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

Category: Ethics

  • The Future of Davis is Rooted in Community: Why I Support Village Farms

    By Linda Deos

    As a member of the Davis City Council, my primary responsibility is to look toward the horizon. I am constantly asking: How do we preserve the soul of the city we love while ensuring it remains a viable, vibrant home for the next generation? Since the initial planning application for Village Farms was submitted in April 2023, I have engaged deeply with the details, the data, and—most importantly—the residents.

    Over the last three years, this project has undergone rigorous public scrutiny, environmental review, and repeated refinement. After witnessing this collaborative process and reviewing the robust commitments secured in the project’s Baseline Features, I am proud to support Measure V. Village Farms Davis is not just another housing development; it is a meticulously planned extension of our community values.

    (more…)

  • Lack of transparency in the relationship between DJUSD and Village Farms developer

    Screenshot

    By Elizabeth Coolbrith

    I am a parent with two children in DJUSD schools, and I’m sharing this focused update because Davis voters deserve to see some specific information that hasn’t been laid out clearly in one place. This goes to the heart of transparency and illuminates an aspect of the relationship between DJUSD leadership and the Village Farms developer. Now that these documents are public, I feel a responsibility to share them.

    Two pieces stand out:

    First, there is long‑term developer funding of DJUSD entities tied to Village Farms developer John Whitcombe and Tandem Properties, who have been major funders of DJUSD through the Tandem Foundation. Public records show roughly $40,000 a year in donations to Davis schools for over 20 years, totaling close to $500,000 as of 2023. These generous donations are legal. But they can create the appearance of a very close, ongoing financial relationship between this developer and the district.

    Second, newly released public records include an email from the Village Farms development team asking DJUSD to keep Measure V communications off email.

    (more…)

  • Measure V is a Very Bad Idea

    By Glen Holstein

    The Environmental Impact Report provided by the Village Farms consortium includes the following: “groundwater beneath the project site…appears to have been impacted by the former landfill…Eight contaminants were found to exceed the Maximum Contaminant Level…detected …PFAS…compounds and manganese appear to originate from the Old Davis Landfill.  Three PFAS compounds exceeded their…USEPA water quality standards…Anomalously high…groundwater elevations were reported…for…dry seasons…the depth to water…was reported as 9.93 feet on September…elevations…not typical of dry-season conditions.”

    Despite their own EIR’s abundant evidence Village Farms consortium plans to invite home buyers to live just a few feet above toxic groundwater, which it has consistently either ignored or minimized.  The resulting potential outcome is no mystery.  A New York state school district  first built schools in such a place. and then arranged for homes to be built there as well so families would fill the schools.  The only problem was that when the toxic groundwater rose in elevation, as it often does, kids and their parents living there ended up in hospitals instead of classrooms.

    This Love Canal disaster of the 1970’s was so notorious it led to Superfund legislation, but those who made it happen could at least honestly claim nothing like it had ever happened before.  Those who fast tracked Village Farms in Davis, however, have no such excuse.

    (more…)

  • In support of Measure V

    By Ron Glick

    At the beginning of the 21st century, after a period of strong growth, concerned citizens of Davis passed two major reforms to preserve farmland. The first was the Measure J ordinance that requires a popular vote to rezone agricultural land to other uses. This is the reason Measure V, which I support, is on the June ballot. The second reform was a parcel tax dedicated to the preservation of open space around Davis. 

    Together, these two reforms have been incredibly successful in preserving farmland in the area directly surrounding the city of Davis. In the last 25 years, and with little acrimony or fanfare, thousands of acres of land have been purchased by the city or otherwise preserved under conservation easements. The City of Davis Open Space Commission deserves the thanks of everyone in Davis who cares about land preservation.

    (more…)

  • Super PAC has now poured over 1.1 million dollars into ads supporting Eric Jones

    The latest venture-capital funded mailer is downright Orwellian

    By Roberta Millstein

    Mailer received 27 April 2026. Annotated by the author.

    Eric Jones’s campaign to unseat Mike Thompson in Congressional District 4 has repeatedly promised not to take money from special interests and PACs.  As I have already documented in detail (see earlier articles here and here), that promise is essentially meaningless.  A former partner of the Dragoneer Investment Group, Jones has received large individual donations and repeated campaign advertising funded by massive donations to the New Leadership Now Super PAC from his fellow venture capitalists, including a huge donation from the family of Dragoneer’s founder, Marc Stad.

    Expenditures for ads in support of Eric Jones’s campaign (mailers, TV, internet, etc.) from New Leadership Now currently exceed 1.1 million dollars, as this screenshot from the FEC website shows [UPDATE: over $1.33 million as of May 9, 2026]:

    (more…)

  • What Justice Looks Like in Davis

    We find out at the April 28th City Council Meeting

    By Scott Steward

    July 1, 2024, UCD Student Encampment – Popular University of Liberation of Palestine
    One sign reads: “As You Go to Class Today, remember that there are no Universities Left in Gaza

    City Staff released its version of the Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian and Allies (MAPA) recommendations this past Friday. (provided below)

    Discrimination against Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian bodies, families, and cultures has been an unfortunate project that has accelerated since the First World War. This bias is also evident in the colloquial, systemic, unequal, and dehumanizing treatment of our Muslim, Arab, and Palestinian residents and students in Davis.

    City email boxes are filling with canned opposition emails leading up to the April 28th special City meeting to hear Muslim, Arab, Palestinian, and Allies (MAPA) antidiscrimination recommendations, recommendations made by our own City Human Relations Commission (HRC).  The HRC recommendations were made after months of surveys, hearing testimony, and careful consideration. 

    (more…)

  • Eric Jones’s close ties to a Super PAC

    Jones criticizes Mike Thompson for taking PAC money, but is he being hypocritical?

    By Roberta Millstein

    Flyer in support of Eric Jones’s run for Congress, paid for by the New Leadership Now Super PAC

    Among the small deluge of flyers Davisites have received promoting Eric Jones’s candidacy for Congressional District 4, some may have noticed that one was different from the others: It indicated that it was paid for by a group called “New Leadership Now.”  Who is New Leadership Now, and what sort of connection does it have to Eric Jones, if any?  This article aims to shed a bit of light on these questions.  It is a follow-up to my earlier article discussing the direct campaign contributions from Jones’s former venture capitalist co-workers and other individuals from the high tech industry.

    New Leadership Now is registered with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) as a Super PAC.  What is a Super PAC?  Wikipedia has a helpful definition:

    Independent expenditure-only political action committees, commonly known as super PACs, are a type of political action committees (PACs) in the United States. Unlike traditional PACs, super PACs are legally allowed to fundraise unlimited amounts of money from individuals or organizations for the purpose of campaign advertising; however, they are not permitted to either coordinate with or contribute directly to candidate campaigns or political parties. However, in practice, restrictions on such coordination are considered flimsy and poorly enforced.[1]

    The unlimited expenditures coupled with not really knowing if the committees are actually coordinating with candidates make Super PACs controversial.  Eric Jones has touted his campaign as “Powered by People, Not Special Interests: Not a Dime from Corporate PACs”[2]  What I will describe below casts some serious doubt on that slogan, however.

    (more…)

  • What does “No on Measure V” really stand for?

    By Matt Williams

    For Davisite readers, the following is a response to an Alan Pryor post that made the following accusation, “Grass Roots” is not an accurate description of the opposition to Village Farms. How do you spell “NIMBY”? It is not spelled “Grass-roots”! (see https://nextdoor.com/p/9nSwSrmBTckW/c/1585068648?utm_source=share&utm_campaign=1776984857876&share_action_id=a32ff6cd-07c2-4764-a989-a686060c125a)
     
    Alan, is there a reason you are deploying the “If you can’t address the message, attack the messenger” tactic?  There are very few NIMBYs in No on Measure V.   That is very clear in the unifying principles of No on Measure V, which were just yesterday presented to DTA, the DJUSD teachers union, and are anything but NIMBY, specifically:

    (more…)

  • Give students stronger representation on the UC Board of Regents

    Support ACA 18

    By Raymond de Vente

    In a public university system that manages a $53.5 billion annual budget, oversees three national labs, and educates nearly 300,000 students, you would expect those students to have a real say in how things are run. Currently, they do not.

    That is why Californians should pay attention to ACA 18, a new Assembly Constitutional Amendment moving through the state legislature. Authored by Assemblymember Jessica Caloza (D-Los Angeles), this measure would finally fix a long-standing democratic deficit at the heart of the University of California.

    Here is the current reality: Under the California Constitution, the UC Board of Regents, the powerful body that governs the entire system, includes just one voting student representative. One vote for almost 300,000 minds. While the constitution currently authorizes the Board to appoint student members, it does not guarantee meaningful representation. After a year of serving as a non-voting “designate,” a single student finally gets a vote. For a system this massive, that is not representation; it is a token gesture.

    (more…)

  • Let’s Play Contamination Whack-a-Mole with Opponents of Village Farms Davis

    By Alan Pryor

    INTRODUCTION

    A recent article was published in the Davis Enterprise (3/22/26) entitled “Village Farms Contaminant Risks” which purportedly discussed the alleged “risks” of environmental harm due to concentrations of a class of chemicals found in the groundwater beneath the Old Davis Landfill. These chemicals, known as PFASs, are likely found in the groundwater as a result of seepage from the long-since closed Old Davis Landfill. This article was later reprinted in a slightly altered form in the Davisite and Davis Vanguard on March 29,

    Unfortunately, however, the authors of the article really only repeated information already known about the concentrations of this only remaining organic contaminant currently found in  the groundwater.

    Further, the authors completely failed to actually quantify any real environmental “risk”of any type that this reported contamination might actually cause. Instead, the authors essentially  just say,”It’s there and it’s really bad”! – albeit saying that in a very ponderous and sonorous but seemingly credible manner. 

    But the authors did not even attempt to quantify the real likelihood of any environmental risk in their article. Why?…Because the risk of contamination is so infinitesimally low that to properly quantify that risk and disclose that information to the public would completely undermine their attempts to scare and frighten the public. This is not a thoughtful, deliberate scientific report. This is yellow journalism pure and simple.

    Let me explain.

    (more…)