From the Department of Shameless Self-Promotion, I bring you an announcement of an upcoming event for my recently-published book: The Land Is Our Community: Aldo Leopold’s Environmental Ethic for the New Millennium (University of Chicago Press). Mark your calendars now for this free event, one month from today!
Event info:
The following was emailed to Chancellor May on December 11, 2024.
Dear Chancellor May:
We write with appreciation for the actions campus staff are taking to reduce UC Davis’ greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and to ask you to ensure that UCD sets strong goals for Scope 1, 2, and 3 emissions reductions in response to UCOP’s call for campus targets for all UCs to be submitted by 1/1/2025 (for background see here).
Specifically, we would like UCD to officially establish targets of 75% reductions in Scope 1 and 2 emissions below the 2019 baseline by 2030, 81% by 2035, and 95% by 2040, which are the feasible potential reductions identified by our own Fossil Fuel-Free Pathway Plan (FFFPP).
We view the strong intermediate 2030 target from our campus FFFPP as particularly important, given the urgency of the climate crisis. Communicating around near-term goals that are meaningful for our undergraduate students will show them our commitment to leading on the climate crisis.
We would also like to encourage campus to accelerate the process for tracking and reducing Scope 3 emissions (those generated off-campus, for example by travel and commuting). The state is requiring public and private companies to submit annual reports of such emissions by 2030 (a date which may be moved up to 2027), and strong near-term Scope 3 reductions will be needed to set us on a track toward UCOP’s goal to “reduce total emissions (scope 1, 2, and 3) at least 90% by 2045 without relying on carbon offsets.” We would like to be a part of campus discussions around Scope 3 targets and processes.
Finally, we would like to let you know that a group of us has formally asked the Academic Senate to consider a detailed proposal for a Climate Crisis General Educational (GE) Requirement so that all UCD undergraduates will graduate with some background in climate science, action, and justice concepts. This one-course requirement would probably be allowed to overlap with other GEs so as not to increase time-to-graduation. We are happy to provide further details, and hope we can count on your support to make UCD a climate education leader. UC San Diego adopted such a requirement last year, starting for the class entering Fall 2024.
By Scott Steward
I am motivated to keep Venessa Chang, Lina Khan and Julie Su in power (see bios below). These women are in charge of our government’s renewable energy future, market, and wage equity. That goes very much away if Trump wins.
Against Trump’s authoritarian challenge, good men and good women have come together in associations where differences are put aside to elect Harris/Walz.
Indivisible Yolo (Indivisibleyolo.org) has built a platform of action here at home. For the next two weeks, the aim is to prevail in defending democracy.
Get involved. IY has already paved the way – training at no cost. indivisibleyolo.org. Weekdays and weekends. Canvassing to win congressional districts in California. Calls to win abortion rights in Arizona. Volunteers virtually go where they are needed. You need a computer and a cell phone to be fully able to help. It's the most important 2 weeks ever.
When we call, text, knock we win! Come join in!
(this message is provided by the author alone and not any organization)
Storer Lecturship in the Life Sciences: How Decades of Climate Denial, Disinformation and Doublespeak by Big Oil Fueled the Climate Crisis
Tuesday October 22, 4:00 – 7 pm ARC Ballroom (and Zoom)
Register here: https://bit.ly/102224StorerReg (or use QR code in flyer). All are welcome. Please register soon to help ensure an accurate headcount.
Speakers:
Storer Lecturship in the Life Sciences: How Decades of Climate Denial, Disinformation and Doublespeak by Big Oil Fueled the Climate Crisis
Tuesday October 22, 4:00 – 7 pm ARC Ballroom (and Zoom)
Register here: https://bit.ly/102224StorerReg (or use QR code in flyer). All are welcome. Please register soon to help ensure an accurate headcount.
Speakers:
The changes will threaten Commission independence and stifle innovation
By the Sierra Club Yolano Group Management Committee
A recent op-ed by Dan Carson and Elaine Roberts Musser (see here) alerted Davis residents to a concern with a new proposal before the Davis City Council that has the potential to substantially limit citizen input into environmental issues in the City of Davis.
According to the op-ed, Mayor Josh Chapman and Councilmember Bapu Vaitla recently began asking Davis City Commissioners for feedback on their proposal for “clarification of how items are placed on a commission meeting agenda.”
Carson and Roberts Musser state:
“…in a big change, proposals initiated by a commission would now be subject to review and veto — by either any relevant council subcommittee (two councilmembers) or that commission’s assigned Council liaison (typically one councilmember).The Chapman-Vaitla plan says these new rules would apply whenever the council wished to “undertake a particular task/project/discussion.” In other words, almost anything and everything a commission might ever want to do would be subject to veto by one councilmember. The Council and city staff would dictate what a commission can or cannot do, but the commission itself would have absolutely no control over its work.” (Bold emphasis added)
If enacted, we find this proposal deeply concerning and undemocratic. Historically, at least six of Davis’s volunteer citizen commissions regularly dealt with environmentally-related matters: Tree; Open Space and Habitat; Natural Resources; Bicycling, Transportation, and Street Safety; Utilities; and Recreation and Park Commission (for the latter, with topics such as the use of toxic pesticides and drought-tolerant plantings).
By Roberta Millstein
A Davisite reader sent me the following information. Until that point, I hadn't realized that comments were being sought on the environmental impact report for the proposed Palomino Place Project, so I thought I would share the information with other Davisites, too. I haven't seen anything in the Davis Enterprise or Vanguard about it (though it is possible I just missed it).
Apparently, the draft Subsequent EIR ("subsequent" to the EIR from 2009) for the Palomino Place Project has been available since early August. Comments on the draft are due September 23. Comments would typically point out errors, inconsistencies, omissions of data or analyses, conclusions not based on evidence, or failures to provide discussion required by CEQA.
As the post below indicates, there is also a public meeting about the project on Sep. 11.
City link to Palomino Place documents:
Draft Subsequent EIR released August 2024:
Notice of Availability (NOA) of Palomino Place Subsequent EIR:
Time to enforce the Law at Oakshade Mall?
By Alan ”Lorax” Hirsch
To give the landlord more flexibility to find tenants, Davis council is being asked to rezone the Oakshade Mall (Safeway) located at south Pole Line Rd x Cowell. This is before council on the Tuesday 8/27/24 agenda ( see staff report item #4). However this landlord is notorious for their neglect of its trees and is in violation of city tree protection ordinance.
So, while makes sense for city to update zoning in response to a changing retailing climate, it also makes sense to do updates in city’s relationship with this out-of-town landlord in regard to the Climate Crisis and city’s CAAP policies, changes to sustain Davis’s quality of life by deal with global heating.
More Shade is Existential
It is forecast that half Davis’s summer days will be over 100 degree in 50 years. Unshaded asphalt reachs 140+ degrees in those conditions. Davis’s CAAP climate plan appropriately calls for more tree shade as part our adaption plan. To have that shade in 50 year tree need to be planted now. And investing in tree is just good marketing sense of a long-term landlord- as contrast with incentive for on-site property manager who often just think about next quarter’s cash flow so look everywhere to cut maintenance cost.
But beyond increased tree shade called for Davis CAAP climate plan, this shopping center development has for years been in gross violation of the city’s 1990’s tree ordinance under which it was approved. That ordinance required “50% parking lot shade in 15years” The landscape plan the developer/landlords signed off as part of plan- check had them agree to no just plant trees, but maintain the newly planted trees to obtain that 50% tree shade level. This was not an impossible requirement: If you drive West of Cowell just 2 block to the Kaiser clinic you can see tree can be grown in Parking lots.
However, the landlord & his property managers have not grown and maintain trees as agreed over near 30 years the mall has been in operation. And when trees have died they have either not been replace, or replace with a shorter species. And the irrigation system has been neglected.
As you can see from attached recent arial pictures- (and picture in below linked article from 2018), the landlord has not met their legal requirement of 50% shade. A visit the site will make obvious the gross number of missing, stunted and dead trees. The north parking area is nearly tree-free.
East Covell, Westbound, between the Mace Curve and Alhambra. See Video. Reported on 8/1/2024. Based on my understanding of how My Davis Requests are processed, this has not even been evaluated at time of writing.
Davis, CA - I've been riding a bike in cities for most of my adult life – that's forty years. As an example for others I don't often say that something feels safe; but when I feel a situation is dangerous it's a more valid perspective to share.
For the last six weeks or so I've had to travel two times a week from my home near Mace and Cowell to Sutter Davis. The fastest way there by car is via 80 and 113; by bicycle it's Mace to East and then West Covell. I have an e-bike, and it takes about 23 minutes, a bit longer if I don't make the lights, and longer still if I have to slow or even stop to avoid hitting overgrowth of trees and bushes into the bike lane, and slower if I have to stop to let vehicles pass when the overgrowth extends all the way to the edge of the traffic lane.
"In some situations when the tree concern appears to be an immediate safety hazard [emphasis mine] the Street division will respond and put up barricades or traffic control to block off the area until tree work can be done. When the Urban Forestry division assesses the tree they determine the urgency of the concern and who the work will be assigned to. They also consider if the tree is the City’s responsibility to maintain. If a tree is blocking the public right of way per the clearance standards for that specific area they will assign pruning of the tree to meet clearance standards for the roadway, bike lane, sidewalk or path. Prune may be done but City Urban Forestry staff or by our contract arborist, currently West Coast Arborist. Work is completed based on the priority assessment conducted by one of the City’s Certified Arborist. If you have any additional questions please contact us …" – from a response to an earlier complaint.
How in this cornhole-tomato industrial apocalypse is the situation in the photo above not an "immediate hazard"? As of time of writing, along the westbound (WB) route between Mace and Sutter Davis, there are just over 30 bushes and trees which are "overgrowth" – the City's term – in the bike lane. Some require a diversion into the buffer (which is not a passing lane, and only part of this route has painted buffers), some require a diversion into the traffic lane, some require ducking under possibly sharp branch ends (ironically, the by-product of earlier trimming….).
Along this route I first reported overgrowth on the NB Mace Blvd overpass on July 27. It's still there, requiring a quick maneuver to avoid this punji stick, but – watch out! – not so far into the traffic lane!
What's curious is that "Closed" seems to only mean that the problem is solved in regards to potholes (and similar). "Closed" in relation to overgrowth on city property such as Covell indicates that the issue has been forwarded to the City's trees department, and with private property it means it went to the police for code enforcement. I have mentioned this and suggested that "Closed" should only be used if the issue is resolved (or fixed, etc) or some kind of interim category should be created to show it's in process. While non-anonymous issue filers receive updates via email, it would be better if everything was more clear in the My Davis App.
So… a real question is what's a realistic timeframe for the City to respond to what is objectively an "immediate hazard"? BUT the better real question is:
Would this be tolerated in [motor vehicle] traffic lanes for weeks at a time?
What would people who drive motor vehicles do if their daily route required diversions, stopping, making sure a big truck wasn't going to ram into them, multiple times a week on the way to work or an errand?
The answer is simple: The city would clear it immediately, or with a bit of delay during an exceptional weather event. They would clear the traffic lane or lanes. This is how it works here, and my personal experience for the last seven years I've lived here.
The roughly similar – but roughly more seasonal issue – is yard waste in bike lanes. It's explicitly completely illegal under city rules; "overgrowth" is not. Both are equally dangerous.
Reviewing City Hall minutes from ten years ago… many things regarding yard waste in bike lanes were promised. When I was on the BTSSC (RIP) – actually the night that Officer Natalie Corona (RIP) was killed – the Commission supported my wording of a recommendation to City Council to improve things. (It's perhaps worth noting that the immediate sequence of events that resulted in a person with serious behavioral health issues killing Officer Corona started with a vehicle crash on 5th St – things like that with cars are seen as normal, and are forgotten). The Council watered it down and nothing improved, or changed (with the exception of a few signs in certain areas simply referring to the existing regulation.)
I have very little hope that the Council, Staff and relevant Commissions will do anything about it. Case in point: School starts today! Did DJUSD work with the City in the last weeks to ensure that our City's safe routes to school (SRTS).. are safe? Beyond my ride to Sutter Davis I can say that they have not. There's lateral pot holes and overgrowth all over.
Measure Q? It makes general promises about improvements, but why would Davis change now and target the needs of the most vulnerable road users? It's never been the priority: The City chronically builds infrastructure that's not compliant with the 2016 Street Standards — while simultaneously referring to then as "progressive" when it is going forward on a street project. The BTSSC was never consulted about the ongoing 10-year pavement plan nor the overlapping Cool Pavements project.
The City's not making it feel safe for me to get around… my sense is that those who are younger or have less experience with bicycles simply don't consider the fastest routes if they feel unsafe on them. Do people who normally drive not take certain routes in town because they feel dangerous?
*****
In the following additional examples, there is also the before and after of a sewer grate on the Mace overpass damaged to the level where one could stand a bike up in it, and its "fix", a few months after being reported. Some fine craftsmanship, there!
There's also a screenshot from the City's "What Do you Do?" video series of very light and uncritical portraits of city staff and their job duties. Why wasn't this slip up about "world" never corrected?
*****
Parts 2 and 3 coming soon:
Part 2: What the City plans to do about yard waste and other materials in bike lanes – a ridiculous new tool.
Part 3: What the City should be doing (and why success of Measure Q might not help very much.)
*****
What can you do now?
* Write the Transportation Commission (copying to City Council, new Active Transportation Coordinator Sereena Rai and the City's tree department): tc@cityofdavis org, citycouncilmembers@cityofdavis.org, srai@cityofdavis.org,citytrees@cityofdavis.org.
* Ask the League of American Bicyclists if Davis deserves its "Platinum Bike Friendly" rating: bfa@bikeleague.org (there is not an application currently under review — this is just a cheeky way to get this corrosive garbage on their radar.)
* Ask the Board of the Davis Joint Unified School District if the situation is safe for students, and if they got the City to check for obstructions – including potholes – on safe routes to schools in Davis before the first of day of class today: boe@djusd.net.
(From press release) The Sierra Club, the nation’s largest and oldest environmental organization, is pleased to recognize two outstanding environmental justice leaders – Diana Almendariz and Adelita Serena – for their dedication to protecting and enhancing the local environment for people and nature in the Yolo bioregion.
The Sierra Club Yolano group’s geographical reach extends from Southern Colusa County through the entirety of Yolo County to Northern Solano County and is within the ancestral homeland of the Patwin-Wintun people. The awards were granted by the Yolano Group to the two indigenous women for their work to engage community members in protecting the ecological health and sustainability of the region.
Diana Almendariz is a Cultural Practitioner of Maidu/Wintun and Hupa/Yurok traditions, heritage and experiences. She is a visionary culture-bearer, storyteller, naturalist, educator and visual artist who has been dedicated to the cultural and ecological revival of her Native homelands for over three decades.
Almendariz teaches homeland-based ecological stewardship using traditional materials such as tule – a wetland reed – to make baskets, mats, cordage, dolls, and boats, blending arts, culture, and ecology into the learning.
Davisite 