By Roberta Millstein
Yesterday, I posted the ballot arguments for and against Measure Q, which would increase Davis's current retail transactions and use tax from 1% to 2%. Here are the rebuttals to those arguments that will also appear on the November ballot. See the County's website (where these arguments are also posted) for more details: https://ace.yolocounty.gov/417/Measure-Q—City-of-Davis
Rebuttal to argument in favor of Measure Q:
By Roberta Millstein
This November, Davisites will vote on Measure Q:
To support essential City services, such as public safety and emergency response; crime prevention; pothole repair; parks, road, sidewalk, and bike path maintenance; and addressing homelessness, affordable housing, and climate change, shall the City of Davis's Ordinance be adopted establishing an additional 1¢ sales tax providing approximately $11,000,000 annually for general government use until repealed by the voters, subject to annual audits, public disclosure of all spending and with all funds staying local?
This would increase Davis's current retail transactions and use tax from 1% to 2%. To pass, a majority (50% + 1) of the votes cast by City of Davis voters must approve the measure. As implied by the text above, the tax has no automatic sunset date; it will be in effect until repealed by voters.
Further details are available at the County's website: https://ace.yolocounty.gov/417/Measure-Q—City-of-Davis
Here is the argument in favor that will appear on the ballot:
Missing funds may continue to compromise transit
By Alan Hirsch
This is a report on the untalked about short falls in funding on I-80Yolo projects (plural), changes to the freeway from Dixon across the Sacramento River bridges for both US 50 and I-80. We are told the freeway here is in crisis (Like the climate crisis?)
Other have noted the short thinking of funding highway widening continue to “crowd out” funding of substantial transit improvements and that keeps us from addressing climate change and providing travel choices to driving.
For example, on I80 Yolo the total bill is a jaw dropping $745 million- 40 times the Yolobus budget.
Caltrans and freeway proponent all through the decision-making process on I80 have not make clear its full cost and long term impacts. They have instead levered an initial $86 Million federal grant – which we are told we dare not give back – to lock us into spending hundreds of million more. A sum that effectively crowd out investment in transit.
After years and years of anticipation and false promises of 'any day now' going back years, the 'Vanguard News Group' new website landed last week with a 'plop', like the sound of a human turd dropping on a San Francisco sidewalk. I honestly wanted it to be better, but it wasn't. In some ways it was worse. Why spend so much time to get it right, and then roll out something that is less functional and still has many of the problems of the old site?
The old site was bad and getting worse. It would load so slowly it would often time out. The site used massive RAM memory that would drain a laptop battery. The pages would skip while you were reading them, and then when you went back (if you could find where you were), the page would skip again.
Towards the end the site had some sort of virus/malware that would cause the page to spontaneously skip to unwanted ad pages, and it would replace the recent history with six steps of the same ad page address with the original address eliminated. Usually it was unwanted ads, or Bing, for some reason. A couple of times it was straight up porn. Without giving it in full the domain address it skipped to once began with "https://da.check-tl-ver-176-2.com/my-adult-video/ . . . ". This should have been stopped at once, but it happened 2-3 times.
One piece of good news, the new site hasn't spontaneously skipped to ads or porn or replaced the short-term history. It has, however, had the same loading issues and even said, "The site you are trying to reach is taking too much memory and is slowing down your browser. Would you like to leave?". It also still spontaneously skips text as it is trying to load text, and still does it again when you go back. Others have told me this was the worst part of the old site to them as well, and it's amazing DG rolled out the new site without fixing this.
Certain things about the new site are worse: It's too plain. While the old site had too much color, it would have been nice to have kept the old color scheme, just as borders and highlight, but it's just plain with no character. For some reason, the "Davis Vanguard" livery is replaced with "Vanguard News Group". Like so many things with the Vanguard, I'm sure this has some meaning to DG, but to the common person it's just confusing.
There is no ability to click on comments so you have to scroll through the whole article to reach them. Honestly, the so-called articles are so often dull and predictable and/or copied from elsewhere, so I'd often read the comments first or don't read the article at all. Having to scroll to comments, if there are any at all, which increasingly there are not, is just more than I feel like doing. In addition, there is no 'new comments' box, so you'd have to keep track of each article and keep clicking on it to see if anyone added a new comment. And again, that's more than me or most people are willing to do. And as people learn that no one knows they posted a new comment, they won't bother to post at all.
The banner at the top only hides one article at a time, and it moves at a weird rate, and it's too big and obscures to those not familiar that the most recent news is below. The articles are still repetitive crap on housing in Davis, how someone is going to sue on measure J, and on why cutting school costs actually costs money, and how more housing will save schools. And there are the usual copy articles on the evils of 'carceration' by the ACLU. And by the way, if you liked the ACLU of years ago, join F.I.R.E.. It's like the old ACLU without all the new utlra-progressive crap.
DG say: "The website highlights the various segments of the Vanguard. My focus will continue to be heavily on Davis issues and multiple commentaries each week." Let me guess: Recycled crap about housing in Davis, how someone is going to sue on measure J, on why cutting school costs actually costs money, and how more housing will save schools.
DG say: "we now have a team member who is working exclusively on grants which we see as part of the long-term financial sustainability for the Vanguard." It's good to have a team member doing this, so they can get grants that will partially cover their own salary :-| And bye bye Sparkplug Foundation: you exhibit poor judgement.
KO say: "I remember the days when there would be 50 comments by 9am. There were robust conversations. The fact now that comments often sit in the moderation queue for hours kills any chance of that ever happening again." Yup.
KO say: "Where are the several conservative commenters that used to post? Having diverse views used to generate more commenting. I thought progressives were supposed to be all about diversity." Diversity of skin color, not diversity of ideas.
KO say: "What you need are the Alan Millers, Ron Oertels, SOD’s and Frankly’s to return." Not to mention Rik Keller, that spacey woman who talked about space aliens, and that drunkard musician who doxxed RO with the global coordinates of his house.
And yes, bringing back Alan C. Miller would be the savior of the Vanguard. He is more interesting then the entire blog and its staff combined and can bring you joy and eternal life. Alan C. Miller says: "I am the resurrection and the life. He who believes in my will never die!" [Actually Alan C. Miller does not say that.]
But it is true that bringing back the robust community comments would bring more clicks and more eyes. Apparently that doesn't interest the Vanguard. Having developers, H.A.L.'s, useful idiots, startup foundations and civil-rights lawyers fund the thing is all that matters in the new business model, apparently, and community engagement and discussion or even clicks really don't matter. Is that sustainable? Especially with a tax lawsuit to fight?
I would have gladly served as a site-tester for the new website, but no one asked me. Apparently DG never even had a normal person look at it, as surely they would have said, "Dude . . . "
Well, DG, your savior awaits. DG deep down knows I am the savior, that my comments are the best, most humorous, and most interesting and will save all blogs whom I touch. DG knows my terms. DG knows the real problem. But until he deals with it . . .
By Alan Hirsch, Davis Lorax
The controversial city council plan for commission consolidation and refocus is going into effect this summer. This is a rare opportunity for reform I hope is not missed.
Let us begin by restating the overarching goals council set forward in this reform:
Davis Council Resolution 24-079 May 2024
Guiding Principle for New Commission Structure
. City Commissions should act at all times with the understanding that guiding principles are at the core of their work.
The first meeting of the new Climate and Environmental Justice Commission on 7/22 Monday is precedent setting as it can begin to put implementation meat on the bone of these principles by:
As a first step in embracing council principles for this reorganization, I suggest the commission’s pass a resolution to establish these ground rules for operation
Your host: Alan C. "Al" Miller
Pictured: an extreme version of himself
By Elaine Roberts Musser
I was appalled with City Council’s response to the apprehension many expressed at the City Council meeting on June 4 about the proposed midterm city budget and 1% sales tax increase. Concerned citizens were gaslighted, accused of seeking revenge for the commission mergers and engaging in hyperbole. (Gaslighting in this context is manipulating citizens into questioning their own perception of reality to avoid accountability for questionable behavior.)
The fact of the matter is we only pointed out things the Finance & Budget Commission would’ve zeroed in on, were it still in existence (but hasn’t been for almost a year). But as we know, the current City Council (minus Councilmember Neville) voted to eliminate this commission in favor of a more generic Fiscal Commission that has not yet met, now manned with new commissioners who are mostly commission inexperienced.
Here are the problems we highlighted:
In other words, the City Council wants us to approve a 1% sales tax increase, in essence a blank check with virtually no accountability, insisting we trust them to make responsible decisions. Their conduct has hardly inspired confidence!
When people fought decades ago to save land from development, forever, do you believe what they were really fighting for was to save the land from development 'forever, or until there was pressure to build housing, whichever comes first' ?
It's June, and the City of Davis is in mourning. People are visiting the Davis Cemetery to visit our fallen committees. To celebrate this misery, Alan C. Miller sang "Committee Rise, Committee Set" at the City Council meeting last night, sung to the tune of "Sunrise, Sunset" from Fiddler on the Roof. Mr. Miller was brought to tears by his own performance.
This can be viewed at this link: https://davis.granicus.com/player/clip/1703?view_id=6&redirect=true
At this time signature: 38:10
Here's the lyrics from Tuesday night's (June 4th) council meeting:
To be Discussed and Possibly Decided at Tuesday, June 4th Davis Council Meeting
By Scott Steward
Right when Davis is in full graduation mode – the City is to consider items that have everything to do with how free you are to express your views without being recorded and traced, with or without your knowledge. Is this servail increasing our safety or providing more tools that have to be maintained and that have to find an excuse to exist?
Military equipment in a civil city? Where Davis has been resistant, other communities are less so, and the armaments that our police department does not have, it can leave them wondering if they have to borrow the highest gauge shielding and firearms. Or is that true? Is keeping the peace more about relationships and not over-arming to defend against community breakdowns that erupt in bizarre and tragic ways? Ways that no shielding can defend. A teenager hidden in a house, a gun owner deciding he does not like a police officer, a gun owner whose roommate does not suspect he has lost it. Or a knife held by a young man whose mind and body go feral?
Disarming those whose weapons are for organized crime and premeditated harm, this is part of peacekeeping, and how that can happen safely for the police officers is to be heard and understood. What are the tradeoffs? What is necessary, and what is contributing to escalation?
Item 5 (7:15) – agenda is here: https://documents.cityofdavis.org/Media/Default/Documents/PDF/CityCouncil/CouncilMeetings/Agendas/2024/2024-06-04/City-Council-Agenda-06-04-24.pdf
Davisite 