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

Category: Housing

  • Village Farms Needs To Be Fixed

    By Elaine Roberts Musser

    I am trying to keep an open mind about Village Farms, a new housing development proposal for northeast Davis.  But try as I might, there are a couple of new concerns that have surfaced which really bother me.

    I am disturbed at two of the features being suggested for Village Farms: to wit, a fourth fire station and a city run down payment program.  Our municipality is in so much financial trouble, that it is short more than $2 million a year just for pavement management alone. The estate of a deceased Davis citizen was just awarded a whopping $24.2 million because of the city’s negligence in not properly maintaining its trees.  We face similar financial risks because of our neglect of other city infrastructure.

    The harsh reality is the city cannot afford a $3.4 million annual hit to its budget to pay for operating another fire station. Nor can it afford the cost of construction of a new fire station, potentially in the tens of millions of dollars. Similarly, the city cannot bear the expense of running a down payment program for housing, and who knows at what expense?

    (more…)

  • Letter concerning the Lumberyard Revised Affordable Housing Plan

    [The following letter was shared for posting to the Davisite by the author]

    October 12, 2025

    Dear Mayor Vaitla, Social Services Commission Chair Sverdlov, Planning Commission Chair Weiss and to all the council and commission members and Community Development Director Sherri Metzker.

    I saw last week in a recent Davis Enterprise the city’s public notice re

    The Lumberyard Revised Affordable Housing Plan.

    The core elements of the revision are as follows;

    The number of units will drop from 226 units to 205 units

    A reduction of 21 units

    However, the number of bedrooms will increase from 322 to 444

    An increase of 122 bedrooms and therefore at least 122 more people at one person per bedroom but many more if any of the bedrooms allow 2 people

    If various fees are based upon people and vehicle usage, then the project will; 

    Reduce project income to the city by about 10% 

    While increasing the number of noncontributing municipal users by 37+%.

    It appears to me therefore that the reduction of 21 units, the city will have a measurable loss of project-based income to cover the long-term costs while substantially subsidizing and increasing dollars spent on the wear and tear on the city.

    I would like one of you to pose this question to the Community Development Director;

    (more…)

  • On Education, Accountability, and the Price of Pretending: Part One

    By David Taormino

    It has often been said, sometimes in reverence and other times in jest, that the Davis Joint Unified School District is “doing the Lord’s work on Earth.” And perhaps, in part, that is true. There is no higher calling than the education of our children—no greater trust than that which we place in those who shape young minds.

    But let us not, in our admiration, lose sight of the facts.

    The School District, noble though its mission may be, is also a business. It employs administrators, staff, and teachers, all of whom depend upon the continued operation of schools—regardless of whether the children who fill those classrooms live in Davis or are brought in from elsewhere. This is not criticism. It is recognition of reality. But reality, too, must be subject to the rule of law.

    That is why I have filed suit—on behalf of myself and future homeowners of Palomino Place—to challenge the District’s newly-adopted fee on new development. The total for a 2,000 square-foot home now exceeds $10,000. This fee, and the rationale for it, strain both legal boundaries and public trust.

    The Law Is Clear—and It Is Not Being Followed

    (more…)

  • Clarifying the Realities of Downpayment Assistance in Davis

    By Barbara Clutter

    In their August 11 piece in The Davisite, Dan Carson and Elaine Roberts Musser rely on a preliminary report from the City’s Fiscal Commission subcommittee on Downpayment Assistance to argue that Davis should align with existing state programs, such as CalHFA (CA Housing Finance Agency), which assisted 30,000 California homebuyers in 2025. Carson/Musser point out that only two of those recipients were from Davis, implying a missed opportunity for our city. However, what they do not acknowledge is the underlying reason so few Davis residents qualify for CalHFA is the high cost of housing. Families working under CalHFA's income limits generally find that qualifying housing is virtually nonexistent in Davis, making the program largely inaccessible in Davis.

    Musser and Carson also highlight SB 417, a proposed $10 billion statewide housing bond measure which would primarily fund rehabilitation of infrastructure and existing housing. While it earmarks $1 billion for downpayment assistance, no community is guaranteed any of these prospective funds, even if the bond measure is passed in 2026.

    (more…)

  • Fiscal Commissioners Propose the State Pay for New Housing Program Instead of Davis Taxpayers

    By Dan Carson and Elaine Roberts Musser

    We were disappointed when the Davis City Council adopted an ordinance last January authorizing a new city-funded downpayment assistance program for lower-income Davis homebuyers. It put on the books a potentially expensive new program city taxpayers can ill afford. It did so with a blank-check ordinance lacking normal programmatic limits, like how much money would be given to a potential homebuyer. 

    At the time, advocates of the new downpayment assistance program lobbied for an annual allocation of new General Fund monies of $1 million or more from Measure Q.  Measure Q was an increase in the city sales tax approved by city voters last November. 

    That didn’t happen once the full impacts of out-of-control spending by the City Council became clear. Excessive pay hikes and bonuses for city staff, including another round of new contracts rushed through in May, have gotten the City of Davis into very serious financial trouble. A new fiscal forecast shows that within the next couple of years the city will have zero financial reserves, with spending exceeding General Fund revenues by millions annually. 

    Essentially, all that new money from Measure Q has gone up in a puff of smoke. This, despite campaign promises by the Council of new housing programs and fixes to our city infrastructure. Promises that were made in public statements and official ballot arguments the Council signed and that were sent to every registered city voter.

    (more…)

  • The General Plan won’t be a Genial Plan

     

    Screenshot 2025-07-30 8.22.55 PM"The goal is to manipulate

    Heavy hands to intimidate

    Snuff out the very idea of clarity

    Strangle your longing for truth and trust

    Choke wisdom sapience and prudence

    The war economy is inviolable violently

    Suppresses all intelligence that conflicts

    With the stakes of those who drive it."  - 

    From "Melodie is a Wound" by: Laetitia Sadier, Tim John Gane. Performed by Stereolab. Album: Instant Holograms On Metal Film. Released: 2025.  https://youtu.be/Nndpg90P2O8?

  • No Measure J/R/D amendments

    Suburban sprawl
    It was disappointing to read the recent Davis Enterprise article regarding the City Council meeting item on  Measure J/R/D on May 13th. To be clear, there was no “confusion” by the public of what was being discussed or what could have resulted from that meeting. The Council was deciding if and when the City would add “exemptions” to Measure J/R/D on a ballot.  Any project including any of these exemption conditions would avoid a Measure J/R/D vote and disenfranchise Davis citizens from voting on it. 

    Also, there was no mention about the huge number of citizens who expressed their opposition to any Measure J/R/D “amendments” (exemptions) in person, by voicemail and by email at the meeting.

    How coincidental, that this subject of “amending“ Measure J /R/D was raised just when the egregious Village Farms project is supposed to be the next project on the ballot? Unless of course, it was somehow “exempted” by an “amended” Measure J/R/D.  Village Farms is a 1,800-unit project at Covell and Pole Line with a 200-acre floodplain, toxics from the adjacent unlined Old City Landfill, massive infrastructure costs, and enormous traffic and unsafe access issues.

    To be clear, any amendment(s) to Measure  J/R/D to exempt large projects which would annex in large parcels of ag land or open space for development, is for the benefit of the developers, not our community. Measure J/R/D already has exemptions built into it including for affordable housing.

    While the Housing Element Update citizen committee evaluated addressing new housing needs,  they did NOT make any recommendation to amend or add  Measure J/R/D exemptions. That concept came up between the City Staff and the State. Was this Staff’s idea, or was Staff given that direction, and by whom, to offer the concept of amending Measure J/R/D?

    With democracy on the line on a daily basis, we don’t need that happening here in Davis. The intention of Measure J/R/D is to give the public the ability to support good projects, and reject bad projects. Measure J/R/D is “The Citizens Right to Vote on Future Use of Open Space and Agricultural Lands”.  It passed 83%:17% when last renewed in 2020.  Measure J/R/D is democracy in action, and it does not need any “amendments” to weaken or invalidate it.

    Eileen M. Samitz

  • NE Transportation Corridor – Tonight on City Council Agenda @8:40pm

    Open Letter to City Council on NE Transportation Corridor Item 7 (8:40pm, Tues 4/1)

    City Council,

    I may not be able to attend tonight so am making email comments here.

    I appreciate your taking up the NE Transportation Corridor.  As specified, the item as written would be part of the General Plan.  From the staff report, this involves more detail than the concept suggested by the Davis Citizens Planning Group (DCPG or close to that name).  

    I also came up with the almost identical idea of a transportation corridor north and east of Covell/Mace to run through the new suburbs, as a BRT or Bus Rapid Transit corridor parallel to a bike line.  As separate citizens came up with almost identical comments, perhaps the consultants should meet soon with the citizens for initial input, rather than or in addition to the consultants having citizens comment on the consultant's plans.

    Here are the basic features that I believe I and DCPG agree on:

    • There would be minimal stops as per BRT standards (1/4-1/2 mile spacing).
    • The corridor would not be for automobiles
    • There would be and adjacent and parallel bike track on the south/west of the corridor.
    • There would be minimal intersections, with only major arteries crossing the corridor to minimize conflicts.
    • The BRT would continue into Davis on regular roads, with some upgrades for the BRT infrastructure.
    • The Route:
      • The BRT would start at shopping center south of Hwy. 80 along Mace (Nugget) for a SE anchor.
      • The route would cut east on the north side of the tracks to access the corridor.
      • The dedicated corridor would continue in an arc north and west parallel to the curve of Mace and Covell.
      • At Wildhorse, the BRT could divert south to Covell, or use the 'cut-through lot' to access Moore and run to Moore & Pole Line.
      • From there the BRT could continue through Village Homes or south on Pole Line.
      • The BRT would serve Oakshade Shopping Center
      • The BRT would then continue Covell–>F Street–>Amtrak–>First Street–>South Campus (Library Silo)–>West Village
    • Each development could proceed on its own once the basic route is confirmed through the to-be-developed areas, as long as all developers agreed to link to the future through corridor once each segment is built.
    • The new route should minimize turns and instead follow a smooth arc.
    • IMPORTANT:  Building density for each development should be at its maximum nearest bus stops and along the corridor, and step to medium and to lowest densities (per project) as one gets further from the corridor.

    I believe the transportation corridor placement needs to be negotiated and agreed to with each landowner/developer far in advance of the General Plan Update.  This will allow the corridor to be whole and usable once all developments are in place.

    Alan C. Miller

  • Letter: Workforce Housing is Needed in Davis

    Davis is a city that prides itself on being a welcoming, forward-thinking community. Yet, as many as 25,000 people who work in Davis—including teachers, firefighters, police officers, UC Davis staff, and service workers—are unable to live here due to the high cost of housing. Instead, they are forced to commute from surrounding areas, contributing to traffic congestion and increasing greenhouse gas emissions.

    The average price of an older detached home in Davis is a staggering $850,000,  and new 2-bedroom houses start in the mid- $700,000’s (see Bretton Woods). Duplexes and townhouses, on the other hand, sell in the mid- $500,000’s (3-bedrooms, 2-baths—see Zillow).  These “missing middle” housing options are critical for keeping our workforce in the community, yet there is a glaring shortage of such products in recent development proposals. Will Davis step up to build them?

    The rental market is no better. Many new apartments are leased by the bed, catering primarily to students. This leaves non-student workers and families with limited rental options. Larger, family-friendly rental units with play areas are desperately needed to accommodate those who contribute daily to the vitality of our city.

    Interfaith Housing Justice Davis is committed to just and equitable housing for our community, including ensuring that our workforce is not priced out of living here. Providing the people who serve our city with the opportunity to live here strengthens our community and our schools, while reducing environmental impacts from commuter traffic.

    Alex Achimore and Barbara Clutter, Interfaith Housing Justice Davis

  • Draft EIR for Village Farms released for public comment

    Screen Shot 2025-02-02 at 3.24.20 PM
    The project site is bounded by Pole Line Road to the east; East Covell Boulevard to the south; the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) mainline, F Street, and Cannery development to the west; and Davis Paintball, Blue Max Kart Club, and agricultural land to the north.


    By Roberta Millstein

    On January 7, the City of Davis released the Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Village Farms Davis Project for public review.  The approximately 497.6-acre project site is located north of East Covell Boulevard, east of F Street, and west of Pole Line Road in a currently unincorporated portion of Yolo County, California.  The City has invited public comment on this document for a 45-day period extending from January 7, 2025 through February 25, 2025. (Sorry for the late notice, but there is still time to submit comments).  EIRs are part of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process.

    The DEIR materials can be found within the ‘CEQA Documents and Information’ tab at: https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/community-development/development-projects/village-farms-davis

    It's a very long document, but citizens can start with:

    And then, you can peruse particular areas of interest or concern:

    (more…)