By David Jacobin
Royal Guest Hotels is the greediest and most ruthless development group I have experienced in the town of Davis. Let me tell you a story of a group called Third Space Art Collective.
By David Jacobin
Royal Guest Hotels is the greediest and most ruthless development group I have experienced in the town of Davis. Let me tell you a story of a group called Third Space Art Collective.
The recent Davis Enterprise article about UCD’s 2018 Long Range Development Plan going to the Regents for approval on July 18 warrants rebuttal. UCD proclaims the LRDP builds on the success of the 2003 plan “…and charts ambitious sustainability and housing options…” But this statement ignores that the 2003 LRDP expected that 36% of total enrollment of 30,000 students would live on campus by 2015-16, but in reality UCD missed the mark by 1400 beds, with only 29% of the 3-quarter average of 32,663 students that year living on campus (most in freshman dorms which they had to vacate for sophomore year).
In addition, a Board of Regents student housing report issued in November 2002 expected UCD would house 38% of its students by 2012 (with a goal of 40% living on campus) but by 2015-16 only 29% lived on campus, translating to a shortfall exceeding 1800 beds. While UCD’s new housing goals seem ambitious, it obscures the fact that UCD has consistently surpassed enrollment projections while under-producing the housing needed meet the needs of its expanded enrollment. The previous Chancellor’s overly ambitious “2020 Initiative,” which aimed to boost enrollment by 5,000 more students than required by the Regents, significantly exacerbated the student housing shortage.
Last Tuesday, the subject of public comment procedures was on the City Council’s agenda. Incoming Mayor Brett Lee had proposed some potential changes such as limiting general public comment to 45 minutes, with remaining speakers coming back at the end of the meeting, and shortening individual public comment from three minutes to two and a half minutes.
The intention of the changes was potentially to try to expedite the meetings in the spirit of greater efficiency. However, there were a number of citizens’ emails sent to Council objecting to the proposed changes and around a dozen citizens testified, urging the Council not to make these changes. It was clear that there was a Council majority who wanted to try alternative methods to the proposed changes to manage public comment. These alternative methods, including use of the 1-,2-,3- minute method for public comment when there are many speakers (that is, encouraging commenters to speak for only one or two minutes, instead of the full three allowed, and giving those speakers priority in the queue), served as a great relief to many people whom expressed concern about the original proposals. But it was helpful for the issue to be discussed with the public, explaining the unintended consequences that would result from forcing people to return at the end of the Council meeting to testify, particularly when an item they wanted to comment on likely would have already been voted on.
Kern County Public Health Department has launched a new voluntary informational program for people and families dining at Kern County restaurants.
Restaurants can seek to qualify as 'Certified Healthy" if they meet several specific criteria including:
Here is the list of criteria that restaurants must follow to qualify for the Certified Healthy program. These can be met either as part of the regular menu or with a lite menu.
Check it out here!
When I was in college I drove tomato trucks during the summer to make money for the year. It’s one of those crazy jobs where you work sixteen-hour days, every day, for about 80 days.
At the time, I thought I was making good money – I wasn’t.
But the real hook was that you were working so much you just never had time to spend it – you ended up saving a big chunk of dough – even, if like me, you suck at saving money.
And that is huge for a college student.
It was just a miserable job.
I have always had a thing for jobs that pushed me beyond some limit.
I'm glad for Chris Jones' alternative vision. In my opinion, the process has been hijacked by special commercial interests, outside planners, the Planning Department and the City Council. Having attended two meetings, seems to me the community is being railroaded by the process, stirred up by the dream that downtown redevelopment that will cure Davis' ills, especially the economic "problems," and be the city of the future.
Though the process appears to be democratic and fully participatory, the outside consultants were rude, didn't answer questions honestly and without bias, and dismissed others...treating many participants as lacking the requisite "credentials" and education on planning to participate meaningfully. How many of our tax dollars are being spent on this process?
Yes, the town square concept described by Chris Jones has historical, traditional roots with major state institutions clustered around the square or central commons: church, school, administrative and judicial offices, financial institutions, etc. But let's be honest, cities all over the world are made up of neighborhoods that replicate the same concept on a smaller scale.
Here I offer another alternative. Why create a downtown that is a central place in the economic/social hierarchy? That's how we in Davis have always thought of the downtown - the "Main Street." In fact, after a few of us "saved" Central Park from being a three-tiered shopping mall, we created the first Core Area Task Force..maybe that was 1987 or 88 or 89. We have always had a very protective attitude toward the "core" and tried to ensure peripheral malls would not compete with the core.
The following letter was submitted by Todd Edelman to the Planning Commission for its meeting tonight, July 11, at 7 PM.
Dear Planning Commissioners,
First of all I would like to say that I consider it very unfortunate that the Downtown Plan Advisory Committee (DPAC) meeting is scheduled at the same time as the Planning Commission (PC) meeting. Tomorrow's Bicycling, Transportation and Street Safety (BTSSC) meeting has been cancelled, but - again - it was planned as simultaneous to that night's DPAC meeting.
Second - just so you know - the BTSSC is not apparently seeing this project. I am not clear why this is the case. Aside from their individual unique perspectives and goals, there is a welcome overlap in the scope of what the BTSSC and PC look at in regards to mobility. It seems that this will be missing from this evaluation. I write here on my own behalf.
JUMP down the page for my suggested SOLUTIONS
Nugget is by most accounts a great company that treats its employees well and offers great service and products (though so far the seeded watermelon on sale this year needs some help...). But the mobility profile for their retail locations bears no relation to our City's goals in our Council-approved Beyond Platinum bicycle plan from 2014: While the goal for bicycle trips for shopping is 30% by 2020, my multiple non-scientific visual surveys over the past 18 months at Nugget on E. Covell show a share between 2 and 4% at best. Even if a large, automobile-oriented market is informally considered to only be responsible for a 15% goal, this location only fulfills a fraction of it (and, by the way this 15% would need to be balanced by other destinations shooting for 45%!).
Dear Downtown Plan Advisory Committee,I would like share with you a video presentation I created outlining an alternative vision for public space in downtown Davis.I am submitting this video as comments on the previous workshop summary documents and in preparation for the workshops this week. I understand that the comment period is closed, but I was unable to summarize my comments in format provided.The presentation is extremely critical of the consultants’ “Plan A” to create an eventual square on third street. I outline a large number of intrinsic problems with this plan, including feasibility, cost, the selling off of viable public spaces to developers, poor design, lack of support for existing businesses among other obvious problems.
If you want to preserve your right to speak in general public comment at City Council meetings, come to the City Council meeting today (Tuesday, July 10) at 7:15 PM and express your concerns about the proposal to shunt some of general public comment to the very end of the meeting. Maybe you’ve never spoken at a Council meeting. Maybe you don’t think you would. But it’s exactly when our concerns are the greatest that we find ourselves doing things that we didn’t expect we’d do and when we most need to preserve our right to speak.
Although I’ve spoken at Council meetings a number of times, I don’t believe I’ve ever spoken at general public comment at the beginning of the meeting (exception: my first time when I didn’t understand how things worked). But I have heard others give general public comment. They speak of issues that the Council might not yet know about or has yet to take up and place on the agenda. Or they speak to items that are on the agenda, but for which they cannot stay to speak. They speak with passion and conviction. Maybe the issues aren’t important to me. But they are important to the speaker. In a democracy, all voices should be heard, even those we disagree with or those who speak about things that we ourselves do not care about, because when it’s our turn, we will want to be heard.
By Jon Li
The worst current example is the Downtown Plan “participatory workshop” process, where the expensive outside consultants DICTATE the new city policy as previously agreed to with city staff. City staff is determined to lock the future of the Davis Downtown on one particular course, and nothing else is to be considered, let alone discussed and evaluated. All the discussion is between the expensive outside consultants and city staff.
In the first Downtown Plan “participatory workshop,” the expensive outside consultants and city staff allowed 10 minutes of public discussion. While the public kept making points of difference from what the economic consultant defined as Davis economic reality, there was no time for discussion, because the “historic preservation” LECTURE was scheduled, and that is so important that the 20 people who wanted to discuss economic development were cut off.
Last October 16th, when Mike Webb laid out this absurd plan, I asked what if the public discussion isn’t good enough? Mike Webb was shocked that anyone would dare question a claim by the city manager. You, Mike Webb are a product of the Downtown Plan Process, which is all you know. Davis talks about design, even sustainability, as the traffic builds up at Richards, and the relationship with UCD remains at an all time low.
The city staff is trying to get away with what UCD is doing: pretend like you are going through a public engagement process so that it is approved without public evaluation.
The participation has been a reflection of the hideous excuse for outreach by the special consultant whose claim included that she went to Chico State so she knows Davis. The outreach postcard has print so small that you need a magnifying glass to find out what time the LECTURES on new Davis policy are. As far as the outside consultants and the city staff are concerned, it doesn’t matter if anybody comes to the events, they just need to claim to the state that there was a public process.
The city needs to talk about economic development. Not one person on city staff has a clue about economic development. Rather than hire someone, the city invented the title of business policy communicator, gossip. No one in the city staff could lead a discussion about economic development, which is what Davis needs.
The downtown is a product of the entire city economy. The problem is that the general plan only wants housing, so Davis is suburban, and only does housing design. There is nothing about economic development in the second Downtown Plan “participatory workshop” – it is all fantasyland design stuff that will never happen. A million dollars and a year wasted.
You should go to the second Downtown Plan “participatory workshop” Tuesday evening. Because the outside consultants are so important, the only time they have available to do the workshop opening presentation is the same time as the first meeting of the new Davis City Council.
Will ANY city staff be at the opening “participatory workshop” LECTURE? Will any member of the Davis City Council be there, even Lucas Frerichs who is the one who provided the political cover for this little adventure? The publicity was pathetic, and with UCD summer vacation and the college students mostly gone, no one is in town anyway. But it is even better to staff the fewer members of the public who even know the Downtown Plan process is happening.
Staff sold the city council a year ago on this Downtown Plan when the opponents to Trackside wanted the city to live within the design guidelines. This will override the guidelines, and then the city staff can go back to telling the city council what to do. There will be no other changes in the plan for the future of Davis.
The city staff prohibits public dialogue because they will lose what little domination they have over the city council’s agenda. Innovation and buy-in can only happen with public dialogue.
City Staff does what it wants to do, and it tells the City Council that is reality and they have to live with it, and then city staff parades around and if you question then they put “THE CITY COUNCIL” in your face and they do what they were going to do anyway. The City Council should figure out “policy governance.”
We are pleased to see our new city surveillance ordinance being implemented. Last Thursday night we saw the first staff reports on surveillance technologies being used in the city. As our first attempt as a city to lead the way in public disclosure of use of surveillance technologies, we want all parties to contribute to fully meeting the spirit and requirements of the ordinance. To that end, we offer both questions and suggestions regarding the Police Department staff reports.
By Colin Walsh
Yesterday Council Member Lucas Frerichs made an enthusiastic endorsement of an upcoming development project on his Facebook page and tagged every other member of City Council and several members of the Planning Commission. It was covered on the Davisite here.
Council Member Lucas Frerichs’s post declared the new project is “Coming soon!! Welcoming the new corporate headquarters…”
This morning, I learned of a new proposed Mace Ranch business park from a Facebook post from Councilmember Lucas Frerichs, a post that tagged the soon-to-be other four members of the Davis City Council (among other people). The proposal seems reasonable to me on its face in terms of its size, purpose, and location, although I reserve judgement until I have heard more about it. What shocked me, however, was Councilmember Frerichs’s proclamation that the project was “Coming soon!!” with “approval expected,” as captured in the screenshot at the beginning of this post.
I find this shocking because the proposal hasn’t even gone to the Planning Commission yet (as Councilmember Frerichs notes), nor has the City Council had an opportunity to hear from citizens. Will any concerns be raised that make the City Council think twice about the proposal? It would seem that Councilmember Frerichs, at least, does not think so.
This talk is part of the Yolo ACLU's ongoing exploration of how communications technologies also become surveillance technologies that can affect us all.
Join us on July 18th, from 7-8:30 pm at the Davis Branch of the Yolo County Library in the Blanchard room.
This event is free, refreshments will be served, and the book will be available for purchase.
Show me the data! Until the 21st century, nearly all our activities were private by default, and public only through effort; today anything in digital space has the potential (and likelihood) to remain somewhere online forever. That means all the technologies that have made our lives easier, faster, better, more efficient have also simultaneously made it easier for others to keep an eye on our activities as well. In 10 crucial legal cases, "Habeas Data" explores the tools of surveillance that exist today, how they work, and what the implications are for the future of privacy.
The Yolo County ACLU has addressed this issue with its proposed city ordinance to make purchases and use of surveillance technologies by the Davis Police Department both public and transparent. That proposed ordinance is still being considered by the Davis City Council.
Cyrus Farivar is a Senior Tech Policy Reporter at Ars Technica, as well as an author and radio producer.
His second book, Habeas Data, about the legal cases over the last 50 years that have had an outsized impact on surveillance and privacy law in America, was published May 8, 2018 from Melville House.
In 2017, Cyrus Farivar and Joe Mullin won the Technology Reporting award from the Society of Professional Journalists, Northern California Chapter for their August 2016 story: “Stealing bitcoins with badges: How Silk Road’s dirty cops got caught.” Cyrus’ first book, The Internet of Elsewhere—about the history and effects of the Internet on different countries around the world, including Senegal, Iran, Estonia and South Korea—was published in April 2011. From 2010 until 2012, Cyrus was the Sci-Tech Editor and host of “Spectrum” at Deutsche Welle English, Germany’s international broadcaster. He has also reported for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, National Public Radio, Public Radio International, The Economist, Wired, The New York Times and many others. He is based in Oakland, California.
Wikipedia link about the phrase "Habeas Data": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habeas_data .
Refining a Preferred Alternative
The workshop is a four day opportunity for Davis community members to collaborate with a multidisciplinary team to craft a vision for
The ideas and vision developed during the workshop along with other community input will guide the creation of the Downtown Davis Specific Plan document. The Downtown Davis Specific Plan will then implement these ideas through policies and design standards.
6 of the top 10 Cities are located in California, but Los Angeles is rated as the least safe city in the country for cyclists.
The Anonymous IRS 13909 complaint against the Vanguard Non-profit was given to the Davisite by the Flatlander. The Flatlander received them anonymously through the US Post. The IRS submission contained 14 pages of supporting evidence as referenced in the cover letter. and the postings contained on the pages seem to generally support the allegations on the 13909 form. All 14 pages are available for download below.
Good news today..... Scott Pruitt is out as head of the Environmental Protection Agency. Not only were his/Trump's policies harmful to the environment, but he basically is a crook. Guess he is getting out of town shortly before an indictment.
It is good riddance and now time to clean up the mess he has made and put the EPA back on the smart bi-partisan path of the past. Don't forget, the EPA was started by a Republican president... Richard Nixon. And a lot of important environmental legislation was signed by that same President after lead ins by others.
A healthy environment helps create a healthy population...... and although that seems obvious, to some people it is not.
The Davisite received the below IRS form 13909 Complaints against the Davis Vanguard. They were given to the Davisite by The Flatlander who received an anonymous envelope in its PO box containing the forms and other documents which appear to have been filled with the IRS.
The anonymous complaint and cover letter are below.