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

Author: Roberta Millstein

  • Part 6 Candidate Responses to the Sierra Club Yolano Group Questionnaire for the 2022 Davis City Council Election

    Sierra-club-yolano

    Waste Management and Financial Contributors

    Introduction – As has been our custom for over 20 years, the Sierra Club Yolano Group prepares a wide-ranging questionnaire and presents it to candidates in races of interest to our local membership. The questionnaire for the 2022 Davis City Council race received answers from all 5 candidates in the 2 of the 5 City Council Districts for which an election is held in November, 2022.

    The candidates, listed in alphabetical order by their first name, are:

    District 1 (West Davis): – Bapu Vaitla, Dan Carson, and Kelsey Fortune

    District 4 (East Davis ) – Adam Morrill, Gloria Partida

    Questions were asked in the following general categories :

    Part 1 – Land Use and Housing Development – Peripheral Development

    Part 2— Land Use and Housing Development – Downtown Core and Student Housing

    Part 3 – Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions

    Part 4 – Transportation Management

    Part 5 – Toxics in the Environment and Other Environmental Issues

    Part 6 – Waste Management and Financial Contibutors

    Parts 1 through 5 in this series can be viewed by clicking on that article's title above which is linked to the earlier publication.

    This is the 6th in the series of articles and focuses on Waste Management and provides candidate responses to the following questions:

    Question #1 – Recyclable or Compostable Take-out & In-Restaurant Food and Drink Containers

    Davis has adopted a Zero Waste Resolution striving to achieve zero waste by 2025. As part of this program, all food service industry tableware and drink containers must be reusable, recyclable or compostable including a ban on all Styrofoam containers. All waste must also be segregated by organics, recyclable, or landfill but few fast food or other restaurants are currently doing so.

    What should the City do to enforce this Ordinance?

    Question #2 – Proposed Commercial and Multi-Family Recycling and Food Waste Collection

    The City of Davis waste management plan also now requires mandatory commercial and multi-family segregated recycling and segregated food scrap collection but this City has yet to roll-out these mandatory programs on a widespread basis?

     

    Do you support these measures and why or why not. If yes, how should the City go about rolling them out and enforcing them?

     

    Question #3 – Financial Contributors

     

    How much money have you collected overall to date and from which unions, developer or real estate interests, or other entities doing business with the City of Davis? Will you accept all contributions from any of these interests?

    (more…)

  • Learning from the anti-Semitic incident on 113 overpass

    Anti-Semitic bannersBy Roberta Millstein

    As most Davisites have learned by now, at least twice over the past two weekends, masked men displayed antisemitic banners from a highway overpass in Davis (see Davis Enterprise article for details).

    The banners said, “Communism is Jewish” and “The Holocaust is an anti-white lie.”

    Several local leaders issued responses.  These responses, although all were well-meaning, miss the mark a bit.  I want to try to explain why.

    Chancellor Gary May said: “We are sickened that anyone would invest any time in such cowardly acts of hate and intimidation. They have no place here. We encourage our community to stand against antisemitism and racism.”

    This isn’t false per se, but it’s incomplete.  This isn’t just an act of hate.  As I will explain further below, the banners replicate common tropes (repeatedly told stories) about Jewish people.  Without calling out those tropes, many will not understand, or fully understand, what the issues are.

    Chancellor May is correct that anti-Semitism and racism are connected, but he doesn’t say how.  Again, more on this below.

    (more…)

  • Explaining what shouldn’t need explaining

    PileofmoneySpending one million dollars is a sign of a mis-managed campaign

    By Roberta Millstein

    In his most recent apologia for the Yes on Measure H campaign, David Greenwald suggests that it is inevitable that developers will spend “exorbitant amounts of money” to promote their projects. 

    But nothing forced the Yes on Measure H campaign, led by “Honorary Chair” Councilmember Dan Carson, to outspend the No on Measure H campaign by more than 14-1, as Alan Pryor reported.

    In 2020, the Yes campaign spent around $323,000 to promote the DISC project. Let’s consider how the developers might have reacted to that loss.  They might have talked to voters to find out what, in their eyes, would make for a project that was better for Davis and modified the project accordingly. 

    Instead, they polled Davisites to find out what would “sell” to voters and rushed a virtually unchanged project to voters (just cut in half) only a year and a half later.  Apparently, voters like parks, greenbelts, environmental sustainability, and affordable housing, so those are the features that they poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into highlighting, even though these aspects were at best incidental to the project and at worse deceptive. The graphic of the stand-up paddleboarder was perhaps the most egregious example of this.

    And they dumped in almost three times the amount of the previous campaign – a campaign that had itself had spent large sums of money – in order to sell the project. That includes over $200,000 on a heavy-handed free-speech-squelching developer-funded lawsuit, which, bizarrely, Greenwald says is not a campaign expenditure issue.

    (more…)

  • Will this City Council Uphold Democracy?

    DemocracyTuesday’s Council Meeting will give us our first indication

    By Roberta Millstein

    This City Council does not have a good track record on democracy.  It has the opportunity to do better this time.  Will it?

    Newly appointed Mayor Lucas Frerichs, having served on the Council since 2012, is anticipated to step down on January 2, 2023 to become Yolo County District 2 Supervisor.  That will leave a vacancy on the Council in District 3 (note that county and city district numbering is different) until the November 2024 election.  The Council has a choice of two ways of filling the vacancy: 1) call a special election to fill the vacancy (see staff report for possible dates) or 2) appoint someone to fill the vacancy.

    The first way is the democratic way.  It’s the way that allows the voters of District 3 to select a representative who they feel listens to them and understands their concerns about their district.  It’s the way that allows new voices to put themselves forward for leadership of the city, fulfilling one of the promises that district elections were supposed to bring – i.e., more localized campaigns being easier and less expensive to run.

    The second way is the power-abusing way.  All the other districts will have elected their representatives, but District 3 would be appointed by councilmembers who are not even in their district.  There is nothing about this process that would ensure that the appointed representative would know about and care about issues particular to District 3.  What this process does allow for, however, is for councilmembers to appoint someone who sees things their way or who is part of the current power structure in Davis.

    Note that the Council also has the option of calling for a special election (the second way), but then appointing someone to fill the vacancy until the election.  I think this option is problematic too.  The person appointed for the interim period before a special election would have the advantage of incumbency in that election. The council should refrain from any appointment at all and simply call an election to fill the seat.[1]

    (more…)

  • City of Davis survey results

    How are you feeling about your city?

    By Roberta Millstein

    Recently, the City released the results of a periodic survey it does to take the pulse of Davis's residents.  The results are online here.

    The survey was conducted April 12 – 19, 2022 using a a multi-modal methodology: telephone, text- and email-to-web.  There were 500 interviews with an estimated margin of error ±4.37 percentage points.

    The staff report highlights some "key takeaways":

    • more than two-thirds of residents are optimistic about the direction of the City
    • more than 75% are satisfied with City services
    • affordable housing, homelessness and public safety are the top three areas of concern for residents
    • social media platforms and communications from the City are gaining popularity as a source of local news

    Those are indeed interesting takeaways, although as always with the term "affordable housing," one wonders if people intend the legal meaning, or if they are unhappy with the affordability of housing more generally, or both.

    Below are two panels of the survey that I found interesting.  In the first panel, only 23% of citizens are dissatisfied with city services but 39% are dissatisfied with the City Council.  So it seems that the dissatisfaction with the City Council is over and above the dissatisfaction with the provision of city services.  As for the second panel, as a longtime subscriber to the Davis Enterprise I am glad to see that it remains our top source for news.  I hope that people support it with subscriptions because there really is no other comparable source in Davis.

    I'm curious to hear people's thoughts and reflections about the survey, so please leave comments if you'd like to weigh in!

    City-satisfaction-ratings

    Important-source-of-local-news

     

     

  • Happy 4th of July?

    FlagBy Roberta Millstein

    When I was growing up on the east coast, 4th of July was always a wonderful day.  My father, a WWII vet, loved fireworks and imparted that combination of awe, excitement, and patriotism to my sister and me.  We'd head to the next town over and stake out a position on the grass and wait for the amazing display from a barge on the river.  It was always over way too fast, the "big finale" being the part you looked forward to the most while knowing that it signaled the end.

    Of course, I want everyone to have a good day.  I want children to have wonderful experiences like the one I was able to have as a child.  No one wants to be a killjoy.

    But.

    I also want our celebration of the 4th of July to be a genuine one – that is, a celebration of freedom.

    It's hard to feel free when 6 people are dead and more than 2 dozen hospitalized for the sin of attending a 4th of July parade, when mass shootings have become a daily event and our elected lawmakers fail to take action that would make a difference.

    It's hard to feel free when 50% of the population has just been told that their bodies are not theirs to control, that the state can make one of the most fundamental and life-changing decisions for them.

    It's hard to feel free when in the same decision, one of our Supreme Court justices threatens to eliminate the right for heterosexual couples to use contraception, the right for homosexual couples to have sex, and the right for gay people to get married.

    It's hard to feel free when racially-motivated voter restriction laws have been passed across the country, preventing full participation in our democracy.

    It's hard to feel free when Black Americans are incarcerated at nearly five times the rate of white Americans.

    As civil rights leader Fannie Lou Hamer said, nobody’s free until everybody’s free.

    Meanwhile, Davis's "celebration" continues as planned even with known harms of fireworks both for those who are attending and not attending, spewing toxic chemicals into the air,  triggering PTSD in humans, and scaring animals into bolting.

    When is Davis going to have a more appropriate celebration, one that is healthy and recognizes the liberties we have as well as the liberties we still have to fight for?

    When are we going to start fighting for our liberties?

     

  • City Council issues lily-livered statement concerning abortion rights

    City council statementBy Roberta Millstein

    Two days ago, the City released a statement signed by all five members of the Davis City Council in response to the recent Supreme Court decision overturning Roe v. Wade.  Sadly, the statement is wishy-washy and lacking in any sort of call to action.  One wonders why they even bothered.

    Those who moved to Davis recently may not be aware that the City Council voted to make Davis a pro-choice City in 1989.  The LA Times quoted then-Mayor Michael Corbett: “The resolution is a political act to support women’s choice to choose their own morality. . . . I know that will alienate people, but that’s the way I see it.”  That was bold leadership, leadership that is sorely lacking in today’s City Council.  Are we still a pro-choice city today?

    There are, it should be acknowledged, some positive elements to Tuesday’s statement, namely where it says:

    (more…)

  • Bias in jury selection in Yolo County Court

    JusticeBy Roberta Millstein

    What makes a juror too biased to serve on a case? 

    Recently, I was called for jury duty selection for case that involved repeated sexual assault on a person who was a minor at the time.  I was not selected; the prosecuting attorney used one of his peremptory challenges to dismiss me.  I’m OK with that – the trial would have been weeks long – although I do, in an idle curiosity sort of way, wonder about the reasons.  My friends insist it is because I have a PhD (apparently many of my fellow PhDs have been dismissed from juries), but I’d also note that the prosecuting attorney seemed very concerned about having people on the jury who were not in favor of the district attorney, who was on the ballot for re-election.

    But it wasn’t the prosecuting attorney’s dismissal of me that I found troubling.  Instead, it was process, largely led by the defense attorney and, if I understand correctly, allowed by the judge, for dismissing people “for cause.”

    I know at least some of what I say here will be controversial and perhaps heretical.  It won’t be as well-organized as I’d like because I am still thinking through some things.  But perhaps the reader will think through things with me.

    The defense attorney’s questioning of potential jury members was very haphazard.  He asked what was ostensively the same question in different ways, to the point where they seemed like different questions, although I don’t think that was his intent.  Some people were queried more intensively than others.  And it seemed to me that women were queried more intensively than men.

    That was bad enough, but as the process went on, it became apparent that anyone who had experienced sexual assault or who had someone close to them who had been sexually assaulted was being dismissed for cause on the grounds of “bias.”  Since something like 1 in 4 women have been sexually assaulted, this was quite disturbing.  A lot of people were being dismissed.  (Of course, some people are going to find it too painful to serve, and those people were rightly dismissed – but the dismissals were going beyond that).

    (more…)

  • Davis still needs a new vision

    Back in December 2020, some members of the successful 2020 No on DISC campaign got together and articulated what they felt was a new and better vision for Davis.  With the apparent defeat of DiSC 2022 as Measure H, currently showing a 63.52% "No" vote, I thought I would pull it out again.  I think our vision and much of what we wrote here remains pertinent , including an all-too-prescient prediction that:

    "the developers will try to bring back DISC with minor changes and spend another quarter of a million dollars in the hopes of gaining just enough new votes to change the outcome of the election.  What the election vote shows is that such an attempt would be a mistake.  The project proposal was fundamentally flawed and a few more bells and whistles wouldn’t change that."

    We did not, however, expect that the developer would spend significantly more than half a million dollars, and still lose.  It is to Davisites' credit that we still saw that this was a bad project delivered through a bad process (including an inappropriate developer-funded lawsuit, spearheaded by a sitting Councilmember).

    I hope our op-ed stimulates you to think about an alternative path for Davis.

    -RLM

    The Failure of Measure B Suggests a New Vision Is Needed
    Originally posted December 12, 2020
    https://newdavisite.wordpress.com/2020/12/12/the-failure-of-measure-b-suggests-a-new-vision-is-needed/

    West from Rd 30B - Sac skylineBy Roberta Millstein, Pam Gunnell, Nancy Price, Alan Pryor, and Colin Walsh

    Measure B – the measure that proposed a 200-acre business park and housing development outside of the Mace Curve – failed at the polls.  The defeat comes with official Yolo County returns showing that 16,458 people, or 52% of voters, said “no” to the project.  In Mace Ranch and Wildhorse, 60% of voters opposed the project.

    This is a remarkable result considering that the No on B campaign was outspent by over 14 to 1.  As of October 28, Yes on B had spent $258,919 between when B was put on the ballot in July and the election in November, while No on B had spent $18,149.  The No on B campaign, composed solely of volunteer Davis citizens, created its own literature, designed its own sign and other graphics, was active on social media, and, to the extent possible during COVID, pounded the pavement distributing flyers to let Davisites know about the negative impacts that this project would bring.  It was a true grassroots effort.  There were no paid designers, no paid consultants, no multiple glossy mailers, and no push-polls to gather information on what messages would sell.  Opponents also could not table at the Farmers Market due to COVID restrictions, normally the bread and butter of a campaign lacking deep pocket donors to finance getting its message out.

    By comparison, Yes on B hired a PR Firm and other consultants more than a year in advance of the vote to help contrive and package its message and run the campaign.

    The fact that Measure B was nonetheless defeated in the face of long odds and unusual circumstances shows that DISC was a bad project for Davis from the outset.  It was too big, chewing up prime farmland and habitat.   The promise of on-site housing for DISC employees could not be guaranteed, making the development car-and commuter- oriented with extensive parking areas. Poor public transportation options exacerbated this problem. The DISC development would have massively increased Davis greenhouse gas emissions and made it impossible for Davis to meet its carbon neutrality goals. We are in a climate emergency, as Yolo County and other counties have recognized; Davis needs to shoulder its share of responsibility for climate impacts, including but not limited to wildfire impacts and extreme weather events locally and globally.

    (more…)

  • Don’t forget to vote!

    I-votedToday (Tues, June 7) is the last day to vote! Polls close at 8 PM.

    Easiest way to vote is with a drop box.  Just vote, put your ballot in your envelope, seal your envelope, SIGN your envelope, and drop it in the box.

    • Outdoor boxes:
      • Davis City Hall, 23 Russell Boulevard, Davis
      • UC Davis Campus, 282 Tennis Court Lane, Davis
    • Indoor boxes:
      • Nugget Markets, 409 Mace Boulevard, Davis
      • Nugget Markets, 1414 E Covell Boulevard, Davis

    If you need in-person assistance, our election-day voting centers are:

    • Veterans Memorial Center – Multipurpose Room, 203 E 14th Street, Davis.
    • UC Davis ARC – Ballroom A & B, 760 Orchard Road, Davis
    • Montgomery Elementary School – Multipurpose Room, 1441 Danbury Street, Davis
    • Emerson Junior High School – Multipurpose Room, 2121 Calaveras Avenue, Davis

    My votes:

    • Measure H (the DiSC industrial project): NO
    • Yolo County Supervisor, District 2: Juliette Beck
    • Yolo County District Attorney: Cynthia Rodriguez
    • Yolo County Sheriff: Tom Lopez
    • U.S. Congress: Andrew Engdahl

    But even if you don't vote like me, please vote!