a weakening of the City’s inclusionary housing requirements. They claim that the requirements eat into developer profit margins and make it so projects won’t “pencil out,” In contrast, actual economic analysis of  the results of implementing inclusionary programs does not bear this out:

    •  “The most highly regarded empirical evidence suggests that inclusionary housing programs can produce affordable housing and do not lead to significant declines in overall housing production or to increases in market-rate prices” (National Housing Conference’s (NHC) Center for Housing Policy: “Separating Fact from Fiction to Design Effective Inclusionary Housing Programs.” https://nhc.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Separating-Fact-from-Fiction-to-Design.pdf

     

    The City should use evidence-based local policy solutions that further goals for inclusive, equitable, and affordable housing solutions.This process and product is not adequate.





  • “The Fun Habit” Author at Avid Reader

    !!RuckerAvid Reader Bookstore to host Mike Rucker (who grew up in Davis) author of "The Fun Habit" Thursday January 12, 2023 at 6pm. Avid Reader is located at 617 2nd Street Davis, CA.

    <<From Press Release>>

    “Far from being just a feel-good exhortation or collection of fun activities to embark upon, this title brings an in-depth, science-backed exploration of happiness, through the lens of having fun.” — Library Journal

    "This cheerful debut trumpeting the importance of joy…is a fittingly entertaining guide."
    — Publishers Weekly

    "Psychologist and fun lover Mike Rucker has written an enjoyable treatise on the art of bringing more play and joy to life." — Shelf Awareness

    “Rucker’s book is full of sound, sensible, and sometimes surprising suggestions for creating space for renewal, connection, and joy.” —Psychology Today

    It’s hard to deny the fact that most people want to be happy. But doesn’t it feel like the harder we try to find happiness, the more elusive it becomes?

    Until recently, Dr. Mike Rucker had spent most of his life engaged in the pursuit of happiness. Yet even when all his happiness “boxes” were checked—he was married with kids and a successful career, well-traveled, physically fit— he didn’t feel all that happy. It wasn’t until Mike suffered two back-to-back personal losses that it began to dawn on him how much energy he had been expending grasping for an ideal life and criticizing himself when it seemingly always fell out of reach. In focusing on a lofty, abstract concept, he had discounted day-to-day pleasures—in particular, he had neglected to have fun.

    (more…)

  • Please Pick the Side of Democracy

    Democracy

    By Colin Walsh

    Please pick the side of Democracy.

    Tonight, the City Council has the opportunity to set in motion their own private pick of the successor to Lucas Frerichs for the District 3 Council seat, or they can side with democracy and let voters decide.

    I can certainly understand the temptation to save money and sidestep elections and appoint their selected candidate (likely Donna Neville). After all, the council all endorsed each other and almost always votes together. Even our newest council member Bapu Vaitla arrives as a consummate insider with strong relationships with the other council members. I mean really the Davis power clique has dominated the last elections and has every reason to believe their handpicked appointment would win in an election anyway. After all – the inside candidates dominate in fundraising, endorsements, and opportunities in all recent council elections.

    The mechanism for picking might look like this – we would probably see the Council set in motion a process where they would pick the pickers. The council could appoint a committee to go through the process of interviewing and evaluating candidates and then pick exactly the same person the council would pick. After all, the council would surely pick the pickers that would pick the council’s pick of choice anyway – all while the voters of district 3 would be left picking their noses.

    But maybe district 3 would vote differently than the power clique prefers. They certainly should have a chance to pick for themselves.

    Some argue precedent, that the council has picked replacements candidates in the past, but things are different now with district elections. All of the current council members are elected by voters from specific districts and not by district 3 voters. District 3 voters deserve the chance to pick their own council person without interference from the candidates representing the other districts.

    Even if the council chooses an election sometime in the future, but picks an interim council member, it amounts to the biggest endorsement they can give providing a very unfair advantage to their pick in the election. Better to leave the seat open until the voters of District 3 can vote democratically for the council member to fill the remaining term that Frerichs has left behind. Frankly if district 3 voters are upset about not being represented for a period of time, they should send their complaints to Frerichs who abandoned his council seat mid term for a better paying gig.

    Let’s face it, the council has been voting in lockstep on just about every major issue for years now. A vacancy for a few months is not going to make a big difference in outcome. Especially considering the lockstep council would likely just pick another person to join them in lockstep.

    Or maybe the council will pick democracy and district 3 can pick the next council person to represent them. One can hope.

  • This Election Is In The Books

    Picture3

    By Colin Walsh

    Today is the last day, and the final votes are being cast today in what has proven to be a very nasty down and dirty slime fest. What follows are my reflections on the campaigns in the form of vintage children’s book covers.

    Powerplay

    Muzzle

    Felon

    More after the jump. Click to continue.

    (more…)

  • Maureen Carson’s Role as a Nextdoor Reviewer

    Nextdoorby Janet and Joe Krovoza
     
    We have reason to believe that Maureen Carson, Dan Carson's wife, is involved in halting discussion on Nextdoor posts deemed damaging to her husband. Twice now, a piece that Joe has posted on Nextdoor politely and factually discussing city staff and city council actions (and well within Nextdoor's guidelines for community discourse) has had its comments section closed suddenly and without any explanation within hours of its posting.
     
    Both of Joe's recent posts addressed the corrupt process leading to the purchase and installation of playground equipment at Arroyo Park and the city and council's lack of response to what appears to be illegal and certainly irregular acts by staff and vendors. Joe's first posting, which begins "Some may be interested in our posts…," includes links to our related articles in both The Davisite and Davis Vanguard. It was posted September 30 and closed to discussion less than 24 hours later, after it had attracted 23 reactions and two comments. Joe's second posting, dated November 3, begins "Since the information below was just published…" and includes a pasted-in version of our Davis Enterprise opinion piece. Over the next several hours it received 19 reactions and 20 comments but shortly after the comments brought up Dan Carson explicitly, it, too, saw its discussion closed.

    (more…)

  • 10  reasons  to  not  support  any  current  city  council  member,  now  or  in the future!

    Measure H mailer smlrBy Marc Thomas

    The City Council is not aligned to resident and taxpayers interests as evidenced by:

    1)  Failing their fiduciary responsibility and care and duty as council members. The entire city council, including Dan Carson and Gloria Partida, by their actions, have allowed the city budget/deficit to deteriorate to the point of “needing” special interests/developers to generate additional tax revenue. The current city council has enabled a loss of control of the budget by the residents and taxpayers, and is the result of mismanagement of the city budget by the current city council.

    2)  Unanimously supporting DiSC 1 (as Measure B in 2020) and DiSC 2 (as Measure H in 2022). The entire city council, including Gloria and Dan, who are both up for reelection, continued to unanimously support developer growth despite being voted down (not just once, but twice) by the taxpayers and residents.

    3)  Supporting excessive wages and overtime for various city functions to the tune of Millions. The entire city council, including Dan and Gloria, by their actions have failed to address the overtime and wage growth where the top 10 firefighters each earn over $385K  in pay and benefits in 2021, and the fire  chief was paid over $500K in 2021.

    4)  Wasteful spending. Our entire city council, including Gloria and Dan, who are both up for re-election supported MACE mess, SkyTrack, Ladder truck project, fire station kitchen remodel, etc., adding up to millions of wasted taxpayer funds.

    5)  The CAAP proposal and sham survey. The entire city council, including Gloria and Dan, who are both up for reelection, supported CAAP in its original form and the sham survey which was un-navigable by the average person. How did it get so far? The city council is out of touch with residents to even approve the draft’s release to the public.

    6)  Failure to address root causes of homelessness. The entire city council, including Gloria Partida and Dan Carson, who are both up for reelection, have failed to adequately address the root causes of homelessness: lost jobs, addiction, mental issues, divorce/breakup, eviction, and family issues. For some reason, they believe that just taking the homeless off the street is the answer. It's not, note even close.

    Chart

    7)  Unanimously supporting false marketing claims for Measure H. In addition to the project not being aligned to taxpayer and resident interests as proven by a 2:1 vote, the developer-funded (almost $1 million) campaign was misleading and 100% voted on by all existing Davis City council members.

    Mailer

    8)  Failing to publicly and unanimously condemn a council member (Dan Carson) for suing taxpayers and residents who objected to Measure H. Resident objections should be heard and listened to, not attacked by financial interests and developers. Council members should not be aligned to developer interests, Council members MUST be aligned to resident and taxpayer interests, with taxpayers and residents never sued for objecting to City councils members special interest.

    9)  Failing to recognize the type and nature of crime in Davis and take appropriate action and use taxpayer money efficiently and effectively. Dan Carson, comparing Davis to El Paso, Gilroy and Dayton, supported the need to purchase a $120,000 armored vehicle for Davis where Carson added, “We see headlines in Gilroy, El Paso and Dayton, Ohio. There’s very scary things going on out there.” We are not any of those cities, and our issues, our crime is far less severe and different. Davis' crime requires officers out policing the neighborhoods, more cameras installed and not an armored vehicle which will remain parked 99% of the time.

    10) Continuing to support “politics as usual”, and failing to engage with the taxpayers on important issues. Had Dan or Gloria or any other city council member reached out to their constituents and or held neighborhood meetings to listen to the taxpayers and residents of their districts, CAAP never would have been proposed in the current form, and Measure H never would have been on the ballot with the City council's unanimous support!

     

  • Newly Released City Documents Reveal More Problems with Carson’s City Emails

    Carson - emailCouncilman Carson Violated Two City Policies Using City Resources for Campaign Emails

    By David L. Johnson and Colin Walsh

    New documents obtained through a Public Records Act request reveal that City of Davis Councilman Dan Carson violated two City of Davis policies when he sent numerous campaign emails from his publicly-funded city email account concerning Measure H, a ballot measure to approve the DiSC development project.

    New documents from the city also reveal that all emails Carson sent in 2022 regarding measure H appear to have been deleted from his city account.

    (more…)

  • Partida Statement On Old Fraud Conviction

    20200707-partida-gloria-700x395Statement By Gloria Partida

    There has been discussion on social media over the past week concerning whether I was truthful in answering a question that was asked by an audience member during a candidate forum sponsored by Yolo People Power on September 26, 2022. I was asked whether I had ever been arrested or convicted of a crime.

    I responded by giving examples of police encounters I had had while driving. I also affirmed in my response that I had the experience of being arrested.

    Have I ever been convicted of a crime? Yes. Do I currently have a conviction? No.

    Answering this question in a way that doesn’t create misunderstanding, takes more than the brief response time allowed in the forum. Moreover, I have received legal advice that I am under no obligation to disclose this prior conviction, given that it was reduced to a misdemeanor and set aside.

    QuoteThe events around this occurred in 1996, and resulted in charges being filed against me. The details of this incident involve my extended family and the circumstances are deeply personal and painful. The bottom line is that I followed all legally authorized processes to resolve the matter, including what was needed to obtain court orders to render the incident a misdemeanor for all purposes and obtain an expungement of my record. When I filed for a new term on the City Council and declared that I met the eligibility criteria, I did so in good faith and in accordance with the law. I have been assured by my legal counsel and the District Attorney’s office that my response was in full compliance with the law.

    In response to Alan Pryor’s statements regarding my background, I do not have a criminal conviction. I did have a prior conviction from 22 years ago. That conviction was dismissed and set aside by the Yolo County Superior Court in 2005, based on my “continued law-abiding lifestyle, education and involvement in family and community.”  Simple fact: I do not currently have a conviction.

    Seventeen years ago, my court case file should have been updated to correctly show a “dismissal” of the charges. I learned only recently that, due to a record-keeping error, the Court website was not properly updated to show this dismissal until I notified them several days ago that the court website contained incorrect information. Contrary to Mr. Pryor’s assertion that the court website was “scrubbed” the Court Clerk’s Office acknowledged that the website had not been properly updated.  The Court Clerk then sealed the record, as required by Senate Bill 731, which took effect on July 1 of this year. No scrubbing involved, just compliance with applicable legal requirements.

    I did not have any legal obligation to disclose this when I filed my papers for candidacy.  At that point, I was asked if I had a felony conviction, and I did not have one. The prior conviction had by then been reduced to a misdemeanor and dismissed. You have a right to hold me to a high standard, and my sincere hope in sharing this information with you is that you will take into account my long history of commitment to our community. I sincerely hope that all of my work in the community will allow you to put this issue into the proper context.

    —————–

    link to Alan Pryor's previous article "Does Gloria Partida’s Conviction for a Felony in 2000 Disallow Her from Holding an Elected Public Office in California?"

     

    link to answer Gloria's Answer at forum