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

Category: Environment

  • Letter: Fortune is the only progressive-environmentalist running for Council in District 1

    Fortune-for-davis

    Kelsey Fortune

    There is only one progressive and environmentalist running for Davis City Council in District 1.  That person is Kelsey Fortune. I had the opportunity to speak privately with Kelsey for more than an hour on a Zoom call. I was impressed with her intellect and her planned approach to city-wide issues. Kelsey believes in diversity, honesty and transparency, the last of which has been missing in our current council. Kelsey will also be a strong advocate for affordable housing and in-fill development projects.

    But let’s look at the other two candidates. Dan Carson and Bapu Vaitla supported the Davis Innovation Sustainability Campus, Measure H.  Davis citizens disapproved this project 64% to 36%, which political scientists define as a landslide defeat. Carson was the honorary chair of the Measure H campaign which had lawn signs that implausibly read “combat climate change” – for a project that predicted 12,000 daily vehicle trips. What do these facts tell us? Carson and Vaitla are out of touch with the Davis electorate.

    In a recent Sierra Club questionnaire to city council candidates, Bapu Vaitla stated that he would consider overturning the City’s phase-out of glyphosate, which is the primary ingredient in Roundup, an herbicide made by Monsanto and now Bayer. Here’s Vaitla’s quote: “If no effective organic herbicides exist for our context, we should reconsider the glyphosate question.” None of the other four candidates made this risky claim. In 2020, Bayer agreed to settle over 100,000 Roundup lawsuits, agreeing to pay $8.8 to $9.6 billion to settle those claims.

    If elected, Kelsey Fortune will focus on our climate emergency, work on the city’s budget to make it sustainable and will help ensure that every decision the city makes is fiscally responsible.

    For decades, the Davis City Council has had a progressive-environmental majority. Unfortunately, the current council has swung to the center-right. We need to get back on track. Please join me on November 8, or earlier, and vote for Kelsey Fortune for Davis City Council, District 1.

    David L. Johnson

  • Not Just Rain Falling – Campaign Signs Too!

    IMG-6749

    >>from press release<<

    You may have seen some No on H signs popping up around town over the past few days. The No on H campaign, rather than throw away or recycle their campaign signs, provided those signs for Kelsey Fortune’s reuse, since she was the only candidate in District 1 to oppose Measure H. This is a candidate who is walking the walk with her campaign. Her care for the environment isn’t just a talking point, but actually influences her choices during the process. Instead of creating additional plastic waste, this campaign for city council is simply covering old signs with compostable posters. The much appreciated rain has hastened the breakdown process and revealed the signs beneath. Please excuse the surprise change in signage!

    We’ll be replacing signs this week. If your sign didn’t stand up to the rain or otherwise needs replacing, please reach Kelsey by text at 530-220-2001 or email at fortunefordavis@gmail.com, and we’ll make sure to bring you a new one! You can also contact her if you don’t yet have a sign and would like one, and further information is available at http://www.fortunefordavis.com!

  • Call For Action on Sept. 23rd Global Climate Strike

    Resized_Copia_de_GCS_Announcement_Graphics_-_1_400960667076094(From press release)

    Dear Community Members. 

    Three years ago, in September of 2019, Davis participated in the first Global Climate Strike with nearly 2000 youth and adults alike demanding climate action. This year, Fridays For Future Davis is inviting you to join us again to fight for all of our future. On September 23rd 2022 at 11am we will march from E 14th and B Street down to Central Park. We are asking students across Davis to walk out of school and adults to walk out of work and join this international movement to demand we have a livable future. 

    At the 2019 school strike for climate action we delivered a letter of climate action demands to the Davis City Council and DJUSD, and since then not one of our demands for climate action have been met. We, the youth and Davis community, will not stand for this. 

    Elected officials are holding our future in their hands and it is up to them whether we will have a livable planet or not. But it is up to us to tell them when it is time to act, and it is past that time. The Earth’s clock is ticking. We cannot and will not wait until 2035 or 2030 or even 2025 for change to come. We will not wait any longer. 

    This September you can be part of this international school walkout and strike to show the world that we will not give up on our future and we will not back down.

    (more…)

  • Rally for Youth Transit

    DE5BE5F2-5F64-4317-BEF2-CA2CA8E231FA(From press release) Youth for Climate Action Justice is holding a rally at the Capitol 1-4pm on Friday, September 16th. Bill AB1919 creates the Youth Transit Pass Pilot Program, a program that will help young students access free public transportation. It also establishes a report requirement to show how effective public transit is at reducing carbon emissions. Join Youth for Climate Action Justice at the Capitol on September 16th and tell Governor Newsom to sign this important bill!

    Register here: https://forms.gle/MBBNiYygXJdbMRUS8

    55A1FE56-FFF7-40E4-A3FC-3F2AB3C44970EVENT: Rally for Youth Transit
    WHERE: West side of the Capitol building
    1201-1231 10th Street, Sacramento CA 95814
    WHEN: September 16th 2022
    TIME: 1-4pm

  • Taormino Response to Staff Report Open Space and Habitat Commission Hearing

    On Friday, Sept 9, David Taormino sent the following email concerning wildlife tunnels at Bretton Woods to the Open Space and Habit Commission in advance of their meeting yesterday.

    Dear Commissioners,

    Below is my response to the Staff Report Recommendations.

    Response to Staff Report Recommendations, Background and Analysis:

    I am not appealing the original Tentative Map Conditions. nor your original commission recommendations, nor the Development Agreement. I was ready to design according to these conditions when Public Works staff said, essentially: We want to eliminate the “natural creek bottoms” and substitute stamped concrete and “multiple ledges”.

    From development agreement

    I am willing to support certain staff-initiated changes set forth in the Staff Report, but these changes result in different infrastructure requirements that were not contemplated when the DA and map conditions were agreed on with the City Council and Planning Commission.

    Discussion and my alternatives to staff requested changes:

    1. Concrete lined bottom of all four tunnels: two tunnels along Covell Blvd and two at the north Bretton Woods channel connecting to the new John Jones Detention Pond. I am agreeable. It contributes to good maintenance practices and minimization of clogging.
    2. I am in agreement that all four tunnels are to be built without custom stamped concrete as initially required by staff as a replacement for natural creek bottom. This also eliminates the need for oversizing the tunnels.
    3. Ledges in all four tunnels: I am not entirely agreeable as explained below.

    My Recommended Alternative and Explanation:

    Culvert ledge example 2

    Culvert ledge example 2

    The original ostensible and practical purpose of ledge(s) was to provide a “dry” walkway under Spirit Street somewhat akin to the current ledges on the foundations of the two corrugated steel tunnels under Risling. (see John McNerney’s example photo attached: Culvert Wildlife Ledge example 2)

    Typical 4 X 8 culvert

    Typical tunnel

    I agreed to the concept of ledge(s) because the ledge(s) were an integral part of the foundation for tunnels with natural creek bottoms as specified in the Tentative Map Conditions. Those foundations with ledge(s) are necessary to build such tunnels. When changing to four-sided concrete tunnels without a natural creek bottom. no foundation is needed. The four sides of the concrete tunnels are smooth (see photo of typical tunnel attached), thus any ledge needs to be hand made and hand installed in a space that has only four feet of height to work in. It is time and labor intensive.

    Drainage Tunnel ExhibitMy alternative: Install a 2 X 8 redwood board ledge along the length of the tunnel and attached to the wall of the tunnel closest to the North edge of the Covell Channel, located furthest from Covell Blvd. Anchor the redwood ledge to the side/top of the Covell Channel for ease of animal access. This redwood ledge provides animals a safe below-grade route (below Spirit Drive). It would be located away from Covell Blvd and closer to the landscaping on top of the channel. One 2 X 8 board inside the length of the tunnel will not likely impede water flow in heavy rains and would require little city maintenance. This location is the safest connection point to where animals are likely to walk. (See attached drawing of the tunnels originally proposed by Staff for a visual.) Having one conveniently located ledge with above ground access is ample considering the overall likely use is by smaller critters like possums, skunks, racoons, etc. that will use the side or bottom of the Covell Channel and landscaping for cover. In John McNerney’s report he states:

    “I recommend that the City uphold the agreed upon wildlife conservation measures for the project including the installation of culvert wildlife undercrossings. It is my opinion that while the Covell and John Jones Road drainage channels are not significant migratory corridors for wildlife. they do provide cover and movement habitat for small to medium sized urban wildlife. Installing new roads across these channels will indeed create a barrier to wildlife movement and increase the risk of vehicle strike mortality. Installing the wildlife ledges, as proposed, is a relatively cheap and effective method to provide safe passage for wildlife.” (Emphasis mine)

    Conclusion on Covell Channel Tunnel: One ledge closest to the landscaping meets the intent of providing a safe alterative below ground path under Spirit Street for animals to avoid cars and is consistent with expected use.

    North Bretton Woods channel tunnels (2).

    My Recommendation: No ledges necessary.

    Explanation: Unlike the Covell Channel, there is no street crossing that impedes the animals from moving safely from the Bretton Woods Channel to the John Jones Detention Pond and vice versa. The two north Bretton Woods Channel tunnels go from one “open space” area to another. Any animal prevented by drainage water from using the underground tunnels below the levee can simply walk over the top of the levee from one side to the other. A ledge is unnecessary since there is no street to cross nor other impediment for a safe crossing. The overland route is no different than going up one side and down the other side of the dirt channel.

    Respectfully Submitted, Dave Taormino

    Bretton Woods

  • Great Tree Search Bike Tour

    Image1(From press release) Tree Davis will kick-off its 2022-23 tree planting season with a bike tour. Beginning at 8:30am on Saturday, September 24, coffee and donuts will be served under the shade of a 22-year old Texas red oak and thornless mesquite at 1009 Kent Dr. At 9am Dr. Greg McPherson will lead a 6-mile tour with stops at 9 Great Trees. The tour will finish at the Farmer’s Market at 11:00am.

    This will also be a fun opportunity to participate in the City of Davis’ Urban Forest Management Plan Photo Contest. Snap photos of your favorite trees along the biking route! Submission for the photo contest can be shared here: https://www.treedavis.org/city-of-davis-urban-forest-management-plan-photo-contest/

    Tree Davis has asked residents to nominate Great Trees and 33 specimens have been recorded in one of four categories: Unusual Size, Species, Form and History. The Great Tree Search is helping residents better understand and appreciate the educational, environmental, and cultural contributions of our trees.

    This annual community event is fun for the whole family. We hope you will join us in celebrating our great trees!

    Sign up for the Great Tree Search Bike Tour at https://tinyurl.com/GTSBikeTour

  • Vaitla Suggests Return to RoundUp Use in Davis Parks.

    Spray picBy Nancy Price

    I was stunned to read that Bapu Vaitla, who is a candidate for Davis City Council in District 1, is considering overturning the City's phase out of glyphosate (manufactured and commonly sold as RoundUp by Monsanto) instead of improving and strengthening the City's Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program. (see Question #2 at  https://newdavisite.wordpress.com/2022/09/07/part-5-candidate-responses-to-the-sierra-club-yolano-group-questionnaire-for-the-2022-davis-city-cou/#more). None of the other candidates made this audacious proposal.

    Here is some background. The City decided to phase out glyphosate in 2017; finally discontinuing its use in 2020.  The process involved three City citizen-advisory commissions: Natural Resources, Recreation and Parks, and Open Space & Habitat. It took over a year and a half and involved a widely attended public citizens forum, a city-wide citizen survey, many individual Commission meetings, and a 3-way joint Commission meeting. Despite considerable stonewalling from staff, who attempted to derail and water down THIS [the] citizen-based effort, the measure was finally unanimously approved by the City Council. What passed in 2017 wasn’t perfect, but it was well-received by citizens. (For more details, see https://newdavisite.wordpress.com/2018/07/17/bad-process-leads-to-mediocre-decision-on-pesticide-use-in-davis-and-not-without-wasted-time-and-eff/). 

    Around the same time, the city forced out its popular and highly respected IPM specialist (see https://newdavisite.wordpress.com/2018/05/18/martin-guerenas-statement-city-of-davis-environmental-recognition-award-2018/). Regrettably, that position still hasn’t been filled. But given the clear desire expressed by many staff to continue using non-organic pesticides over other less toxic weed management strategies, it is hard to see the ongoing long-term failure to fill the position as an unintended accident. 

    Instead of advocating for hiring an IPM Specialist, Vaitla thinks we should go back to glyphosate because, he says, — “we cannot reasonably resort to mechanical weed management.”

    There are several problems here. One is Vaitla offering an opinion that either ignores or is ignorant of this recent controversial history of pesticide use by the City. A second problem is his complete dismissal and disregard of the work of the public and three citizen-advisory commissions which collectively devoted many hundreds of hours of work to this effort, most of which occurred prior to Mr. Vaitla's most recent move to Davis. 

    A third problem is that, although Mr. Vaitla gives lip service to the Precautionary Principle, he doesn’t follow it. Notably, just this past June, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected EPA's analysis for determining that glyphosate is likely not carcinogenic to people and ordered EPA to conduct "further analysis and explanation." The science is far from settled, and since there are valid reasons to think that glyphosate is a human carcinogen supported by respected international authorities and agencies, we should avoid using it especially since we have other methods at our disposal. 

    Vaitla's position is hasty, overlooks a long City history and the latest Court rulings, and lacks respect for the citizen and commissions-led process in Davis. And, most importantly, it fails to protect our health. This attitude generally does not bode well for the sort of Councilmember he would make. 

  • 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…)

  • Part 3 Candidate Responses to the Sierra Club Yolano Group Questionnaire for the 2022 Davis City Council Election

    Sierra-club-yolano

    Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emissions

    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 Contributors

    Parts 1 and 2 in this series can be viewed by clicking on that article's title above which is linked to the earlier publication.

    This is the 3rd in the series of articles and focuses on Energy Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions and provides candidate responses to the following questions:

    Question #1 – Greenhouse Gas Mitigation for New Development

    Davis has declared a Climate Emergency and mandated carbon neutrality by 2040. Often 70% or more of a new project's GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions are due to transportation-related impacts which are not addressed in increasingly stringent building standards. Some have proposed that developers pay for mitigation of these GHGs because they cause public harm just as sellers of tobacco pay a tax for their associated public harm.

    Do you support in principal a GHG mitigation fee on new developments in Davis and why or why not?  If yes, do you have any ideas how such a fee might be assessed or used by the City?

    Question #2 – Commercial / Multi-Family Solar PV Ordinance

    There currently is a mandatory solar PV requirement for new single-family home and low-rise apartment construction in Davis. However, there are currently no similar requirements for new multi-family housing projects greater than 3 stories or for commercial construction.

     

    Do you support a proposed ordinance mandating solar photovoltaic systems on new multi-family housing, or commercial construction in Davis if not otherwise planned for a net-zero energy use?

    Question #3 – Other Energy Conservation Measures

    What additional steps could be taken by the City, its businesses, and residents that you believe would be most effective in reducing overall energy use and GHG emissions in Davis to meet our climate action and adaptation goals?

    Subsequent articles in the series in the coming days will focus on each of the general categories in Parts 4-6.

    (more…)

  • Part 1 Candidate Responses to the Sierra Club Yolano Group Questionnaire for the 2022 Davis City Council Election

    Sierra-club-yolano
         Land Use and Housing Development – Peripheral Development

    ______________________________________________

    Introduction – As has been our custom for over 20 years, the local Sierra Club Yolano Group has prepared candidate questionnaires for some local elections in Yolo County.  The questionnaire for the 2022 Davis City Council race asked for candidates' views and opinions on a wide-range of environmental issues of interest to our local membership.

    The questionnaire received answers from all 5 candidates in the 2 City Council Districts for which an election is held this November. Listed in alphabetical order by their first name, the candidates 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 – Waste Management

    Part 6 – Toxics in the Environment and Other Environmental Issues

    The article below reports the candidates' responses to the questions posed to them in the first category, Part 1 – Land Use and Housing Development – Peripheral Development. The following 3 questions were asked of each of the candidates in this category:

    Question #1 – Measure H – Davis Innovation and Sustainability Campus

    Did you support or oppose the development of the Davis Innovation and Sustainability Campus mixed use business park in Davis on the June ballot as Measure H and why?

    Question #2 – New Proposed Peripheral Housing – Projects on Covell and Mace

    There are 3 new proposed large housing projects on prime farmland in east Davis for which pre-applications have been submitted to the City – Palomino Place, Shriners, and On-the-Curve. All will require General Plan amendments and Measure J/R/D votes by the citizens. Do you support these projects and, if so, would you require any changes from their pre-application? If you do not support these projects, why not?

    Question  #3 – Measure D (Measure J/R) Modification

    Do you support any modifications to the recently renewed (2020) Measure D (formerly Measure J/R)?  Why or why not?

    Subsequent articles with candidate responses to questions asked in the 5 other general categories will be reported in the coming days.

    (more…)