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

  • 3/28: Third No Kings Yolo to march across Tower Bridge on 60th anniversary of historic farm worker march to Sacramento

    Thousands of Yolo County residents gathered in Davis in October for the second No Kings march and rally. Indivisible Yolo is organizing the next No Kings event for March 28 in West Sacramento. Photo by Laurie Friedman

    Countywide event will be held alongside protests across the country

    (From press release) Following in the footsteps of farm workers in their historic march across the Tower Bridge with the farm workers movement 60 years ago, Indivisible Yolo is joining with the Sacramento Labor Council for Latin American Advancement AFL-CIO and Change to Win, along with Davis Phoenix Coalition, to host the third No Kings Yolo on March 28. The event will begin with a democracy fair at River Walk Park in West Sacramento at 10:30am with activities for all ages and a brief speaker program. Supporters will then march at noon across the Tower Bridge to the state capitol to join Indivisible Sacramento’s No Kings rally. Learn more and sign up: https://www.indivisibleyolo.org/no-kings-yolo. 

    No Kings Yolo, this time themed “We are the Power! Somos el Poder!,” is part of the largest single-day national mobilization in history expected to attract millions nationwide as people gather to protest Trump administration policies – including ICE terrorization, unauthorized wars and threats to working families in the community – and to remind the president that America is a democracy. 

    (more…)

    Posted by

    davisite2

    on

    in

    , , ,

    |

    No comments on 3/28: Third No Kings Yolo to march across Tower Bridge on 60th anniversary of historic farm worker march to Sacramento
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • Let’s Talk Honestly About Village Farms Home Prices

    By Leslie Blevins

    There has been a lot of certainty lately about what homes at Village Farms will cost. Too much certainty compared to what the facts actually show.

    Project opponents continue repeating that every home in the development will “start at $740,000,” as if that number is locked in, guaranteed, and unavoidable. It isn’t.

    The $740,000 hypothetical figure being cited comes from a fiscal modeling assumption for a hypothetical average 1,740 sq ft home used in an economic analysis — not from a builder price sheet. The modeling assumption itself states that medium-density homes are projected at an AVERAGE sales price of $740,000 not starting sales price.

    But that number was used to estimate tax revenue. It was NOT a declaration of a minimum sales price. There is a big difference between a modeling input and a market reality.

    The truth is, we do not know what homes will cost in five to ten years when these units are actually built. Construction costs fluctuate. Interest rates change. The economy shifts. Lending standards evolve. Labor markets tighten and loosen. Anyone claiming certainty about 2029 home prices is speculating.

    (more…)

    Posted by

    davisite2

    on

    in

    , , , ,

    |

    13 comments on Let’s Talk Honestly About Village Farms Home Prices
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • Phase Out the Zoning Code’s Planned Development (PD) Districts to Boost the Davis Economy

    By Greg Rowe

    This article is a slightly modified version of a letter I recently sent to the Davis City Council in support of the Economic Development Strategic Plan (Plan) discussed at the March 3 Council meeting. In particular, my letter endorsed the Plan’s recommendations for simplifying the City’s Zoning Code and development application procedures.  Specifically, I advocated significant revisions to the Planned Development (PD) District provisions in the Municipal Code (Article 40.22.010- 210), and recommended that achieving the Plan’s aspirations would be bolstered significantly if the PD provisions were completely expunged from the Municipal Code.    

    Concerns:

    Development in Davis has been hindered by an inordinately complex, prescriptive, rigid and incomprehensible zoning code and land use entitlement process, which makes achieving development outcomes cumbersome, time consuming, and unpredictable.  A central goal of the General Plan Update (GPU) and its implementing zoning code should be a simple, flexible, expansive and predictable development framework. Davis has long had a regional reputation as a difficult place in which to “do business,” which to a large extent results from the current complex and regimented zoning code (which implements the General Plan).

    Instead of a General Plan that strives to preserve a “small college town atmosphere,” there is an imperative need for integrating the General Plan Update, zoning code and economic development strategy to position Davis as a dynamic, forward-facing city ready to meet the future as part of a vibrant regional economy.

    Planned Development (PD) Districts Impose a Layer of Complexity

    (more…)

    Posted by

    davisite2

    on

    in

    , , ,

    |

    No comments on Phase Out the Zoning Code’s Planned Development (PD) Districts to Boost the Davis Economy
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • What are the guaranteed parts of the Village Farms project?

    Looking at Affordable Housing in particular

    By Roberta Millstein

    With the for and against ballot arguments for Village Farms and their rebuttals posted to the County’s website (as Measure V), and the campaigns starting to ramp up, I thought it was important to highlight what are technically known as the projects Baseline Features. These are available as part of the “Full Text of Measure V” on the County’s website, and I encourage Davisites to take a close look at them, but I wanted to point out a couple of things first.

    Most important to note is what it means to be a Baseline Feature. As the text of the Measure itself clarifies:

    Beyond the Baseline Project Features there are other additional requirements for the Project, including but not limited to, the mitigation measures set forth in the Village Farms EIR, and the Development Agreement that, while important to the Project, are not Baseline Project Features and may be modified with the approval of the City after the appropriate public process (emphasis added).

    Another way of saying this is to point out that only the Baseline Features are guaranteed parts of the project. Anything else can be changed with a vote of the City Council — and here one should keep in mind that membership of that future City Council could be somewhat or even substantially different from today’s City Council. Thus, anything that is not a Baseline Feature is not a guaranteed part of the project.

    And even then, it’s important to read the Baseline Features carefully, as some of us learned when Bretton Woods was able to jettison its promised memory care facility. Let me give an example that is tied to one touted feature of the project that is of great interest to many voters: Affordable Housing.

    The rebuttal to the argument against Measure V states that the project will have “360 units serving very low to moderate income households.” But is this true?

    (more…)

    Posted by

    Roberta Millstein

    on

    in

    , , , , , , ,

    |

    6 comments on What are the guaranteed parts of the Village Farms project?
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • Rebuttals to for-and-against ballot arguments are now available

    Roberta Millstein

    In an earlier article, I posted the for and against arguments for the Village Farms project. The rebuttals to each of these arguments are now available on the County’s website, and I have pasted them below. Village Farms is subject to a Measure J/R/D vote of all Davis citizens and has been assigned as Measure V.

    Here is the rebuttal to the argument in favor of Village Farms that will appear on our ballots in June (the rebuttal to the argument against follows after that):

    (more…)

    Posted by

    Roberta Millstein

    on

    in

    , , , , , , ,

    |

    2 comments on Rebuttals to for-and-against ballot arguments are now available
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • It’s Time for New Leadership for our CA-4 House Seat

    By Scott Steward

    Eric Jones at one of his Meet and Greets held throughout the District

    At this critical time, as we confront the destruction of our democratic institutions and equal representation under the law, we have a choice to make while we can still vote.  

    There is no need to worry that a Democratic primary challenge will eliminate all Democrats from our safely blue district race. In this year’s District CA-4 Congressional primary election on June 2nd (early voting starts on Monday, May 4th), we can vote for one of the two leading Democratic candidates: Mike Thompson or Eric Jones.  

    Mike Thompson, the 28-year incumbent, has shown that no amount of phone calls and letters will change his commitment to a system that “trusts the process.” Thompson’s politics will not allow him to raise taxes on gross excess (oil, drug, gambling, tech, and the weapons industries). He has and will continue to rationalize excessive profits and justify incarceration at home and $6 trillion (since 2001) in support of endless war. 

    (more…)

    Posted by

    davisite2

    on

    in

    , ,

    |

    27 comments on It’s Time for New Leadership for our CA-4 House Seat
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • Make It Happen for Yolo County Receives $20,000 from Beneto Foundation as Nonprofit Continues to Expand

    Funds will help build capacity to address furniture poverty for local youth

    Two local youth unload the furniture and household goods they received from Make It Happen for Yolo County in fall 2025.The nonprofit recently received a grant from Beneto Foundation.

    (From press release)The Beneto Foundation has granted $20,000 to local nonprofit Make It Happen for Yolo County to help sustain and expand the organization that addresses furniture poverty among Yolo County’s underserved teens and young adults as they transition into independent living. The nonprofit provides furniture, household goods and resources to furnish their first homes.

    “As our nonprofit continues to grow, we are grateful to our new funder, the Beneto Foundation, for investing in our work and the resilient youth we serve,” said Cathi Schmidt, executive director, Make It Happen for Yolo County. “Beneto is passionate about helping youth in our community, and we know this partnership will help us continue to reach more local teens and young adults who are moving out on their own without the resources to furnish their new homes.”

    (more…)

    Posted by

    davisite2

    on

    in

    ,

    |

    No comments on Make It Happen for Yolo County Receives $20,000 from Beneto Foundation as Nonprofit Continues to Expand
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • Ballot arguments for and against Village Farms now available

    By Roberta Millstein

    This post is to just let people know that the arguments for and against the Village Farms project are up on the County’s website. The rebuttals to the for and against arguments are due by March 3; I will post them at some point afterward. Village Farms is subject to a Measure J/R/D vote of all Davis citizens and has been assigned as Measure V.

    Here is the argument in favor of Village Farms, i.e., in favor of Measure V, that will appear on our ballots in June (the argument against follows after that):

    (more…)

    Posted by

    Roberta Millstein

    on

    in

    , , , , , , , ,

    |

    6 comments on Ballot arguments for and against Village Farms now available
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • United Ways Across California Join to Host Nonpartisan Gubernatorial Forum in Sacramento

    (From press release) Nine United Way chapters across the state of California are bringing qualified candidates for governor to Sacramento on March 23 for the United Way Nonpartisan Gubernatorial Forum: Voices of Californians. The event will take place from 5:30-7 p.m., with doors opening at 4:30 p.m., at the Crest Theater in downtown Sacramento to provide voters with a substantive, issue-focused opportunity to hear directly from gubernatorial candidates about their priorities and vision for California. Tickets are $40 for the general public and can be purchased at uwccr.org/cagovernor. Discounted tickets are available for college students at $10 and nonprofit employees at $15 and can be purchased by emailing events@uwccr.org. Event sponsorship opportunities also are available.

    “Across our United Way network, we see the hopes and challenges of more than 10 million Californians every single year,” said Dr. Dawnté Early, president and CEO, United Way California Capital Region. “Our families, our volunteers, our donors and our corporate partners all show up because they care about building stronger, more just communities. That’s why it matters that we create spaces like this, places where every voice is valued and where candidates can speak directly to the people they hope to serve. This forum is about connection, clarity and ensuring that every Californian has the opportunity to understand the vision and values that will shape our future.”

    The forum is presented by United Way Bay Area, United Way California Capital Region, United Way Central Eastern California, United Way Fresno and Madera Counties, United Way of Greater Los Angeles, Inland Southern California United Way, United Way of Merced County, Orange County United Way, United Way of Stanislaus County and the Crest Theater. Any views expressed at the forum will be those of the participating candidates and not the United Way or any United Way chapters. Sponsorship of the nonpartisan forum is not intended as an endorsement of any candidate.

    Posted by

    davisite2

    on

    in

    ,

    |

    No comments on United Ways Across California Join to Host Nonpartisan Gubernatorial Forum in Sacramento
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.

  • The City’s handling of the noise ordinance: The good and the bad

    By Roberta Millstein

    The City’s handling of the proposed noise ordinance was good in some respects and quite bad in others.

    First, the good: At Tuesday night’s meeting, led by Mayor Donna Neville, the council agreed that the noise items weren’t an ordinance clean-up item and that they deserved a true staff report and separate consideration.  The noise ordinance (Chapter 24) items were pulled from the Consent Calendar and Item 4B’s noise ordinance “clean-up” will come to the council at a later date.

    I am grateful to the Council for hearing the Davis citizens who emailed and gave public comment concerning the noise ordinance.  (Previous Davisite articles about the proposed changes can be found here and here). 

    Now for the bad: This should have never been on the Consent Calendar in the first place, which is for noncontroversial items that do not need discussion.  I’m not quite sure how or why it was put there, or why the Council passed it unanimously at its “first reading” (Tuesday was the “second reading”), but to me it’s a continuation of a “trust staff implicitly” mentality.  I hope that this is a sign that the Davis City Council recognizes that it (the Council), not staff, is the responsible party who we voted for and that oversight is needed.

    Another concern is the way that comments emailed to Councilmembers were handled.  I received a reply from Barbara Archer, the City’s “Public Information Officer,” asserting (in essence) that the concerns I raised were not valid.  There are several problems with this:

    (more…)

    Posted by

    Roberta Millstein

    on

    in

    , , , ,

    |

    2 comments on The City’s handling of the noise ordinance: The good and the bad
    Davisite logo

    Did you enjoy reading this article? Then subscribe to the Davisite for free and never miss a post again.