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

Category: Housing

  • Celebration of Abraham Rocks the Block in West Sacramento with Habitat for Humanity

    Rocks-the-block(From press release) On Saturday October 8 the Celebration of Abraham joined Habitat for Humanity Greater Sacramento to Rock the Block in West Sacramento. Our team comprised folks from all three Abrahamic traditions including Jewish (Renee Dryfoos, Gregory Guss, John Katonah and Dean Newberry), Muslim (Anne Kjemtrup, Kamal  Lemseffer and Timur Mamedov) and Christian (Mary Philip and Helen Roland Cramer). In addition to providing the interfaith work team, the Celebration of Abraham ran an on-line fundraising campaign and raised $1350 to supply the materials needed to work on the project.

    The specific project that the Celebration of Abraham worked on was painting the transitional housing that Shores of Hope provides to folks aging out of foster care. Shore of Hope is a nonprofit in West Sacramento that offers among other services transitional housing, Slavic Women’s Health Outreach, emergency shelter, and a Food Closet. (See Welcome to Shores of Hope )

  • Letter: Comments on Mr. Morrell’s take on homelessness in Davis

    I am writing to share my deep concern about the comments that Adam Morrill, a candidate for city council (District 4) has made regarding homelessness and those who experience homelessness.  His comments should trouble all of us. Despite our move to district elections, we remain one city and one community. I have spent well over decade working on issues related to homelessness, serving on the boards of Davis Opportunity Village, the Yolo County Homeless and Poverty. I am also a member of the Interfaith Housing Justice Group. Mr. Morrell’s approach to dealing with the homeless issue lacks an awareness of the scope of the problem as well as an understanding of the limits of the resources of local nonprofits.

    In the Davis Chamber of Commerce forum, he was asked about his approach to addressing homelessness. Early in the forum he referred to unhoused individuals as “violent transients.” He said that he thought a better solution to addressing homelessness than “kind of moving people along who are continually problems, people who aren’t interested in services” is “deeding over the sidewalks to the landlords because then it results in a “trespassing issue rather than just a camping issue.”” This approach will lead to criminalizing unhoused people. But he didn’t stop there, he went on to say that the city shouldn’t be in the business of social services and that these efforts are duplicative of what the nonprofits have already been doing. The nonprofits cannot solve the issue—they simply do not have the resources.

    My deeply held view is that all humans deserve to live with dignity, and that includes the right to be in stable housing and to receive appropriate services. And I believe local government – because of its role in housing policy, enforcing building codes, and protecting public health — has an important role in dealing with issue.  Mr. Morrill has a very restricted and troubling view of what it takes to build a community where everyone is safe.

    I urge those who live in District 4 to vote for Gloria Partida.

    Helen Roland Cramer

  • Winter Shelter for our Unhoused Residents

    Why non-congregate (e.g. hotel/motel-based) shelter is the best solution

    (From press release)

    Background: The City of Davis, in coordination with several stakeholder organizations, is planning for winter shelter for our homeless Davis and Yolo County neighbors. The current proposal being advanced by the City’s Social Service and Housing Department is to use the city-owned house at 512 5th Street as congregate shelter for up to 10 people, with Davis Community Meals and Housing (DCMH) providing staffing, case management and administration of the program.

    HEART of Davis (formerly Interfaith Rotating Winter Shelter) is enthusiastically supportive of and interested in contributing to sheltering those who need it during the cold winter months. We stand ready to provide volunteers to provide food and other resources to those in need. However, we firmly believe that the 5th Street house is the wrong venue for this purpose at this time, for the following reasons:

    • The 5th St facility is far too small to address the need. Historically, there have been at least 20-25 people needing cold weather shelter on a nightly basis in Davis. Sacramento homeless camp sweeps will likely increase the need.

    • As a congregate shelter it may well be a source of COVID-19 outbreaks, during which time it will have to be closed, as has been the case with the 4th and Hope Shelter in Woodland.

      • During the closures, the only alternative will be using motel or hotel rooms for non- congregate shelter, or to provide nothing at all.
      • The California Department of Public Health’s (CDPH) shelter guidance (dated May 6, 2022) advises: “ When possible, the use of alternative housing sites or non-congregate settings should be considered in lieu of congregate shelters.” (See the attached rationale, written by Dr. Sheri Belafsky, UC Davis Department of Public Health Sciences, in consultation with the Yolo County Public Health Officer).

    • Some hotel rooms will be needed anyway for the vulnerable population. Those who are at highest risk for COVID will need to be sheltered in separate motel/hotel rooms to minimize health risks.

      • The City will then be implementing a second track of non-congregate shelter, which will require separate management. The City could reduce management costs and staff time by running just one non-congregate shelter program.
      • It will be very difficult to for our volunteers to provide food at two locations

    Projected Costs: The room costs of such a program, assuming ~20 people per night for 4 months (120 days) would be 20 rooms x $100/night x 120 nights= $240,000. Demand each night will depend on the weather and other factors, such as screening criteria. HEART of Davis has offered a matching contribution $25K, which has thus far not been accepted by the city. Additional fundraising to pay for rooms, supplies, and other resources will be needed, and possible sources would be other organizations in Davis who support the homeless, the local business community, and, of course, the city.

    What you need to know: Dana Bailey, Director of Davis’ Department of Social Services and Housing, is hosting a meeting with multiple interested organizations on Thursday, October 6, to present her current plan. The City Council will discuss this item at its October 18 meeting.

    What you can do: Please spread the word to your networks and constituencies that the City Council needs to direct staff to pursue shelter options that can accommodate 20 or more people, such as a motel- based shelter. Please contact City Council members directly using the contact information below. Tell them:

    1. Winter shelter for our homeless neighbors is desperately needed in Davis.

    2. The proposal to use the city house for congregate shelter is both inadequate to address the need, and unsafe, from a public health point of view.

    3. Motel/Hotel-based shelter, like that provided last year, is probably our best option at this time, since we know how to run such a program and it needs to be up and running in a month.

    4. The City needs to, and can, find resources to run such a program. All that is needed is the political will.

    5. The Council should direct staff to focus on non-congregate shelter options that can house 20+ people/night.

    Please contact the City Council, and plan to attend the October 18 City Council meeting. Spread the word!

    Lucas Frerichs

    Mayor

    City Council District 3

    Term Ends: 2024

    lucasf@cityofdavis.org

     

    Will Arnold

    Vice Mayor

    City Council District 2

    Term Ends: 2024

    warnold@cityofdavis.org

     

    Dan Carson

    Councilmember
    Elected "At large"

    (resides District 1)
    Term Ends: 2022

    dcarson@cityofdavis.org

     

    Josh Chapman

    Councilmember

    City Council District 5

    Term Ends: 2024

    jchapman@cityofdavis.org

     

    Gloria Partida

    Elected "At large"

    (resides District 4)
    Term Ends: 2022

    gpartida@cityofdavis.org

     

    Attachment. Analysis from Dr. Sheri Belafsky
    Rationale for non-congregate shelter whenever feasible this winter:

    • While case rates and hospitalizations have been trending down over the past month, significant virus circulation remains throughout Californiaincluding Sacramento and Yolo counties. Per CDC data, Yolo County currently has a low community level, however, “community transmission”, which reflects the presence and spread of COVID19, is still “substantial”. (https://www.yolocounty.org/government/general-government-departments/health-human- services/adults/communicable-disease-investigation-and-control/covid-19)

    • Currently, the behavior of the COVID-19 virus is unpredictable, and the development of new variants this winter is possible.

    • Congregate emergency winter shelter constitutes a high-risk transmission setting for a population disproportionately at high risk for COVID-19 complications.

    • CDPH’s shelter guidance (dated May 6, 2022) advises: “When possible, the use of alternative housing sites or non-congregate settings should be considered in lieu of congregate shelters.” (https://www.cdph.ca.gov/Programs/CID/DCDC/Pages/COVID-19/infection-control-guidance- clients-congregate-shelter-including-homelessness.aspx). CDPH also advises that “Non- congregate housing should also be prioritized for:… those who are at high-risk for severe COVID-19 infection or medical complications should they become infected, such as people over 65 or those who have underlying health conditions that increase the risk of severe COVID-19 infection.”
    • CDC recommendations for “medium” community levels include:

    • In the event of COVID-19 outbreaks, other shelters with congregate housing have been forced to close intermittently with subsequent urgent re-housing of their guests in motel rooms to isolate.
  • Why DiSC matters for the City Council election

    Some of DiSC’s proponents called it a tiny city. That suggests it is a microcosm of Davis as a whole and all of the issues it faces.

    DCC with DiSC in background-2By Roberta Millstein

    In a recent interview with the Davis Enterprise, Gloria Partida said that “I know that people right now are very focused on what happened with Measure H” but that being a member of Council is “not a one-issue job.”

    However, Measure H represents a large number of central and key issues that future Davis City Councils will have to weigh in on.  It would have been bad for Davis in variety of ways, as Davis citizens widely recognized when they rejected the project by an almost 2-1 margin. 

    Thus, a candidate’s stance on Measure H speaks volumes about their values and how they would govern.  Gloria Partida (District 4), Dan Carson (District 1), and Bapu Vaitla (District 1)  were strongly in favor of Measure H.  In contrast, Kelsey Fortune (District 1) and Adam Morrill (District 4) strongly opposed Measure H.

    As the No on Measure H campaign emphasized in its ballot arguments and campaign literature, each of the following issues was relevant to the proposed project. In no particular order:

    (more…)

  • An evening with Leah Rothstein

    Document copy

    By Ellen Kolarik 

    It was November 18, 2019 and Richard Rothstein, author of The Color of Law was nearing the end of his presentation to a full house at Davis Community Church.  More than 200 people remained for the Q&A. 

    A member of the audience asked “How can we maintain that small town feel and still deal with our housing issues?”

    The reply? “That small town feel is a euphemism for a segregated community.”

    Those of us that were involved in putting on that event were excited and proud that our community was open to hearing tough information about who we are as a country and as a community.  But, how to move forward?

    Interfaith Housing Justice Davis (IHJD) formed as a response to Rothstein’s call to action.  IHJD is a loose coalition of faith organizations in Davis who advocate for changes in city policy to encourage more affordable housing, the first step in desegregating a community.

    (more…)

  • Part 2 Candidate Responses to the Sierra Club Yolano Group Questionnaire for the 2022 Davis City Council Election

    Sierra Club logo

    Land Use and Housing Development – Downtown Core and Student Housing

    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 Novemeber, 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 asked were in the following general categories:

    Part 1 – Land Use and Housing Development – Peripheral Development

    Part 2Land Use and Housing Development – Downtown Core and Student Housing

    Part 3Energy Use and Greenhouse Gases

    Part 4Transportation Management

    Part 5Waste Management

    Part 6 Toxics in the Environment and Other Environmental Issues

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

    This is the 2nd in the series of articles and focuses on Land Use and Housing Development – Downtown Core and Student Housing and provides candidate responses to the following questions:

    (more…)

  • Where have all the babies gone?

    Screen Shot 2022-07-09 at 10.22.28 AMBy Dave Taormino

    Davis has been gradually losing its innate college town character. The level of civility in civic discourse continues its decline as demonstrated in the recent Measure H campaign. The 1960 – 70s mid-western ethos that prospered when Davis and UCD set out on their mutually aligned growth paths has deteriorated with urban-like political fighting. The midwestern neighborly values that were once well established have given way to a divisive approach to community engagement. In housing development discussions, the person you disagree with is characterized as evil, dishonest, a liar, etc. Why? In part because Davis’s 40 years of restrictive housing and growth policies has spawned and feeds unintended and unnecessary discord with little visible, offsetting benefits.

    Here are some of the impacts:

    1. Less than 40% of our TOP City management live in Davis. Nearly all the major City decision makers and their families live elsewhere. Their family life and personal civic involvement is not here.
    2. The percentage of Davis Police and Fire Department personnel who live in Davis is much lower than the TOP management. In essence, their family and hearts reside elsewhere.
    3. The vast majority of North, North Davis homeowners are individuals employed at UCD or a Davis business. They cannot afford to live here. A sizable number have children commuting daily with their parents to attend Davis schools, a good outcome for us.
    4. In the Cannery, roughly 80% of the buyers had no relationship to Davis or UCD, although some had grown children living here. Most came from the Bay Area and Marin County, exactly where the Cannery developers heavily advertised. It was an intentional strategy not intended to attract local UCD faculty, staff, and other Davis workers. In the 546 homes, an unbelievably low number of school age children actually live there. Something like 26 new students resulted from Cannery’s 546 homes plus apartments. In the 80’s and early 90’s a “Cannery-type neighborhood” would have generated 300 – 400 new students. Where have all the families with or capable of having babies gone?
    5. Approximately 1,000 Elementary through High School students commute daily to our schools. Without these commuting students some neighborhood schools would close. Imagine the rancor and anger that would result should neighborhood school closures be considered. The civic anger, neighborhood vs neighborhood would likely be greater than the recent Measure H arguments. The School District has done a masterful entrepreneurial job in “recruiting” out of Davis parents/children to attend our neighborhood schools. For how long can those creative efforts be sufficient? A university-oriented community NEEDS GREAT schools. Great schools require children from childbearing age parents living here and as a result contributing to a wholesome, family friendly, inclusive community. That was “the 1960’s and 1970’s Davis civic perspective” when UCD embarked on its original and now continuing growth plan.

    The list could continue, but you get the point.

    (more…)

  • An Open Letter to South Davis on Issues at Pacifico (January 2021, recycled)

    Today the D. Vanguard recycled some old content from January 2021 in a 'new' article "Commentary: Long Troubled by Some of the Comments on Pacifico" and sprinkled in some recent content from an Anti-NIMBY Council-meeting public comment.

    I, too, am disgusted by some of the comments on Pacifico, but the comments I find twisted are the opposite comments Greenwald is troubled by — those by David Greenwald, Georgina Valencia and some much-DV-recycled comments by Gloria Partida . . . and the rest of the Usual Suspects of the "Anti-NIMBY" crowd.

    My position remains immortalized in the following letter:

    An Open Letter to South Davis (January 2021)

    Hello South Davis,

    I don’t live in South Davis, but I’m looking at District 3 100’ away out my window.

    I share your problems and your concerns. There is a spot 200’ from my house where drug addicts / drug dealers / thieves camp outdoors. This is not a homeless encampment, it is a revolving crime den. In Spring 2020 I had three scary men on meth (I believe) approach me late at night and one threw rocks at me. There were numerous incidents of mental health outbursts. I slept little for two months as these people were up all night.

    Our neighborhood mostly solved the problem *this time* eventually by having meetings with both the Police Chief and his Lieutenant, and relentlessly pestering the City Council. That took two months.

    Your problems I have heard regarding Pacifico are similar, and thankfully also seem better but not solved. I am here with you in unity. We cannot participate in these issues only when the problem is next to us. We must support other Davis residents who have similar problems, as the problem is bigger than Pacifico, and bigger than the location next to me.

    God Bless the people who are helping the truly homeless population that are in need. Those who spoke today on that are I believe sincere. However, the problem is not the needy, but the criminals. We cannot conflate these.

    There have been times when residents, and subtly even our leaders, have shamed “the homed” for being “privileged” and not being sensitive to those in need. These are separate issues. We must recognize the needs of the truly homeless. We must also recognize that there is no shame in having a home and a roof over our heads, nor the need to protect our families and yes, our things.

    When people talk of drug dealers and thieves, they are not talking about the needy homeless; we must not conflate the two as a rhetorical trick. We must recognize and acknowledge that shaming the ‘other’ and demonizing those with homes, and those without homes, will not result in constructive resolution. We must recognize the needs of all parties as legitimate. Except for criminals, they ‘need’ to be removed.

    Alan C. Miller is a resident of Old East Davis

  • Post-election statement from No on H campaign

    No on H 2022_Sign Design_Final w SC Endorse Seal(From press release) We are pleased by the overwhelming defeat of Measure H, which we believe would have resulted in a development that was harmful to Davis.

    It was a true grassroots effort of many volunteers over many months, who poured countless hours of their personal time into the campaign. It was also the result of many passionate supporters who donated to the campaign, displayed lawn signs, wrote letters to the editor, and participated on social media.  We thank everyone who was involved in the effort.

    We hope the resounding defeat of Measure H  leads to more collaborative community discussions that engage Davisites in creating future projects which will be truly sustainable and environmentally progressive.

  • Davis still needs a new vision

    Back in December 2020, some members of the successful 2020 No on DISC campaign got together and articulated what they felt was a new and better vision for Davis.  With the apparent defeat of DiSC 2022 as Measure H, currently showing a 63.52% "No" vote, I thought I would pull it out again.  I think our vision and much of what we wrote here remains pertinent , including an all-too-prescient prediction that:

    "the developers will try to bring back DISC with minor changes and spend another quarter of a million dollars in the hopes of gaining just enough new votes to change the outcome of the election.  What the election vote shows is that such an attempt would be a mistake.  The project proposal was fundamentally flawed and a few more bells and whistles wouldn’t change that."

    We did not, however, expect that the developer would spend significantly more than half a million dollars, and still lose.  It is to Davisites' credit that we still saw that this was a bad project delivered through a bad process (including an inappropriate developer-funded lawsuit, spearheaded by a sitting Councilmember).

    I hope our op-ed stimulates you to think about an alternative path for Davis.

    -RLM

    The Failure of Measure B Suggests a New Vision Is Needed
    Originally posted December 12, 2020
    https://newdavisite.wordpress.com/2020/12/12/the-failure-of-measure-b-suggests-a-new-vision-is-needed/

    West from Rd 30B - Sac skylineBy Roberta Millstein, Pam Gunnell, Nancy Price, Alan Pryor, and Colin Walsh

    Measure B – the measure that proposed a 200-acre business park and housing development outside of the Mace Curve – failed at the polls.  The defeat comes with official Yolo County returns showing that 16,458 people, or 52% of voters, said “no” to the project.  In Mace Ranch and Wildhorse, 60% of voters opposed the project.

    This is a remarkable result considering that the No on B campaign was outspent by over 14 to 1.  As of October 28, Yes on B had spent $258,919 between when B was put on the ballot in July and the election in November, while No on B had spent $18,149.  The No on B campaign, composed solely of volunteer Davis citizens, created its own literature, designed its own sign and other graphics, was active on social media, and, to the extent possible during COVID, pounded the pavement distributing flyers to let Davisites know about the negative impacts that this project would bring.  It was a true grassroots effort.  There were no paid designers, no paid consultants, no multiple glossy mailers, and no push-polls to gather information on what messages would sell.  Opponents also could not table at the Farmers Market due to COVID restrictions, normally the bread and butter of a campaign lacking deep pocket donors to finance getting its message out.

    By comparison, Yes on B hired a PR Firm and other consultants more than a year in advance of the vote to help contrive and package its message and run the campaign.

    The fact that Measure B was nonetheless defeated in the face of long odds and unusual circumstances shows that DISC was a bad project for Davis from the outset.  It was too big, chewing up prime farmland and habitat.   The promise of on-site housing for DISC employees could not be guaranteed, making the development car-and commuter- oriented with extensive parking areas. Poor public transportation options exacerbated this problem. The DISC development would have massively increased Davis greenhouse gas emissions and made it impossible for Davis to meet its carbon neutrality goals. We are in a climate emergency, as Yolo County and other counties have recognized; Davis needs to shoulder its share of responsibility for climate impacts, including but not limited to wildfire impacts and extreme weather events locally and globally.

    (more…)