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

Category: Health

  • Village Farms Contaminant Risks

    [This Op-ed article was originally published in the Davis Enterprise on March 22nd in response to February 18th Davisite and Davis Vanguard articles in which Alan Pryor asserted that valid concerns related to contaminants associated with the proposed Village Farms Davis project, are “myths”.  This is a slightly modified version of that article.]

    This map from the Draft Environmental Impact Report, which was not included in the Davis Enterprise Op-ed article, shows Village Farms proposed drainage and housing adjacent the Old Davis Landfill/Burn Dump and Sewage Treatment Plant and monitoring well locations. The liner discussed in the Davis Enterprise op-ed article and the Partial Draft Response to EIR Comments does not appear in the Development Agreement or Baseline Project Features. 

    By Steven Deverel, Marjorie Longo, and Robert Okamoto

    There was a recent attempt to dismiss contaminant risks related to the proposed Village Farms project in north Davis. We herein summarize data and potential risks related to contamination from the adjacent Old Davis Landfill, Burn Area, and Wastewater Treatment Plant.

    First, it was posited that contamination from the landfill has dissipated, per and poly fluoralkaline substances (PFAS) are not a health issue and that Village Farms Davis will not be built on the landfill.

    Response

    (more…)

  • Celebration of Abraham Raises Over $2300 for Joshua House Hospice

    (From press release) On February 1, 2026, the more than 130 members of the interfaith community of Yolo County were welcomed by Khalid Saeed to the beautiful new Woodland Mosque & Islamic Center for the annual Celebration of Abraham. This year’s theme was Returning to Abraham: Reflections in Courage. Abraham is a major character is all three Abrahamic traditions: Jewish, Christian and Islamic.

    The theme also reflected the site of the first Celebration of Abraham 2003 was at Holy Rosary Church in Woodland. Father John Boll (retired), who hosted the first Celebration in 2003, was this year’s first speaker and he presented the biblical story of Abraham beginning God’s call for him to leave his birthplace in Ur “into a land that I will show you.” (Genesis 12:1, HBFV)—the promised land. Rabbi Leah Julian, Director of Education and Youth at Congregation Bet Haverim then spoke. She said the ancient Rabbis saw Abraham as a man of great faith and courage and she cited stories of Abraham’s stand against prevailing idol worship, his courage to do the unpopular thing (smashing idols) and on some occasions, Abraham even stood up to the ultimate authority for what he believed was right. The Rabbi ended her speech with a heartfelt appeal for community unity through caring with courage. The third speaker was Imam Riaz Ahmed Quadri who leads the Woodland Mosque congregation. He noted that Prophet Ibrahim, as he is known in the Islamic faith, was one of 124,000 prophets that have been sent to mankind. In Islam, Ibrahim is called God’s friend and he was known for turning away from falsehood which took great courage at the time. He is a true example to follow where he turned to faith over fear.   After their prepared remarks, the Micheal Hirsh moderated the speakers responding to questions from the audience.

    (more…)

  • Why I Now Support Village Farms Davis

    by Alan Pryor

    Introduction

    I have been a fairly consistent opponent of most peripheral development projects in Davis over the past decade. For instance, I was the Principal Officer, Treasurer, and Chair or Co-Chair of the No on Nishi 1 (Student Housing),  No on West Davis Active Adult Community (Senior Housing), and both the No on both DISC 1 and DISC 2 campaigns (primarily Commercial).

    All of those peripheral annexation measures failed except West Davis Active Adult Community. But none of these projects provided for family housing for modest income buyers. I think Davis desperately needs that type of family housing and I believe the Village Farms Davis project provides it so I support the Project.

    As a result, I recently both publicly endorsed the Yes on Measure V campaign and was a  co-signer of the Rebuttal to the Argument Against Measure V that will appear on the June ballot.

    Many folks that I had previously worked with opposing other projects have accused me of abandoning my slow-growth and/or environmental principles after hearing of my endorsement of Village Farms Davis or reading some of the articles I have published about various environmental aspects of the project. Some are saying it is inexplicable to them why I would make this seemingly sudden change in my views toward peripheral development and endorse this Project.

    Well, the reasons are actually pretty simple. I opposed past peripheral development projects because I did not feel any met all of the 3 primary criteria that I look at when considering supporting or opposing a project. And the reason I can now support Village Farms Davis is because I can now check-off each of the boxes for the same 3 criteria – 1) the Features of the Project itself, 2) the Location of the Project, and 3) the Quality of the Developers of the Project.

    Let me explain.

    (more…)

  • Ballot arguments for and against Village Farms now available

    By Roberta Millstein

    This post is to just let people know that the arguments for and against the Village Farms project are up on the County’s website. The rebuttals to the for and against arguments are due by March 3; I will post them at some point afterward. Village Farms is subject to a Measure J/R/D vote of all Davis citizens and has been assigned as Measure V.

    Here is the argument in favor of Village Farms, i.e., in favor of Measure V, that will appear on our ballots in June (the argument against follows after that):

    (more…)

  • The City’s handling of the noise ordinance: The good and the bad

    By Roberta Millstein

    The City’s handling of the proposed noise ordinance was good in some respects and quite bad in others.

    First, the good: At Tuesday night’s meeting, led by Mayor Donna Neville, the council agreed that the noise items weren’t an ordinance clean-up item and that they deserved a true staff report and separate consideration.  The noise ordinance (Chapter 24) items were pulled from the Consent Calendar and Item 4B’s noise ordinance “clean-up” will come to the council at a later date.

    I am grateful to the Council for hearing the Davis citizens who emailed and gave public comment concerning the noise ordinance.  (Previous Davisite articles about the proposed changes can be found here and here). 

    Now for the bad: This should have never been on the Consent Calendar in the first place, which is for noncontroversial items that do not need discussion.  I’m not quite sure how or why it was put there, or why the Council passed it unanimously at its “first reading” (Tuesday was the “second reading”), but to me it’s a continuation of a “trust staff implicitly” mentality.  I hope that this is a sign that the Davis City Council recognizes that it (the Council), not staff, is the responsible party who we voted for and that oversight is needed.

    Another concern is the way that comments emailed to Councilmembers were handled.  I received a reply from Barbara Archer, the City’s “Public Information Officer,” asserting (in essence) that the concerns I raised were not valid.  There are several problems with this:

    (more…)

  • Proposed changes to noise ordinance need to be sent back to the drawing board

    [The following email was sent to CityCouncilMembers@cityofdavis.org]

    Dear City Councilmembers,

    I am writing concerning Item 4B for tonight’s City Council meeting — specifically the changes to Davis’s noise ordinance. The changes would eliminate the concrete, objective measurement of too much noise — a decibel level — and replace it with the subjective determination of which sounds are “ordinary and reasonable.”  Left unclear is who is to make this determination, when such people would be available, and on what basis they would decide.

    As I understand it, the objective standard of a decibel level is being removed not just from public playgrounds, parks, and schools, but also from the regulations concerning sounds from animals, power tools, and vehicle repairs.  Thus, these proposed changes will affect every citizen in Davis.

    And let’s be clear.  This is a quality of life issue, yes, but it is more than that. Loud sounds have demonstrated physical and psychological harms on people and animals.  This is a public health issue.  Speaking personally, I find loud noises extremely debilitating. I can’t think properly, much less get any work done.

    Also, these changes will have people keeping their windows closed and using their A/Cs, unnecessarily wasting energy — and then still not really preventing exposure to the worst sounds.

    Yet despite the potential for serious harm, these considerable changes are poised to be passed without a staff presentation, without input from commissions, and without discussion of concerns raised by Davis’s citizens.

    I urge you to send this proposal back to the drawing board.

    Thank you.

    Sincerely,

    Roberta Millstein
    Davis citizen

  • Municipal Code “Clean-Up” Will Eliminate Noise Decibel Limits for All Parks, All School Grounds, Barking Dogs, Power Tools and More

    By Joe and Janet Krovoza

    On Tuesday, February 3, 2026, the city council approved eliminating all noise decibel limits for every city park, all school grounds, barking dogs, non-commercial power tool use and vehicle repair in neighborhoods. The council did this under the guise of a Consent Calendar “clean-up” item buried among changes to nine different ordinance chapters. The subheading was “Remove outdated and unenforceable provisions–noise limitation.”

    Consent Calendar items are reserved for items deemed “routine and non-controversial” that “require no discussion.” This is not where one would expect a major overhaul of the Davis municipal code’s noise ordinance. During public comment at the February 3 meeting, we alerted the council to the magnitude of what staff had placed on the Consent Calendar and asked the council to pull the item for discussion. They did not. Agenda Item 4D passed unanimously with no public input on the noise section (other than ours), and no staff presentation.

    Ordinance amendments require two “readings.” The first reading is to receive input, the second reading is for the staff to present revisions if legitimate issues arise during the first reading. Staff have placed the second reading on the Consent Calendar for the upcoming February 17th meeting as item 4B. The meeting starts at 6:30 pm. No staff presentation is planned, no public input is invited – though comment must be accepted, as always, at the start of the meeting under General Public Comment.

    The changes have not been reviewed by any city commission. They should go to the Planning Commission, at a minimum. It’s unclear who the staff are that did the work on this. No experts or analysis is cited in the vague 168 word explanation for this radical new approach to city noise management. The short explanation of changes makes references to ambient noise making accurate readings difficult, ambient noise creating prosecution issues for the Yolo Superior Court, and the need for consistent application. These make no sense in the context of what’s being approved.

    The city’s stated reasoning for these alterations is that because the city “has grown larger and traffic has increased locally and on highways” it is now “more difficult to take accurate noise readings.” Really? Says who? We are very familiar with the various noise studies and exchanges with the city’s consulting sound engineers since 2019, and are deeply aware of the literature. Not once have we heard a consultant posit that ambient noise levels were making it difficult to take accurate measurements. This is a complete canard, invented by unidentified staff to deflect argument and justify the gutting of huge swaths of the ordinance.

    The subheading also indicates the amendment addresses “unenforceable provisions.” There’s nothing unenforceable when something exceeds a limit. Try telling a traffic officer this the next time you are pulled over for speeding. If anything, abandoning decibel limits for subjective police officer or city determinations makes enforcement more, not less, challenging. What’s easier and more defensible than enforcing an explicit limit? 

    (more…)

  • Fireworks Disaster in Yolo County? Cancel All 4th of July Fireworks in Yolo County!

    1000013809
    Late Tuesday evening (yesterday, July 1st) the following – minus the images – was sent to the Yolo County Board of Supervisors, the Davis City Council, Davis Fire, UCD Fir, Davis PD, Yolo County Sherriff, local and regional media, relevant Commissions and advisors, and individuals active in climate and climate equity… – TE

    "Hi, I don't want to take more of your time than necessary due to the ongoing situation.
     
    People and property have been harmed. People have evacuated. First responders are taking risks – YSAQMD said that firework smoke is worse than wildfire smoke. First responders are and will be exhausted. 
     
    Do you think people who evacuated through toxic fireworks smoke will enjoy a show of toxic fireworks smoke?
     
    We already know the problems with fireworks shows: Danger to wild animals and pets, danger to people with PTSD. Pollution for everyone: The special colors in fireworks are not made of vegetable dye. 
     
    Screenshot 2025-07-02 8.51.34 AM
     
    We have an alternative going forward: Drone shows – such as at Celebrate Davis this year – or how about the money is used for true patriotism: I notice that Esparto has a single public Purple Air Monitor. (Compare this to Davis). What's the state of air equity in households there? Perhaps the money used to pollute can instead be used to clean the air of wildfire fallout and prescribed burns in households there.

    For now I call on all elected officials in Yolo County to immediately establish a complete ban of 4th of July fireworks shows in the County… and to not postpone them either! 

     
    Thank you,
    Todd Edelman,
    Davis

  • Errant Water Permit Puts Good Humus Farm at Risk

    Good humus at risk

    By Scott Steward

    Boundary Bend was cited by the County in August 2023 for its non-permitted well drilling in the Hungary Hollow region of Capay Valley. So how, after two years of evidence showing that the well is out of compliance, is County staff recommending upholding Boundary Bends agricultural well permit # 23-022W?  The County and Boundary Bend know that the new well is too big and too close to Good Humus farm. 

    Good Humus and other family farms have already had to modify their wells to sustain their table crop farms. Nearly three generations of care have gone into the land craft of organic farming in Hungary Hollow. Without much help, these farms have entered our region's food markets and succeeded in producing some of the healthiest food on earth. Capay has inspired farm-to-fork land care nationally.  

    Boundary Bend (application #23-022W) took advantage of one-time replacement well criteria that the county was obliged to put in place for farms and residents short on water following the seven-year drought. Replacement well designation was allowed for existing agricultural operations and drinking water. Boundary Bend did not meet the criteria for a replacement well. Instead of reapplying as a new well, Boundary hired lawyers at Kronick to lean on the county.

    Here are some of the facts that show that Boundary Bend application #23-022W did not and does not qualify for the approved "replacement well" status. The application:

    (more…)

  • Menopause is topic of Jan. 8 Soroptimist talk

    OB-GYN Carol Darwish will discuss and answer questions about menopause at the Wednesday, Jan. 8 meeting of Soroptimist International of Davis.

    The meeting is from 11:45 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. in the conference room at University Inn and Suites, 1111 Richards Blvd., Davis. Open to the public, this is one of a series of talks on women’s health that the club plans for its 2024-2025 year.

    Darwish is a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist in practice for more than 20 years. She completed her medical training at Tulane University in New Orleans. She practiced at Kaiser Napa Solano for 11 years and at Sutter Davis for four years. For the past nine years, she has worked in hospital settings throughout the Bay Area, Tahoe and Mammoth Lakes, and most recently in Santa Cruz County, Woodland and San Francisco. She lives in Davis with her family.

    Lunch is available for $15. First-time attendees are free. Please RSVP by 5 p.m. on Monday, Jan. 6 for lunch by emailing president@sidavis.org. Guests are welcome to bring their own lunch.

    Soroptimist is a global volunteer organization that provides women and girls with access to the education and training they need to achieve economic empowerment. It was founded in 1921 in Alameda County. Soroptimist International of Davis was chartered in 1954. Local members join some 75,000 Soroptimists in 122 countries and territories to contribute time and financial support to community-based projects benefiting women and girls. Its core values are gender equality, empowerment, education, diversity and fellowship.

    SI Davis offers cash Live Your Dream Awards to female heads of household seeking education or training, and assists King High students through its Dream It, Be It: Career Support for Girls program. It also funds high school scholarships, and grants to nonprofits that align with the Soroptimist mission.

    SI Davis members meet twice a month on Wednesdays – once at lunchtime and once in the evening – and connect for other fun activities and service. Learn more at https://www.sidavis.org/.