Category: Trustworthiness

“No” to a Fourth Fire Station

By Elaine Roberts Musser

The newly released city staff report for Village Homes still includes a fourth fire station. It also adds a public safety center for police and EMS for good measure. It is estimated the fourth fire station alone would cost the city $3.5 million per year. God only knows how many more millions of dollars the addition of police and EMS at that spot would set the city back!

Where in the heck does city staff think the money for all this is going to come from? Last I looked there was no money tree in the back of City Hall. Nor do taxpayers have unlimited pockets. Many citizens are struggling just to make ends meet, as Mayor Vaitla has noted often enough, especially in light of what is going on at the federal and state level.

Additionally, City staff is trying to claim the city’s General Plan requires a fourth fire station, which is a patently false assertion. The general plan called for an analysis of fire facility needs, not construction of a 4th fire station.

The next fairy tale spun by city staff is that the Fire Department or the City Council itself already made the decision to build a 4th fire station. Where does staff get this tarradiddle from? First, the October 30, 2018 City Council minutes prove otherwise – the City Council just flat out didn’t make such a commitment. Second, the Fire Department has no authority to approve such an undertaking.

If the City Council wants this development project to pass a measure J/R/D vote, then any mention of a public safety center and 4th fire station should be completely removed. Any lame attempt to supposedly set aside a parcel for “public safety”, to disguise the real intent to build a fourth fire station, will not fool anyone.

For more complete information go to the following link: https://davisvanguard.org/2025/12/city-council-revisits-fire-station/

December 15, 2025
Give your feedback to the city on the Village Farms project proposal
By Roberta Millstein

Heads up for Davis City Council “workshop“ on Village Farms, Tues, Dec 16, approx 7:20 PM. This is an opportunity for you to let the city know your views on the project.

Item 6: Staff recommends the City Council conduct a public workshop on the Village Farms Davis project (VF) applications, as follows:
a. Receive Staff presentations on the proposed project;
b. Receive Applicant presentations on the proposed project;
c. Take public comment; and
d. Consider the following project applications and documents and provide feedback:

i. Pre-General Plan Amendment, including provisions for Baseline Project Features as required by Chapter 41 of the Davis Municipal Code; and
ii. Pre-Zoning and Preliminary Planned Development; and
iii. Development Agreement.

Details here: https://documents.cityofdavis.org/Media/Default/Documents/PDF/CityCouncil/CouncilMeetings/Agendas/2025/2025-12-16/06-Village-Farms-Workshop.pdf

IN PERSON PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Speakers will be asked to line up at the podium and state their name for the record. Comments are limited to no more than 2 minutes per speaker.

WRITTEN AND VOICEMAIL PUBLIC COMMENTS:
1. Submit written public comments to CityCouncilMembers@cityofdavis.org. Emails are distributed to City Council and staff. To ensure the City Council has the opportunity to review information prior to the meeting, send emails by 3:00 p.m. on the meeting date.
2. Submit comments by voicemail prior to the meeting: Call the city’s dedicated phone line 530-757-5693 to leave a voicemail message for public comment. Staff will play comments during the appropriate agenda item. Comments will be accepted from 12:00 noon until 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting. Voicemail public comments will not be accepted after 4:00 p.m. Speakers will be limited to no more than two minutes.
  
  Note: You must leave a separate voicemail for each item you wish to comment on. Please indicate your name and which item you are speaking about.
December 12, 2025
Why is a Portion of the Village Farms DEIR being Recirculated and has the Proper Process been Followed in Doing So?

by Alan Pryor

A portion of the Village Farms DEIR (contained in the Utilities and Services chapter) is being recirculated because the City, as the “lead agency” in the EIR process, has received a last-minute report from Brown and Caldwell dated November 7. This report indicates that the City’s existing Wastewater Treatment Plant (“WWTP”) is perilously close to exceeding its maximum flow capacity and needs to be upgraded to meet the City’s wastewater treatment permit issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. This information was not known by the City when they prepared and circulated the current Village Farms DEIR for comment.

However, since the new information impacts the analysis of the Village Farms project’s impact on the City’s WWTP, the City determined that the portion of the Village Farms DEIR addressing Utilities and Services needs to be recirculated with the updated information for public comment prior to consideration of the revised FEIR for certification by the City.

Unfortunately, the City has done a poor job explaining this need to the public when they recirculated the portion of the DEIR needing additional comment. Two questions immediately come to mind that should have been answered by the City in more detail and explained better when the DEIR was recirculated.

1) What Information Came to Light that Necessitated the Recirculation of the Portion of the Village Farms Davis DEIR?, and

2) Is this Process Proper and Legally Compliant with CEQA and State Regulations Regarding Public Noticing and Subsequent Consideration by the Planning Commission and the City Council?

The following discussion addresses these questions.
(more…)

December 6, 2025
Response to Bob Dunning, re: the nine misconceptions about Prop 50

By Roberta Millstein

Bob Dunning featured my “Nine misconceptions about Prop 50” in a recent Substack article, here (requires a paid subscription to see the whole thing). I appreciate the shoutout to the Davisite and my article and his spreading the word about the nine Prop 50 misconceptions with wit and humor.

Here is my response to what Bob says about the first misconception, which I also left as a comment on his page:

I should clarify the first misconception a bit more. I saw, on more than one occasion, people having the temerity (SAT word) to say that Texas was constitutionally required to redraw its districts because they were racially biased. Of course the reality is that it is the new, gerrymandered districts are the ones that hurt minority voter representation in Texas.

(The origin of this misconception is the DOJ itself, who claimed that four districts had been impermissibly created using race. This was such a howler of an excuse that even Texas stopped using it, but the misconception persists out in social media — details here.)

And not to blab on, but although you’re [i.e., Bob is] right that Trump would surely have leaned hard on Texans if they hadn’t done what he wanted, it’s people like the Texas Democrats, who risked arrest and their jobs to hold up the gerrymandering vote, that we really need right now. People who are willing to stand up to bullies.

October 29, 2025
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…)

October 20, 2025
Re-sponse-buttal to post “Antisemitism and Trump Defunding UC”

The primary message of the recent blog essay "Antisemitism and Trump Defunding UC" portends to be anti-Jew bigotry (some call it ‘antisemitism’), but the essay quickly dilutes the subject by layering it beneath crushing layers of unrelated progressive causes. The result is that the central issue, real and rising hostility toward Jews, gets blurred into a cacophony of left-leaning background noise.

Omissions are glaringly obvious. There is no mention of Hamas, no recognition of the ongoing subtle-yet-very-real ‘not-quite-welcome’ that many Jewish students endure on campuses, and of course no reference to the illegal and disgusting demonstration of May 2nd, 2025 where 100%-masked persons shouted with a bullhorn inside the UCD Coffehouse: “We don’t want no two state, we want all the ’48,” an explicit call to end Israel’s existence. Is the subject really anti-Jew bigotry or is the author, like Gary May, hoping such glaringly anti-Jew events are normalized by pretending they didn’t happen?

The assertion that “Jews do best in pluralistic democracies” is presented without evidence. Ask French Jews emigrating to Israel, or British Jews living under constant security advisories, how well pluralism protects them. History shows that even the most tolerant societies can turn hostile with remarkable speed. To present pluralism as a guarantee of Jewish flourishing is not analysis, it is wishful thinking. The cherry on top of the wishing-thinking sundae is the author’s:

“We affirm that as Jews we support diversity and the right to freedom of inquiry and dissent, as we ourselves so long dissented in Christian and Muslim religious-majority-societies where we have lived.”

Um . . . first of all, Jews are losing this ideal in places like Davis and UC Davis (unless they disavow Israel as a country). Second, Jews not only dissented in Christian and Muslim religious-majority-societies, they were all-too-often killed or expelled from them. Since October 7th, I’ve been in a deep-dive into Jewish history. The number of events in which Jews are killed in 4, 5, even six-figure-mortality events is staggering.

The idea that anti-Jew hatred must always be fought “along with” other forms of intolerance sounds noble, but in practice it often ensures Jewish issues are sidelined. Jewish concerns are routinely diluted into broader coalitions that rarely prioritize them. That is not solidarity, it is avoidance dressed in moral language. And DEI is a Jew’s worst enemy, as we are classified simultaneously as victims and oppressors by the bigots, for whatever best fits the Jew-hating narrative.

The “Project Esther” section undercuts the seriousness of the topic with a forced biblical pun and seems more about anti-Trump sentiment than concern for the Jewish Community. Equating Trump with Ahasuerus, reduced to a “fickle ruler swayed by a pretty girl,” trivializes the discussion. Assigning blame to Christians for drafting the plan while dismissing Jewish voices that support it avoids the real question – and that question is, “do Jews face immediate and escalating threats today?”. The evidence is clear that anti-Jew bigotry, racism, and hatred are proliferating online, on campuses, and in street protests. None of that is being driven by strategy memos in Washington.

As evidence for the online hate, check out the growing and ever-emboldened anti-Jew bigots on YouTube: Rathbone deBuys, Jen Perelman, Peter Hager, Katie Halper, Rania Khalek, Krystal Ball, Kyle Kulinski, Sam Seder, Abby Martin, Norm Finklestein, Cenk Yunger, Ana Kasparian, Glenn Greenwald, Jimmy Dore, Kim Iversen, Amy Goodman, Max Blumenthal and many, many more. A lot of these YouTuber media personalities are Jews themselves — antizionist Jews. They spew hate like daggers from their eyes, yet couch the hate in the concept of ‘antizionism’, as if that is an excuse, and bath themselves in their own self-deluded superior morality.

There was virtually none of this vitriol – even from a good number of these same personalities – until October 7th, 2023. But even if they hide behind ‘antizionism’, one need only look at the comment sections of their YouTube vids: hundreds to thousands of Jew-hating comments, most not even trying to hide behind antizionism. Where any of these people decent human beings, each would condemn the haters in their own comment sections — but they are all silent.

With the backdrop of this ever-increasing sea of anti-Jew bigotry, presenting this serious subject in an essay splattered with liberal causes that many people — including many Jews — would agree with — only dilutes the seriousness of anti-Jew rhetoric that the real Jewish Community knows is being baked ever-deeper into the American psyche. And as a participant, you don’t even know it’s happening within you.

This is how it starts.

August 31, 2025
Fight fire with fire

The change in voting districts would only be temporary; the stakes are too high not to level the playing field

By Roberta Millstein

As Californians, we are used to having little say in national politics. But now Proposition 50, "The Election Rigging Response Act," will be on the ballot this November. This is our chance to really make a difference — to stand up for our democracy. And as a largely liberal city, we Davisites have the opportunity to turn out in force.

Donald Trump asked Texas to rig its election maps to gain more Republican seats in the House, and Texas readily complied. Prop 50 is California's response to this rigging attempt. It would redraw our maps so as to counter Texas's, easing the path for more Democratic representation in the House than we currently have.

Importantly, this change to our maps would only be temporary. The maps expire in 2030, at which point the California Redistricting Commission’s authority to draw congressional districts would be restored.

We've seen the dire attacks on our democracy: the deployment of armed national guards in our cities, the erosion of checks and balances, the decimation of due process, retaliation against Trump's critics and perceived enemies, interference in the governance of higher education, erratic foreign policy with regard to tariffs and our longstanding friends, defunding of scientific and medical research, and more. The stakes could not be higher.

Some worry about the precedent that this sets for the future — that California will return to the bad old days of gerrymandering on a permanent basis. Should we be so lucky to have a functioning democracy in 2030, I am sure we can keep our independent redistricting, just as we did before. And again, the districts created by Prop 50 will automatically expire in 2030.

The situation is desperate. We must fight fire with fire. Vote "yes" on Prop 50.

Information for how to get involved in the campaign, including donating, is here: https://stopelectionrigging.com.

[A slightly shorter version of this letter appeared in the Davis Enterprise].

August 27, 2025
Supporting Sensible Security at the Davis Food Co-op (Counter Petition – sign it!)

Roberta Millstein is correct that the COOP should have timely sent an email, perhaps with the text from the sign out in front of the store (see below).

However, the text with the petition calling to remove the guards drifts into anti-cop and demilitarization rhetoric that is far-far-left even for the average COOP shopper. The statement "Security personnel in military-style equipment . . . creates the perception of shopping as a criminal act and makes the store feel like a space under occupation." is extreme.

Below is link to a counter-petition, thanking COOP management for their leadership on this matter. Importantly, this petition refers to the guard as a guard (not a militarized occupation), this petition makes no list of demands, and this petition makes no threat of a boycott. Choose the petition that fits your thoughts/opinion and sign one of them. The link to the text and to sign the petition are here:

https://chng.it/jMmWXHDtdh

ENHANCED SECURITY MEASURES
AT THE DAVIS FOOD CO-OP

As many of you have noticed, the retail environment has changed significantly in the past year. Several staff members have expressed concern about safety and the increase in theft incidents in the store. Management has stepped up to become mitigators and although we are grateful for their leadership, it is not sustainable and our priority is safety. Many Members have also expressed their concerns about the changing environment. The overall sentiment is that the Co-op is losing its welcoming and safe atmosphere.

We have done our best to mitigate the increased activity, however, it is becoming a bigger task than we have capacity and at times, training for.
Therefore, after careful consideration, a third-party security company will be engaged to enhance the safety and security of staff, customers, and assets.

This change may feel different to some members who may not be aware of the situations that have been discreetly addressed. However, this partnership will help create a more secure environment for everyone.

The selected company is highly recommended by Sacramento Natural Foods Co-op. Additionally, the owner is a member of SNFC and is committed to incorporating the Davis Food Co-op's policies and values into how their team will engage with the community and handle situations involving theft or disturbances.

This measure is essential to ensure that the Co-op remains a safe and welcoming space for all members, staff, and shoppers. We appreciate your understanding and support as this important change is implemented.

Cooperatively,
Laura Sanchez, General Manager

August 26, 2025
Petition to end the security guards at the Davis Food Co-op

By Roberta Millstein

The Davis Food Co-op now has security guards.

How those security guards are dressed and armed and why they are there is the subject of some dispute — anyone interested in the variety of opinions on this subject can read the hundreds of comments I accidentally generated when I shared a picture of some sidewalk chalk concerning the guards (the first I had heard of it) on NextDoor. There you can also read a variety of opinions about whether the guards are a good idea or not, count the number of reactions, etc. Let's just say it was a classic NextDoor post. Trying to look at the positives, it at least provided a platform for people to share their opinions and impressions.

But that is not the point of this post. The point of this post is to share a petition about the security guards, located here: https://www.change.org/p/end-the-militarized-security-presence-at-our-davis-food-co-op. I have no involvement in creation of the petition, but whoever wrote it did a beautiful job. It is well-written and thoughtful.

I have signed, and I urge others to sign as well. Importantly, the petition not only calls for eliminating the security guards (and explains why) but also calls for the Management and Board of Directors of the Co-op to work creatively with the community — as member-owners of the Co-op — to find alternatives to deal with the recent challenges that the Co-op has had.

It is, after all, supposed to be a Co-op and not a just another business, just another grocery store.

One thing that quickly became clear is how badly the Co-op bungled this. At a minimum, it should have used its email newsletter to let people know about the problems and how they were thinking of handling them. That would have saved a lot of fear, anger, and frustration on all sides. In fact, they still haven't sent out an email like this, instead putting up a sandwich board in front of the entrance with a relatively brief explanation.

Davis Food Co-op, let's work together. Community, let's urge them to do so. Again, the petition is here.

August 26, 2025
Tree Budget Cuts have made Parks, Bikeways Streets and Front yards less safe

By Alan ‘Lorax” Hirsch

Tuesday item 7 before council is the first public discussion about the up-to-now hidden part of city structural deficit; the underfunding of tree pruning/sustainability program. This underfunding has not only made our parks, bikeways and streets less safe, but also added to our structural deficit by ballooning city’s insurance premiums. This is on top of our city’s financial deficit issues that Elaine Roberts Musser and Dan Carlson have written about so elegantly on this blog and elsewhere.

+++

What if your long time HMO revealed they had- without your knowledge – reduced the dose of your heart medication by 50% to cut costs- and done this secretly for over 12 years.

That is what the city’s memo on Trees for Tuesday 8/19 council packet revealed; they state instead of a 7-year safety pruning cycle for front yard street and park tree they had in fact a longer a 12–14-year cycle.

This is consistent with fact a woman died in Slide Hill Park in 2021 by a tree the city had neglected to inspect and prune. The city staff knew this funding shortfall for years (the previous Arbor would tell anyone) but this fact only seems to have been admitted to the public by staff and council now the previous city manager has moved on.

But this mis where we are now: think of the embarrassment if HMO disclose an increased cost of malpractice insurance now exceed the saving from those medicine dosage cuts? In city’s case, its liability insurance increase– due to the $24 million dollar Slide Hill Park tree death settlement.

But this is part of a larger picture about the strategic mismanagement of the city tree program, as I will describe below.

(more…)

August 19, 2025