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

  • Followup on Vaitla/Chapman Commission Proposal

    By Elaine Roberts Musser
     
    On the Davis commission issue that was proposed by Mayor Chapman and Councilmember Vaitla, in which a commission must first ask permission of the City Council to put a commission-initiated task on their agenda, the bad news is the proposal passed 5-0. The good news is Councilmembers Partida and Neville will review the results of this proposal over the next year and make any necessary tweaks to it. Both of them saw major flaws in this proposal, but saw that three votes were going to approve (Chapman, Vaitla, Arnold), notwithstanding the many problems in the proposal. Apparently Mayor Chapman said he is stepping back from the whole thing because of all the criticism he received. He is leaving it to the two women on the City Council to take the fallout from this approved proposal.
     
    What is important to note is that the worst parts of the original proposal were removed, as were some elements of the ever-evolving/vague proposal. That was as a direct result of all the criticism, according to Vaitla & Chapman. (6 citizens spoke against the proposal at the City Council meeting, no one spoke in favor; several letters went to City Council in opposition.) A single council member cannot veto a commission agenda item, which was a clear violation of the Brown Act. Informational or educational items can still be put on a commission agenda without permission of City Council. Agenda items to be reviewed by the City Council will be put on the consent calendar at the next City Council meeting, to avoid lengthy delays. But make no mistake, the proposal micromanages commissions in a way that makes it difficult for them to represent their constituencies. Stay tuned for further developments!
     

  • Vaitla/Chapman Commission Proposal

    The following letter from Dan Carson and Elaine Roberts Musser was sent to the Davisite this morning for posting.

    Dear Davis City Councilmembers and Commissioners,

    As you know, Agenda Item 06-B on the Dec. 3, 2024 City Council agenda presents the latest proposal by Mayor Chapman and Councilmember Vaitla to control how items are placed on city commission agendas. It is, in our view, an improvement over prior versions of their proposal, in that it creates fewer opportunities for violations of the state’s landmark open meeting law, the Brown Act. However, it does not completely take care of that problem, and it contains other crucial flaws. In particular, this proposed change would improperly and unwisely attempt to micromanage deliberations of the corps of volunteer experts on our city commissions. They have long provided invaluable expertise and perspective free of charge for the benefit of our citizens.

    Accordingly, we again urge the full City Council to reject this proposal and adopt an alternative approach we outline at the end of this letter. An approach that we believe would foster a sense of community and collaboration between the Council and its commissions, rather than one that will come across as controlling and condescending.

    Unfortunately, this continually-evolving and still-vague proposal was publicly released by Mayor Chapman and Councilmember Vaitla on the city’s website just before the long Thanksgiving holiday weekend was beginning. It is likely that many affected commissioners are unaware of this new proposal. 

    But we note that prior versions of this plan were roundly rejected by most of the commissioners who were asked to review it during a series of public hearings held in September, and with good reason.  As detailed in a prior message we shared with you, one commissioner after another voiced their concern the proposal would result in delays that would stifle their ability to conduct the public’s business and render them unable to provide the very advice the council assigned them to provide.  Commissions that meet less frequently could have their ideas sidetracked for months. They would be less likely to bring their ideas forward.  Proposals that were time-sensitive in nature, such as consideration of city budget issues, would die by default.

    (more…)

  • On KDRT: Deciding what Davis citizen commissions should talk about

    By Dan Carson

    On Monday, Davis community radio station KDRT began airing an half-hour radio program by local journalist Bill Buchanan examining a proposal by Davis Mayor Josh Chapman and Councilmember Bapu Vaitla to change the current authority that city commissions have to set their own agenda and send proposals forward to the council for its consideration.   Elaine Roberts Musser and I have publicly called for the proposal to be rejected because it is neither legal nor good government.

    Buchanan says, “This week’s subject is narrow, but contains a question worth considering. It involves one of the ways that ideas emerge and ultimately shape public life in Davis. This specific path involves the Davis citizen commissions that advise the City Council on subjects including city spending, planning, police accountability, and several other areas.”

    The show will air periodically on KDRT over a two-week period. A link to Buchanan's description of the show and a recording that can be heard at any time can be found below:

    https://kdrt.org/audio/davisville-nov-11-2024-deciding-what-davis-citizen-commissions-should-talk-about

    Please feel free to share this information with other Davis residents so that they can hear firsthand what is being said on both sides about this controversial proposal that we fear will damage an important aspect of Davis democracy, its system of volunteer experts who serve on city commissions.

  • Commissions Pushing Back on Chapman-Vaitla Plan

    By Dan Carson and Elaine Roberts Musser

    This fall, Davis Mayor Josh Chapman and Councilmember Bapu Vaitla asked our city commissioners for feedback on a proposal they offered for “clarification of how items are placed on a commission meeting agenda.” Their plan, which may come before council in the coming weeks, would empower even a single councilmember to sidetrack any commission-initiated proposal he or she didn’t like, for any reason.

    Commissioners pushed back against the proposal in a recent series of commission hearings:

    David Sandino, Fiscal Commission: “The danger of this is [it] is pretty bureaucratic … I would personally be comfortable with the chairperson working with staff to craft agendas, and not have to have additional review by a council subcommittee or a council liaison…It seems to me too many cooks in the kitchen… I’d hate to stifle commission thought and initiative because you had a few major examples that have ruffled some feathers.”

    Mitchell Marubayashi, Fiscal Commission: “I don't really understand… the problem that this is solving…”

    John Reuter, Climate & Environmental Justice Commission: “This is something the whole city is going to have to live with… If someone has to check on every agenda item, this is a logistics nightmare…an outrageous effort and waste of time…. I think we should be allowed to set [our] own agenda… If you go down that flow chart…where does the commission’s point of view come in?”

    (more…)

  • This Doubling of the Local Sales Tax – It’s All a Lie! – Vote NO on Measure Q! ———- [Al’s Corner – November ’24]

    622ad996-fc34-43cc-928a-94dc8cecf5beToday's article is a video against Measure Q.  This was going to be my testimony before the Davis City Council, but they didn't meet last week.  Or the week before that.  Or next week.  What do they think this is, summer break? 

     

     

     

    Here's the three-minute video:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2mXBTMCgRo

    Of course, as always at Al's Corner, other subjects welcome!  😉

    Davis Citizen  (sung to the tune of "Witchita Lineman" by Glen Campbell)

    I am a citizen of Davis
    And I bike the main roads
    Searching in the street for another pah-ah-ot hole

    I hear far-lefties call “more taxes!”
    I can hear the fire fighters whine
    They say the City budget
    Is still on the line!

    You say we have to save the planet
    Cuz it don't look like rain
    And the more we subsidize housing
    The more the budget won't stand the strain

    You say you need Q more than want Q
    And you need Q for for all time
    But this doubling of the local sales tax
    Is all a lie!

    Vote NO on Measure Q, Mildred!

     

    (Original Glen Campbell version:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q8P_xTBpAcY )

  • The City Council Used Misleading Comparisons of Compensation from Other Cities to Award Excessive Salary Increases to Davis City Employees

    Part 2 – Recent Salary Increases to the Firefighters

    By the No on Measure Q Campaign

    Introduction

    We recently reported that the City of Davis used flawed and misleading data to award excessive compensation increase to the City Manger. (See https://newdavisite.wordpress.com/2024/10/27/the-city-council-used-misleading-comparisons-of-compensation-from-other-cities-to-award-excessive-sa/). They did so by using compensation data from 12 regional cities against which to compare the Davis City Manager's compensation. Claiming this data showed our City Manager was under-compensated, in July of 2024 the Davis City Council awarded him a 2% annual salary increase retroactive to January 1 of this year, an annual 3.0% bonus retroactive for 2023 and another 3% bonus for the uncompleted 2024 year. 

    However, in that article we showed that if the comparative compensation data from only 6 regional cities of comparable size were otherwise used, our City Manager earned between 3% and 30% greater than the City Managers of any of those six comparable-sized cities in 2023 – and this was before the Council awarded bonuses to our City Manager for both 2023 and 2024.

    In May, 2024 the Davis City Council similarly approved a 6.0% increase in base salary for all firefighters retroactive to July 1, 2023. The ostensible reason given for the salary increase was that the total compensation for the average Firefighter II position was 6.0% LESS than the median total compensation earned by Firefighter II-equivalent positions in twelve regional cities and fire protection agencies; and thus a raise to ALL firefighters was appropriate to keep their compensation competitive. However, the Council again based their analysis on misleading data.

    Unfortunately, similar to the comparative analysis of compensation of our City Manager, the Davis Firefighter II compensation was also compared to that in ten purportedly “comparable” local cities and two fire protection agencies in the region.  However, many of those ten cities are much larger than Davis, and include Sacramento (population of 525,000), Roseville (population 190,000), and Fairfield (population 119, 000).  Davis’ population is only about 67,000.

    An Alternative Fair Comparison with Comparable-Sized Cities

    (more…)

  • The City Council Used Misleading Comparisons of Compensation from Other Cities to Award Excessive Salary Increases to Davis City Employees

    Part 1 – Recent Salary Increases to the City Manager

    By the No on Measure Q Campaign

    Introduction

    On July 9, 2024 the Davis City Council approved a 2.0% increase in base salary for the City Manager, Mike Webb. This salary increase was made retroactive to January 9 of this year. He was also awarded a retroactive bonus of 3.0% for 2023 and another 3.0% bonus for 2024.

    The ostensible reason given for the 2.0% raise was that Mr. Webb’s 2023 salary was 2.8% LESS than the median salary earned by City Managers in nearby cities, and thus a raise was appropriate to keep Mr. Webb’s salary competitive. However, the Council based the City Manager’s salary increase on misleading data.

    Mr. Webb’s salary was compared with City Managers in twelve purportedly “comparable” local cities in the region.  However, half of those 12 cities are much larger than Davis, and include Sacramento (population of 525,000), Roseville (population 190,000), and Fairfield (population 119, 000).  Davis’ population is only about 67,000.

    An Alternative Fair Comparison with Comparable-Sized Cities

    (more…)

  • Dillan Horton notes Biased Endorsement Process from Davis Firefighters Local 3494

    (From press release) Throughout the campaign cycle, Dillan’s team arranged four meetings with the leadership of Davis Firefighters Local 3494. During these meetings, union leaders expressed their operations were in disarray as a result of the sudden departure of their longtime past president. Notably, there was neither a formal interview with union members nor a questionnaire for candidates, standard practice for union endorsements. If the candidates were properly interviewed and assessed, it would have revealed that Linda Deos, the endorsed candidate, has no substantial record of standing up for the right to organize, and has not presented serious plans for addressing the persistent labor rights issues that exist in Davis.

    When 3494’s new leadership called the campaign to communicate their endorsement decision, they shared that union leadership already promised it to Linda in a “backroom deal” months prior. This undermined the endorsement process, which should be based on thorough evaluation. This diversion sidelined Dillan, the candidate who’s worked in solidarity with unions his entire adult life, for a candidate who’s most extensive labor experience is working as an attorney for the state correctional officers union to represent prison guards accused of wrongdoing.

    As someone whose entire adult life has involved solidarity with organized labor, Dillan finds the sloppy & blatantly biased engagement in this council election troubling. It undermines the interests of 3494 members, and betrays the interests of the broader labor movement.

  • Vote to Heal a Divided Davis

    Preface to thinking about Measure Q Tax and council election

    2 map housing along freeway

    By Alan Hirsch   

    I write this having attended more City Council and Commission meetings than all current council members, and all but a few community members.

    For years now, I have seen city government fail to harness our community’s education and social capital wealth since the failure of the 2014 R&D Business Park initiative.  The community has not leveraged its charmed geography—a unique rural area highly accessible via I-80 & rail service between the Bay Area & State Capitol. And proximity to UC Davis, a major research university that brings billions in grant dollars to our community. We are ideally located to incubate a wealth of startups and attract businesses. This should be giving us a robust tax base and providing a rich offering of city services.

    Instead, we are failing. So, we now need to raise our sale taxes and we seem to have been forced to site new affordable housing next to the freeway, land that should have been used for new startups and businesses to build our city’s tax base.  I note council decided not to site housing on Russell at a redone Trader Joes Mall across from the University this year. And Community resistance to student housing on Russell Fields 6 year back, close to our downtown, forced students to live in dorms in West Village 1 mile from our downtown shopping area- where they don’t feed out sales tax base.

    It used to be noted at council meetings that Davis’s greatest asset is its involved and educated residents. No longer. Instead, city staff and council, though their actions, indicate they don’t believe this anymore. It used to be residents could express their insight and expertise by being involved in an independent city commission.  Full commissions used to bring up new ideas, and even vote to disagree with the council, even over ballot measures. No more.  People volunteering for commissions are told by staff that their role is to serve the current council’s policy, even though this contradicts the not-yet-updated official Commission Handbook that recalls the old way: “Commissions are independent.”

    (more…)

  • Follow the Money!

    Four Davis City Council Members Accepted Large Campaign Contributions from the Firefighters Union and its Members that Preceded Excessive Salary Increases

    By the No on Measure M Campaign Committee

    I. Large contributions were accepted by current Davis City Councilmembers’ campaign committees over 2 election cycles from firefighters and their union.

    All current Davis City Councilmembers, except Donna Neville, have accepted substantial bundled contributions from individual firefighters and Davis Firefighters Union Local 3494. Additionally, in Gloria Partida’s and Bapu Vaitla’s case, the firefighters’ union also printed and sent out a mailer for each of their campaigns, as well as door hangers. These door hangers were then distributed by firefighter volunteers on behalf of the campaigns in 2022.

    Following is a summary of the total contributions accepted by the 2020 campaigns of Will Arnold and Josh Chapman from the Davis Firefighters Union and their members, and by the 2022 campaigns of Gloria Partida and Bapu Vaitla. See Appendix A for a full detailed listing of the contributions as reported on the City of Davis’ and the California Secretary of State’s campaign finance  reporting portals.

    (more…)