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

Category: Trustworthiness

  • Rebuttal to Village Farms Flood Control Claims

    By Rena Nayyar

    This is a response to a recent article by one of the Village Farms partners regarding the project’s proposed flood control. The article makes the claim that Village Farms will be “better protected from flooding than most of Davis.” That claim is just marketing. The Village Farms EIR does not support this claim. Links to city documents are at https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/community-development/development-projects/village-farms-davis

    The article didn’t cite any sources showing a track record for their “sound, proven engineering design principles” that would be employed to reduce flood risk.  The “hundreds of pages of engineering analysis related to the impact of extreme storm events to the project…demonstrate that Village Farms Davis will be better protected against flooding” is exaggerated as these involve modeling based on assumptions and not actual plans for how this will be implemented. In fact, the flood and stormwater strategy is still being assembled piecemeal, after the circulation of the Draft EIR.  It is meaningless for them to praise the merits of a plan in flux. Village Farms is not a simple “raise the pads” project. It relies on a complex coordinated stormwater and grading strategy across a huge site in a flat floodplain basin with known downstream flooding problems. In that kind of environment, there are lots of failure scenarios. This problem requires completed project level planning that has not yet been done. 

    In the Final EIR response to comments on page 2-10,  liners are being proposed for Channel A to try to prevent the contaminated groundwater including PFAS “forever chemicals”  from mixing with the Channel A runoff water. When the City starts talking about Channel A “liners” and isolation measures to prevent stormwater from interacting with groundwater– those are major changes. This is a sign that the system is being engineered around problems that were not resolved when the public reviewed the Draft EIR. 

    Since the flood plan is so incomplete and not yet approved, the project’s flood story may require future changes, for example in maps (Final EIR page 3-12).  On page 4-83 the Final EIR says that because the drainage patterns of the area will change, “a design-level drainage report shall be submitted to the City …for review and approval” when the first tentative subdivision map is submitted.  Similarly, the response to Comment 217-54, page 2-996 says
    “the preparation of a final Stormwater Control Plan, …cannot be prepared at this time ” and “the appropriate time for a Stormwater Control Plan will be when a tentative subdivision map has been prepared”. 

    (more…)

  • No Certification of the Village Farms EIR  

    By Eileen M. Samitz

    The City Council will soon be making a decision with serious consequences of whether to certify the Village Farms EIR. It is critical that they deny certification. This EIR is seriously inadequate and flawed, and certifying it would expose the City to liability while surrendering the City’s leverage to correct course on this disastrous project.

    Background

    A similar version of Village Farms, Covell Village, was rejected by Davis voters 60:40 in 2005 for many of the same reasons this project and its EIR must be rejected now. The developer, John Whitcombe (Tandem Properties partner) bought the 386-acre parcel in bankruptcy due to the many obstacles making it impractical to develop (originally costing $11 million) for a mere $3.2 million. The site has long been handicapped by an enormous floodplain, unmitigable traffic, access issues, extraordinary infrastructure costs, and toxics from the adjacent unlined Old City Landfill and Sewage Treatment Plant.

    Aberrant, Chaotic, Rushed Process

    The Village Farms “process” has been aberrant. The developer demanded that the City push his project ahead of other projects being processed. The City caved and has been accommodating him ever since, to the detriment of the community. The apparent objective has been to rush this “legacy” project onto the ballot, but the EIR and key documents still contain a plethora of “to be determined,” and “if feasible” language.

    Public meetings were rushed through the holidays, when many residents were unavailable to comment. In backwards order, the City Council held a workshop the day before the Planning Commission was asked to recommend certification of a Final EIR that did not yet exist. Never in Davis’s history has the Planning Commission been asked to recommend certification of an EIR before it was complete, yet staff pressured for that recommendation anyway. That’s not transparency, it’s corner‑cutting. The City has prioritized a June 2026 ballot timeline over the community’s right to a fair, thorough CEQA process.

    Village Farms: Serious Impacts, Costs, and EIR Inadequacies

    Massive traffic

    Village Farms would add at least 15,415 car trips PER DAY, from 1,800 housing units on the 498‑acre site, the largest residential project ever proposed in Davis. This is likely an underestimation because it assumes substantial public transit use. Covell Boulevard and Pole Line Road, already heavily impacted, would be gridlock, degrading streets to Level of Service “F”. Cut-through traffic would impact many neighborhoods of cars trying to avoid this congestion.

    (more…)

  • Village Farms will actually be better protected against future flooding than much of Davis

    By Doug Buzbee

    In a recent Op-Ed in the Enterprise (“Commentary: Why a planning commissioner voted no on Village Farms, Jan 2, 2026” [or see longer version on the Davisite here]), Greg Rowe stated he opposed the Village Farms Davis project claiming the site had excessive flood risks.

    He stated that because part of the proposed project site is currently in a 100-year Flood Zone as mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and because climate change will bring more extreme weather events in the future, we simply should not build anything at all in that part of the project.

    While flood risks are real and climate concerns are valid, Mr. Rowe’s comments ignore the fact that proven engineering solutions will be implemented at Village Farms Davis to remove it from the mapped 100-year flood zone, and furthermore, provide protection against a more severe 200-year flood event.

    Village Farms Davis is actually designed to meet higher flood protection standards than significant portions of the rest of Davis, including many older neighborhoods developed before modern flood-protection standards, and over 400 acres within the city limits that still remain within the 100-year flood plain – including swaths of residential West and Central Davis.

    Let me explain.

    (more…)

  • “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/

  • 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.

  • 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…)

  • 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.

  • 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…)

  • Re-sponse-buttal to post “Antisemitism and Trump Defunding UC”

    Jews-are-concerned-about-anti-jew-hatred-but-the-arti (1)

    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.

    Jews-are-concerned-about-anti-jew-hatred-but-the-arti

    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.

    Jews-are-concerned-about-anti-jew-hatred-but-the-arti (2)

  • 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].