"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?
By Elaine Roberts Musser & Dan Carson
On June 17, 2025 the City Council will “finalize” the 2025-2027 city budget, although it is not written in stone and subject to change. The grim reality is the lion’s share of Measure Q funding (recently approved sales tax increase) has already been spent on employee compensation, and there is absolutely no Measure Q funding left.
Thus there is zero money to front load more funding for roads and bike paths as recommended by both City Council and City Staff. $14 million is needed, but only $8.6 million has been set aside, the same inadequate pavement management funding as before. So the pavement will further deteriorate from its current abysmal state, and be exponentially more expensive to fix, adding tens of millions of dollars to the already huge backlog of pavement projects. And it will present particularly unsafe conditions for bicyclists, especially children going to school.
It should be noted the Yes on Q ballot statement, signed by all five sitting City Council members at the time, declared Measure Q was: “To support essential city services, such as…pothole repair… and bike path maintenance”. Instead, the City Council devoted Measure Q funds to increased employee compensation, while the draft budget plan released May 20 would spend nothing more on roads and bike paths.
This is a bait and switch, an abject betrayal of the voters who approved Measure Q.
By Elaine Roberts Musser
During the 6/3/25 City Council budget discussion, I stated: “There will be no Measure Q revenue left to frontload funding for roads and bike paths as promised in the Measure Q ballot language. This would be a bait and switch scam, an abject betrayal of voters who approved Measure Q.” Mayor Vaitla responded: “This accusation of bait and switch is inappropriate.…” I beg to differ.
Bait and switch consists of a misleading statement intended to deceive voters, that is likely to influence voters, and will probably result in harm.
Let’s take a look at what happened with Measure Q funding. The ballot statement, signed by all five sitting City Council members, declared Measure Q is: “To support essential city services, such as…pothole repair… and bike path maintenance”. Notice it did not mention employee raises. The City Council knew the specific ballot language about roads/bike paths was apt to convince voters to approve Measure Q. Yet the City Council spent Measure Q funds on employee raises, but nothing on roads/bike paths. That deception will result in the city’s abysmal roads/bike paths deteriorating further at exponentially greater cost.
As the budget is finalized on 6/17/25, the only way the City Council can nullify the Measure Q bait and switch is to cut costs in other areas of the budget – and redirect that funding towards roads/bike paths. Then, and only then, can Mayor Vaitla with justification, claim there was no bait and switch.
By Dan Carson and Elaine Roberts Musser
A newly published long-range financial forecast for the city brings dire warnings of shortfalls and outright deficits over the next few years. Below, we outline tough but fiscally responsible actions the Davis City Council should immediately take to rein in this serious fiscal mess, substantially of the City Council’s own making.
The May 27, 2025 analysis prepared by the Baker Tilly Advisory Group in collaboration with city staff found the city faces budget shortfalls of roughly $3 million each of the next two fiscal years. They estimate this would leave the city with a bare-bones General Fund reserve, in a period when the risks of recession and inflation are dramatically rising nationally because of severe funding withdrawals in Washington DC and Sacramento.
Second, absent some painful but unavoidable decisions, the analysis found that the city will likely be completely financially underwater within five years, with annual spending exceeding annual revenues. In other words, we are rapidly moving from having inadequate reserves to having no reserves at all, as well as serious deficits projected to grow to $5 million annually. Even these numbers may be a bit optimistic. The forecast assumes 2.5 percent annual growth in city pay even though newly signed contracts allow up to 4 percent pay growth for many workers supported from the General Fund.
Few Davis residents likely know about this serious financial predicament. The forecast report was released to little fanfare and sparse news coverage in a Council workshop held in the late afternoon at the Senior Center, instead of the City Council’s usual meeting in the evening in Council Chambers. As this is written, no city press release has been issued to highlight these grim developments.
By Elaine Roberts Musser and Dan Carson
During the last few years the city has consistently failed to make the hard decisions needed to manage its finances. The proposed new city budget released on Friday is more of the same. What follows are just a few examples of how the latest city budget proposal for 2025-2027 digs the city ever deeper into an embarrassing financial morass.
Having 10.3% and 10.2% reserves for the city’s General Fund for the next two budget years — as the new city budget plan proposes — might suffice in better times. Property and sales taxes are historically stable revenue sources for Davis and other California cities that can enable them to survive troubled times. But a 10% reserve is inadequate for the next two fiscal years given the treacherous economic circumstances the city is in. And coming are the all but certain massive state and federal funding cuts for local government programs.
In earlier budget discussions, City Council’s direction to staff was to get the city’s General Fund reserve back to 15% over the next 2-3 years. That plan is now dead. No specific proposal to get there is being offered — just a vague statement that new revenues or budget reductions will have to be found somewhere. This dire circumstance should trigger immediate action to put the General Fund reserve back on track to 15% in 2-3 years.
Don’t count on that happening, though. Even as these budgetary dangers loom, another item on the Council’s consent agenda for Tuesday would make things worse: the ratification of a very rich and unwise employee contract with the Davis City Employees Association (DCEA). One that will probably set the stage for another wave of contracts for other city employee groups.
By Elaine Roberts Musser and Dan Carson
At the April 15, 2025 City Council meeting, four of the five Davis City Council members declared their support for immediately committing significant additional amounts of upfront funding to fix city roads and bike paths. The funding would come from the recently approved Measure Q sales tax increase and be incorporated into the two-year 2025-27 city budget that will be adopted this June.
A spending plan labeled as “Scenario 2” was presented at the meeting to Council and recommended for approval by city staff. It would have held pavement spending flat for at least five years and then, in theory, begun accelerating city spending for that purpose in 2030-31 through 2034-35.
Vice Mayor Donna Neville and Councilmembers Chapman, Partida and Deos made it very clear they found the idea of backloading pavement funding, and putting off any significant increases until five years from now, unacceptable. Mayor Bapu Vaitla proposed a much different approach to adding money for roads that we discuss below, that would involve asking Davis voters to approve another new tax measure.
We are grateful four Councilmembers took to heart our warning against approving Scenario 2. The report staff provided to Council documenting this scenario would escalate the roughly $100 million backlog of city road pavement projects that now exists to almost $150 million, an increase of approximately $50 million over the next decade (see the chart below, on page 07-50 of city staff report).
Open Letter to Davis City Council
Davis City Council,
Another collision at 5th & J Street today. Car vs. Bike.
Right after I called for Jersey barriers again at Council last night after the last collision.
This is an emergency situation. Two collisions just this week, four in one week several weeks back. Put up the goddamned Jersey barriers already, like today, like tomorrow. Recognize that people are getting hurt at an alarming rate here. I made a mistake being OK that the changes are coming after calling for Jersey barriers immediately after the four accidents a few weeks back. We can't wait.
Here's how to do it: put Jersey barriers on the left of each directional lane leading up to the intersection, and along the left-turn lane. The left-turn lanes will face each other, so block the west to south lane, and allow east to north. Put a 4' gap on each side for peds & bikes at crosswalks. Do this also at I Street and K Street. Similar site problems, and drivers will just cut over to I or K if J is blocked. At I and K Street reverse which left turn lane is blocked, so cars can only go west to south. This allows people to get into the neighborhood from 5th either direction, but prevents a 'face-off' between cars in the two left-turn lanes. Then slap a vertical yellow reflector on the east and west ends of the Jersey barriers to prevent cars from hitting them.
This has been going on for years, but the rate of collisions has increased greatly recently. I live near the corner of 3rd & J Streets. 3rd is a bit less busy but still an arterial. I can't recall ever seeing a collision there. In over 35 years. I'm sure it's happened, but it's rare. So it isn't just bad drivers, it's the intersection.
People keep asking why. 5th & J has inherent site problems. These can't be fixed with shrub trimming – there are poles and trees in just the wrong places. Going south to cross, you have to stop back of the stop line, then pull forward up to the bike lane, stop, and then pull across. It's the only safe way to do it, but most people who don't use it regularly don't know this, nor is stopping twice a normal way to cross a street. You get someone who pulls forward from the stop line with their site line blocked in just the wrong places, combined with a speeding car on 5th, and BOOM. And it happens often.
Do it! Fix it! Today! Now! No later than tomorrow!
Alan C. Miller
Old East Davis
By Dan Carson and Elaine Roberts Musser
Background
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:
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
By Alan Hirsch
Below is the core of Caltrans press release issued Wednesday 3/12 at 3:28pm announcing postponement of the Eastbound 50 Freeway in West Sac closure for this weekend. They say indefinitely—but it could be forever as they may figure out how to do the pavement rehab work while keeping some of regular 3 lanes up.
But if they reschedule total closure another weekend later in March, drivers will have to contend traffic from with opening of the A’s and River cat baseball season to Sutter Health Park.
This will may push out the work… and could conflict with the schedule to begin work to widened i-80 with toll lane- which is set to begin just next month. The Toll Lane construction work – Phase I of it– will continue into 2028.
For previous articles on evolving (potential) freeway closure, click here , here2.and here3.
Note the bike lane will also be continue thru Monday 3/17 next week- but could go longer as Caltrans notes unhelpfully “weather permitting”.
Editorial: This indefinite postponement could be due to pushbacks to Caltrans from local city council members and state representatives- after receiving calls from constituents. We will likely never know. It is strange the freeway closure was not announced or discussed during YoloTD board meetings even though Caltrans was present – only in public comment. One wonders, for example, if there will be a total west bound closure too.
Davisite 