Al's Corner June: Committee Rise, Committee Set
June 04, 2024
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:
Is this the commission that I buried?
Is this just politics at play?
I didn't believe our committee was obsolete
Why did they?
How is this now a priv’leged duty?
When did Davis trees get to be so tall?
All problematic commissioners must be eliminated by any means necessary
. . . one and all
Committee rise, Committee set
Committee rise, Committee set
Swiftly fly the jeers
One committee merging with another
Laden with politics and fears
What words of wisdom can I give them?
How can I help to ease their way?
Now that they’ve merged with one another . . .
Oi! Let us pray!
They don’t go natural together
The way the newly-merged should be
Is there a commission purge in store for thee?
Committee rise, Committee set
Committee rise, Committee set
Bad politics growing in Davis
Subcommittee does purges and mergers
Gaslighting even as we gaze
Here's a link to a version of the original song "Sunrise Sunset" on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03rzUoyq9K0
I recommend watching the beginning of the Council meeting generally. A total clown show, featuring a Beth vs. Anoosh 'get our sign in front of the camera' game of musical chairs. And a guy mumbling that he had a question for the Council about black helicopters.
And of course it's Al's Corner, so talk about anything.
"Mr. Miller was brought to tears by his own performance."
Yeap, me too. Plus, my ears are bleeding.
Seems to me that the sooner all of us are fully replaced with AI, the better.
Posted by: Ron O | June 05, 2024 at 04:48 PM
Great job Alan. You got your point across.
Also at the meeting it was interesting that Beth Bourne was admonished for moving to different seats in order for her signs to show on the telecast.
I remember a while back Beth trying to speak at a council meeting where people stood directly behind her with signs as she spoke at the podium. Were those people admonished?
The council itself is responsible for some of these problems.
Posted by: Keith | June 05, 2024 at 06:05 PM
RO say: "Seems to me that the sooner all of us are fully replaced with AI, the better."
Al? As in Al Miller? I agree, all of you should be replaced with Al, me. In which case a Jew would replace all of you, which is what those white supremacists in Charlottesville were chanting about. So maybe they had a point?
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 05, 2024 at 06:28 PM
KO say: "Beth trying to speak at a council meeting where people stood directly behind her with signs as she spoke at the podium. Were those people admonished?"
If memory serves, I believe they were after awhile.
Note: memory may not serve.
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 05, 2024 at 06:39 PM
I was thinking the same thing, regarding the similarity between "Al" and AL". Or is it "HAL" (from 2001)?
In any case, I'm quite impressed with AI's ability to "sing", these days. Or more accurately, to make long-dead musicians sing modified songs.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Jh7Jk3aSlo
Posted by: Ron O | June 05, 2024 at 07:08 PM
From today's Vanguard, quoting council member Vaitla:
The root cause of declining school enrollment is insufficient family housing in Davis. The future of our community depends on taking strong action to increase housing accessibility and affordability in our town. Without more places to live for families, our school system will deteriorate. Please make your voice heard by City Council when new housing projects are proposed. Please also participate in the General Plan Update process that will kick off later this year, which will set a vision for Davis for the next generation.
Let's break this down.
First off, council member Vaitla ran on a platform of promoting INFILL, not SPRAWL. Why is he now abandoning this pledge?
Secondly, Davis has a plethora of modest single-family housing - the type of housing that young families prefer. In fact, the "over-supply" of this type of housing was a topic of discussion (including by council member Vaitla) at the recent affordable housing seminar held at the church adjacent to the farmer's market. If I'm not mistaken, it was Vaitla himself who said that if there's only one thing he could do, it would be to eliminate (future) single-family housing developments.
The "problem" in the eyes of someone like Vaitla and the school district is that housing doesn't turn over "fast-enough" to ensure a continuing supply of new students. Any given household will "age out" of the system within a few years of attending a school district, but they're not likely to immediately move-out of their house as a result. This is not a situation that is unique to Davis, and would also occur with any "new" housing that is built.
But the most-concerning aspect of Vaitla's comments is his new-found belief that the city should continuously sprawl outward, to meet the desires of a relatively small number of teachers/parents who would be impacted by a school closure. (And again, these parents have kids who would "age out" of the system in a short period of time, regardless.)
Again, Vaitla and others are suggesting that the city should increase its size so that the district doesn't have to address its excessive size. DJUSD has also realized that its poaching activities (encouraging students from other districts to attend) will not be sufficient to change this situation.
Folks, school districts exist to serve cities, not the other-way around. And yet, Davis has a council member who has not only abandoned his "infill" pledge, he is actively working to encourage others to support sprawl so that DJUSD doesn't have to address its excessive size, in relation to the needs of the existing community.
Does this sound like a reasonable approach to city planning to anyone? That is, encouraging those associated with the school district to promote sprawl, to avoid the inevitable downsizing that they will face?
Posted by: Ron O | June 07, 2024 at 08:33 AM
Ron, here's my comment on the Patwin article you cite:
Keith Olsen
June 7, 2024 at 11:24 am
When I read the headline my first thought was that Patwin was being closed. But no, they are talking about having one less kindergarten class due to declining enrollment. Wouldn’t that be a prudent move in order to save money and be a step in the right direction to help the school stay more fiscally viable?
Also, does anyone have an idea of how many parents choose not to enroll their students in public Davis schools due their LGTBQ+ policies and other such political issues? Could that be a reason that enrollment is down so much?
Posted by: Keith | June 07, 2024 at 01:04 PM
Yeah KO & RO, when I read DG's take on this, and then mirrored when I read Best's comments, my immediate thought was: "Is there a magic cow going around town cooing 'milk me, milk me', and then when DG and Best squatted down to milk the magic cow, it kicked them in the head with it's magic rear hoof and gave them a concussion so severe that building housing was a logical solution to a problem that doesn't exist?
I'm thinking back to my home town and when the school district had to shut down all the baby-boom fed schools in the late 70's and early 80's. They had an extreme drop in the number of children, so they closed schools. Parents fought it, but the numbers were devastating. So now that is happening here in another wave. And instead of laying out the realities of the situation, school officials and city officials are trying to save the schools by building more housing, which *might* over *many years* bring in some more students? Does anyone buy this? Is the magical cow going around also kicking everyone in Davis in the head, or can everyone see through this . . . ploy?
It is so far fetched and detached from reality I can't even believe anyone can publicly say this with a straight face. I mean I understand many progressive stances even if I disagree with people's understanding of a situation. Like Gaza -- I get it to a degree -- we get a war beamed into our homes and many who actually aren't Jew haters see the mass death and suffering beamed out over modern media in real time and want it to stop, so their simple solution is 'cease fire'. But what the hell is this about the schools being saved by development? It doesn't even make sense. The developments may not even attract families in large numbers, especially if there are no new SFHs built. The schools should serve the community, not the other way around. NEVER let gov't become nothing but a self-perpetuation machine.
As for that magic cow . . . I've been pesco-vegetarian for 36 years and don't eat land meat . . . and I've never fired a gun. But if I see that f*cking magic cow around town today, I'm having steak for dinner tonight! :-|
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 07, 2024 at 02:21 PM
Wouldn’t that be a prudent move in order to save money and be a step in the right direction to help the school stay more fiscally viable?
I agree. Another prudent move would be to stop poaching non-district students, whose families don't even contribute to DJUSD parcel taxes. And then shut down a school or two.
As it is, each and every student who attends DJUSD costs more than they receive from the state.
And yet somehow, the claim is that the district needs even more of these money-suckers. (The underlying reason is that they won't correspondingly reduce the size of their system without making a big stink and getting city politicians on their side.)
I wonder how many teachers these days live "out-of-district" and have no other connection to Davis. Teachers that might not even be needed, if they weren't also enrolling their own kids in Davis schools. Thereby helping to maintain artificially-high enrollment numbers (while also not paying any DJUSD parcel taxes).
Parcel taxes that would actually go farther, if there were fewer students.
As far as the LGTBQ issue, I doubt that's having a large impact on enrollment in regard to Davis in particular. As the superintendent noted, enrollments are down statewide.
But on a broader level, politics have apparently been contributing to a net exodus from the state. It's not necessarily driven by ideology, since political decisions/views impact the amount of taxes (in various forms), for example.
Parcel taxes ARE a housing cost.
Posted by: Ron O | June 07, 2024 at 02:23 PM
Home schooling, private, charter and religious school attendance are way up the last few years. There's a reason for that and I believe some of that has to be the left leaning policies of the public school system. Sure there are other reasons but LGBTQ+ and CRT curriculum have to be playing a roll in the diminishing numbers too.
Posted by: Keith | June 07, 2024 at 04:16 PM
Davis as a whole does not attract the (almost always more conservative) big family demographic (pretty much 100% of the families I know - or even "know of" with 5+ kids under 20 are super conservative Christian, Catholic or LDS) and would not move here even if the schools banned pride flags and didn't talk about race and gender every day like they do now. I have gone from not even hearing the term "trans" ten years ago to now hearing that a kid of a friend, relative (or friend of a friend or relative of a friend) has a new "trans" kid almost once a week. I had an openly gay roommate when I lived in SF and I don't care what anyone "identifies" as and I truly hope the increasing number heavyset girls find true happiness as trans boys after taking male hormones and growing beards. The school district needs to have a reality check and realize that (like Palo Alto and Burlingame realized the Baby Boom was over in the 70's and closed schools) big families are not coming back to Davis and even we do build a LOT more homes we will probably "still" need to reduce the number of schools in Davis (I bet it has been over 20 years since UCD hired a white male professor with 3+ kids who had a stay at home wife that joined the UFC after they got here). Bill Mahar summarizes what is happening in liberal parts of the country on the link below:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mMBzfUj5zsg
Posted by: South of Davis | June 07, 2024 at 04:43 PM
I saw that Bill Maher clip some time ago. He's probably the best political comedian in the country, now. Reminds me of the time when The Daily Show with John Stewart was funny.
The things that Bill Maher says in that clip would certainly get him recalled from the Woodland school board, however. With the help of some members of the Davis Phoenix Coalition.
Posted by: Ron O | June 07, 2024 at 08:07 PM
Ron wrote:
> The things that Bill Maher says in that clip would certainly get him
> recalled from the Woodland school board
I was recently talking to a (Jewish) fraternity brother and he reminded me of how lucky we were were to be in California in the 1980's to 2000's when pretty much nobody cared what race, religion, or political party you were. I honestly have no idea of the race religion or political party most of my college friends are (I have an idea on race but I have never felt the need to ask the friend with a Pilipino last name and European looking Mom his parents "exact" ethnic mix or even "mom's maiden name") . Just a few years earlier in the 70's almost no fraternities even in CA were mixed race and/or religion but by the mid 80's nobody cared at all what race or religion you were (or who you voted for). Today we are going the other way where a single never married pot smoking life long self described liberal Democrat like Bill Maher can't be a member of any group unless he has a trans pride flag flying at his house and on his car (the old school rainbow pride flag is not enough and will cause you to get "cancelled")...
Posted by: South of Davis | June 07, 2024 at 11:46 PM
From today's Vanguard:
For example, we may have gotten the MOU out of the university; when it came time to plan and locate a major new investment like Aggie Square, the university decided to go to Sacramento. Sure, you can argue that that specific investment makes sense in Sacramento,
O.K. - I will. In fact, it's tailor-made for UCD's medical school, there.
but, at the same time, there is the fact that they didn’t have to fight the community to get it approved and built.
Not true. They were sued by surrounding neighbors.
https://theaggie.org/2021/01/22/lawsuits-claim-uc-davis-aggie-square-project-brings-gentrification-and-environmental-impacts-to-oak-park-neighborhood/
But what really bothers me most about David's obsession regarding a business park is that he (and other supporters) are the SAME ONES who cry about a "housing crisis". And if you're creating jobs (assuming such a business park is actually viable), you're also creating demand for more housing.
In addition, Aggie Square was HEAVILY-SUBSIDIZED by government and UCD itself. It's on UCD's own land, for starters.
Posted by: Ron O | June 08, 2024 at 09:21 AM
DG tooday: "In my view there was a lot of anger and frustration thrown around the city council meeting on Tuesday evening—some of it revolves around the proposed revenue measure, but most of it appears to bleed from other grievances."
David doesn't have a shred of evidence that it is bleeding from other grievances :-|
I also like how he goes on and on about how it won't really effect people that much financially. The woke delusion that only the rich Davis people will pay, but those struggling won't -- when in fact, as Colin Walsh pointed out, this is a *regressive* tax. For the details of what that actually means, kids, look it up on wikipedia -- the simple answer is it has a greater effect on those with less income, exactly the opposite of what you'd think the City would strive for -- which just means the Council thinks the voters are stupid.
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 08, 2024 at 10:11 AM
The proposed sales tax increase would likely have the biggest impact on businesses that sell big-ticket items such as car dealerships, or (perhaps) any big-ticket business-to-business sales that are taxable. In such cases, customers will weigh whether or not it makes sense to purchase elsewhere.
If there's a large discrepancy between two different cities/locales, this will make it more difficult for these "big ticket" businesses to remain in the community (vs. moving to one where sales taxes are lower). Or perhaps moving to an entirely different state, where there are no sales taxes.
Posted by: Ron O | June 08, 2024 at 10:22 AM
"I also like how he goes on and on about how it won't really effect people that much financially."
Hey, what's a few extra dollars in sales tax? Think of all the good. Some of it might be turned into more Drag Queen Shows that the city can help fund?
Posted by: Keith | June 08, 2024 at 12:21 PM
"this will make it more difficult for these "big ticket" businesses to remain in the community (vs. moving to one where sales taxes are lower)."
For autos the sales tax is determined by the buyer's home address so going to a different locale won't save any taxes.
Posted by: Keith | June 08, 2024 at 06:35 PM
Keith - thanks for the clarification - I wasn't aware of that.
Posted by: Ron O | June 08, 2024 at 07:10 PM
Keith is sort of correct, since most people keep an auto at "home" they will pay the sales tax rate of their "home" city (see link below that ranges from 7.25% to 10.75%) but the tax is based on where the DMV mails the registration,
https://www.cdtfa.ca.gov/taxes-and-fees/rates.aspx
If someone lives in Alameda buys a $100K Tesla they will pay $10,750 in sales tax, but if they send the registration to someone "South of Davis" (or in El Macero) they will pay just $7,250 in sales tax. For people buying classic cars (like a 1980's 911) if you send the registration to the home of a friend in one of the 20+ counties in the state that don't require that you get a smog check every two years
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Smog_Check_Program
you will not only save on sales tax but avoid the fun of paying for smog checks and paying crazy money for vintage NLA smog parts from the 80's when your car won't pass smog every couple years.
P.S. Of course I would never dream of trying to pay less sales tax and/or trying to avoid emission testing on a vintage car. Like David I'm in favor of more regressive taxes and think we should have not just a higher sales tax (so each school in town can have a full time drag queen), but we should have "monthly" smog checks in every county (since a guy that drives a 3.2 Carrera ~200 miles a month + the extra lanes on I80 are sure to put us over the edge into "climate doom" and all those poor gardeners with F250s should be driving Cybertrucks)...
Posted by: South of Davis | June 08, 2024 at 09:25 PM
"higher sales tax (so each school in town can have a full time drag queen)"
LOL... Don't give them any ideas, as crazy as it sounds.
Posted by: Keith | June 09, 2024 at 06:38 AM
" . . . but we should have "monthly" smog checks in every county (since a guy that drives a 3.2 Carrera ~200 miles a month + the extra lanes on I80 are sure to put us over the edge into "climate doom" and all those poor gardeners with F250s should be driving Cybertrucks)..."
The guy with the Carrera will probably drive 225 miles per month, when he realizes the new-found joy of driving in a totally-uncongested freeway as a result of widening.
(Otherwise known as "induced demand".) :-)
And those "poor gardeners" will no longer be needed, when they outlaw backyards.
Posted by: Ron O | June 09, 2024 at 12:16 PM
DV Headline today: "Supporters of Prop 47 Rollback Charge Foul Play by Legislature; Fail to Note Falling Crime Rates (Updated)"
ABC-7 News Headline today: "Community searching for solutions after 3 teens killed in 2 separate Oakland shootings"
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 13, 2024 at 12:42 PM
ABC-7 News Headline today: "Community searching for solutions after 3 teens killed in 2 separate Oakland shootings"
I'm sure that restorative justice would put an end to that, including any repeat offenders.
A big fat, "I"m sowwy" should do the trick. Followed by a group hug (victim's families and the perpetrators coming together).
It's all about "public safety". Don't even need the police, other than to facilitate.
Posted by: Ron O | June 13, 2024 at 01:07 PM
RO say: "Don't even need the police, other than to facilitate."
Yeah, butts, DG ran an article yesterday on how crime is down, due to an overwhelming police presence due to Newsome throwing in the CHP troops en masse!
Riddle me that :-|
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 13, 2024 at 02:22 PM
On yesterdays DVG article on Tax Increase, DS say: "There’s not a lot to debate. You can argue for reduced services or for another form of taxation, but that’s about it."
You could argue for less-stupid spending, like being the savior-town of the region's housing, or the savior-town of the world's climate 'issues'. Or "we gave you money last time, and look at how shitty the roads and bike lanes are: how about proving you can prioritize budgeting sufficient money on the essentials before we entrust you with the bottomless pit of a housing trust fund budget (and other 'playthings')" ?
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 16, 2024 at 07:26 AM
" . . . prioritize budgeting sufficient money on the essentials before we entrust you with the bottomless pit of a housing trust fund budget (and other 'playthings')" ?
For sure, a "housing trust fund" is high on the priority list of what the council (particularly Bapu) would do with that money. I recall that this proposed use of funds also came up at the recent "affordable housing meeting" at the church next to the farmer's market, in regard to the tax.
And today, David Greenwald leads with this:
"In my view, affordable housing along with homelessness and housing in general are one plank of what I would call the triple crisis facing the city of Davis. While it might be possible for the tax measure to help fund the city’s affordable housing fund, it is not going to come close to addressing the problem overall."
And again, he brings up this:
"Moreover, every time we try, we harm our relations with them."
(Referring to UCD and the effort to seek assistance from them regarding their impact on the city.)
David then goes on to claim the following:
"For example, we may have gotten the MOU out of the university; when it came time to plan and locate a major new investment like Aggie Square, the university decided to go to Sacramento. Sure, you can argue that that specific investment makes sense in Sacramento, but, at the same time, there is the fact that they didn’t have to fight the community to get it approved and built."
What do you call it when someone knowingly repeats things that aren't true? David knows that Aggie Square is centered around the activities at UCD's medical center, on UCD land, is heavily-subsidized by government, and that UCD was sued by the neighborhood regarding the gentrifying effect of Aggie Square.
https://theaggie.org/2021/01/22/lawsuits-claim-uc-davis-aggie-square-project-brings-gentrification-and-environmental-impacts-to-oak-park-neighborhood/
Can anyone tell me what part of David's statement is true? Perhaps even more galling is that he also knows that a development like MRIC would create more demand for housing than it would have provided.
And again, this is coming from the mouth of someone who thinks that the number one "crisis" facing Davis is a lack of housing.
As a side note, not a shovel of dirt has been turned in regard to the other business park that "got away from Davis" and moved to Woodland, while adding 1,600 housing units in the process. Moreover, there hasn't even been any announcements that I'm aware of regarding landing any businesses to occupy it.
All that I can conclude is that David is a believer in the old saying that if you repeat something enough times, people will start to believe it. Sort of like how advertising works.
Folks, the city has unfunded liabilities as a result of prior decisions (as many/most cities do). And yet, there's been almost no discussion of addressing those, with this proposed tax.
Posted by: Ron O | June 16, 2024 at 08:58 AM
It would be interesting to see what many who work for the city actually do all day, I bet we would be fine (and the climate would not change) if Davis didn't have a full time "Conservation Coordinator" I was surprised to see that Davis has an "Affordable Housing Manager" since the 112 room Pacifico Housing buildings at the end of Drew Circle the city has owned for about ten years has been sitting mostly vacant (when it could be rented for more than $1 million a year or used to house the people living in tents all over town. I'm sure a developer got rich building Pacifico ~25 years ago and after it was mismanaged and mostly (well over half) empty for a decade the city was forced to buy it to avoid the lender from foreclosing and wiping away the low income deed restrictions. I can't understand why the city owns a building and just lets it sit empty year after year rather than renting it to SOMEBODY?
Posted by: South of Davis | June 16, 2024 at 10:40 AM
DG say: "affordable housing along with homelessness and housing in general are one plank of what I would call the triple crisis facing the city of Davis."
Is he just purposefully clowning himself? Housing 'Crisis' wasn't enough, now we have "The Triple Crisis". How about . . . um, I dunno . . . we don't, actually . . . I mean, I look outside at night, I don't see the flames of city burning . . . oh wait I do, but it was one our local professional arsonists doing what they do best when not locked up.
RO say: "I recall that this proposed use of funds also came up at the recent "affordable housing meeting" at the church next to the farmer's market, in regard to the tax."
I recall it being the entire purpose of the meeting: to scare people, guilt people, tell sad stories, and then propose funding a housing fund that would never be enough!!!
DG say: "Moreover, every time we try, we harm our relations with them."
RO say: "(Referring to UCD and the effort to seek assistance from them regarding their impact on the city.)"
I'm glad you clarified that, I thought referred to Israel and Hamas. WHAT, too soon?
RO say: "What do you call it when someone knowingly repeats things that aren't true?"
• A Davidlusion?
• A Greenwaldism?
• Greenwaldlighting?
• Gasvangaunding?
• Being a @#$%^*! ?
Cheerio :-|
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 16, 2024 at 11:00 AM
Alan Pryor
June 16, 2024 at 11:06 am
(from today's Vanguard)
Question – ” … if real estate developers/homebuilders can make money off the development, construction and sales of homes, why can’t cities do the same in efforts to create and fund affordable housing?”
Answer – “Because most municipal governments are incompetant”
Not disagreeing with Alan P, but that's probably not the word you want to misspell if you're trying to make that point regarding another party.
Also, you don't want to misspell "misspell". (I have to check this every time - did I get it right?)
Posted by: Ron O | June 16, 2024 at 01:43 PM
I recall it being the entire purpose of the meeting: to scare people, guilt people, tell sad stories, and then propose funding a housing fund that would never be enough!!!
Interestingly-enough, I recall that the very next day (following this presentation) Don Shor (of all people) noted (on the Vanguard) that the church itself has plenty of land (somewhere else in the city, I understand) upon which they could allow affordable housing to be built. I saw that Don's comment was later DELETED by someone.
One of the first speakers at that meeting was a woman who worked for the church on a temporary assignment, and was complaining about the lack of affordable housing in Davis. She was blaming Davis, for that.
She said that she ended up in West Sacramento, where she said that she witnessed a lot of homeless people. Which begs the question: If it's high housing costs and resistance to growth that's causing homelessness, why are they in West Sacramento, of all places?)
Posted by: Ron O | June 16, 2024 at 04:12 PM
Maybe such churches could at least give up a house size piece of their large tracts of land and create a parsonage so no Davis religious leaders have to live out of town. Except maybe that imam who called for the death of all Jews, worldwide, a few years back. Anyone know if he's still around . . . and if not, was he replaced by someone a bit more, or less, Jew deathy?
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 16, 2024 at 08:13 PM
Well, perhaps folks aren't moving to Woodland for "cheap houses" after all. This one is in Spring Lake (no doubt, the best one in that neighborhood):
https://www.realtor.com/realestateandhomes-detail/2624-Centennial-Dr_Woodland_CA_95776_M26345-61894?ex=2968431928
Posted by: Ron O | June 20, 2024 at 07:07 PM
From today's Vanguard:
"The key to their plan—affordable housing in high-opportunity communities that have “lots of jobs, good schools, transit stops, parks and other amenities.”
That shouldn’t be a radical concept, but it is as it “would be a shift from historic patterns of segregation that concentrated affordable housing in lower-income, lower-resourced communities, such as South L.A. and the Northeast San Fernando Valley.”
So what’s the problem … “the city is backing off its earlier ambition — by taking single-family zones off the table for new apartments and townhomes.”
As the Editorial Board points out: “That decision will diminish the effectiveness of key programs to put more affordable housing near transit, high-opportunity communities and so-called ‘Opportunity Corridors.’”
This reminds me of the school busing program. Forcing kids to take buses to far-flung schools, supposedly to improve opportunities for those whose own local school was sub-par, and to force integration. How'd that work out?
And yet, this same type of ineffective meddling is now being used to try to force growth in cities that don't want it.
Does anyone think that highly of the San Francisco school system, despite the wealth of that city? Other than for schools like Lowell - which had performance-based enrollment requirements? (A previous school board tried to dismantle those requirements due to race-based "equity concerns", and some of its members were subsequently recalled.)
Rather than bringing everyone up, such efforts tend to drag the ENTIRE system down.
In any case, where was David's concern regarding the "Davis-connected buyer's program at WDAAC"?
Posted by: Ron O | June 21, 2024 at 08:25 AM
From same Vanguard article referenced above:
We see this form of NIMBYism everywhere. People intellectually may understand (at least in most cases) that there is a housing crisis, but they are not willing to let it impact their lifestyle—whether it is building multifamily and affordable housing in their neighborhood, encroaching on their precious open space, or impacting their travel times to work or their favorite restaurant.
Did David just imply that I'm "intellectually-challenged"? :-)
Well, if so - at least I'm not one who got myself into a "personal" housing crisis. One way I did so was by "adjusting" the place where I lived, rather than attempting to force the "place to adjust" to my circumstances and desires.
Then again, I'm also not one who would suggest that a community "adjust itself" to meet the desires of an oversized school district. However, it seems to be a requirement to believe this in order to be on a city council.
Bottom line is that I'd have a very different definition of what a "housing crisis" is, compared to David's definition (whatever that definition actually is - since it's never been defined).
"Housing crisis" - do something! That's apparently the gist of it.
Posted by: Ron O | June 21, 2024 at 08:55 AM
The $2.4mm home in Woodland that Ron posted for sale at $2.4m works out to LESS than $500K a room. Since that is over $100K LESS than LA is paying per unit for new housing for the Homeless (see link below) I think we just need to ask the developer to build another hundred homes like that and we will have housing for 500 homeless (aka urban campers or as David would say "hard working people with full time jobs pushed into tents because of our "housing crisis"). I'm sure David and other Social Justice people will be mad if we "concentrated ALL the "affordable housing in lower-income, lower-resourced communities" like Woodland so maybe we can ask the developer to build a few in Davis (despite the fact that building in Davis will probably add at least $100K per bedroom in a combination of higher land prices and higher costs related to dealing with the nightmare that is building anything in Davis).
https://www.yahoo.com/news/dtla-homeless-housing-tower-cost-182640426.html
Posted by: South of Davis | June 21, 2024 at 11:00 AM
SOD: That is an amusing observation. And they'd live in luxury (e.g., with a pool, 3-car garage, etc.) to boot!
But you actually do have a valid point, in that it seems rather inefficient to try to build more "affordable" housing in already-expensive communities.
How much cheaper it would be to house the homeless in Redding, vs. Atherton?
Posted by: Ron O | June 21, 2024 at 12:12 PM
Just appeared on the Vanguard:
"As you may know, the IRS is investigating our non-profit status, due to complaints by folks who want us in trouble. We have good news on that front, but more money to raise this week as the attorney’s are not cheap."
No, "we" don't want you "in trouble". We want you to acknowledge what you are - an organization that behaves quite a bit like a "for profit" enterprise - like the Enterprise (rather than pretending you're something else).
Similar to how "we" want YIMBY organizations to acknowledge what they are (funded by business interests).
Posted by: Ron O | June 21, 2024 at 05:46 PM
Regardless of what one thinks of rent control, it's entirely-predictable that the Vanguard's resident "growth monkeys" have no comment regarding today's guest article which discusses that subject. If it's not in support of growth, those monkeys have no interest. They only "feign" interest in regard to economic or racial disparity when it corresponds with their actual interest.
That's why we "nary heard a peep" out of them, in regard to the Davs-connected buyer's program at WDAAC. It's also the reason that they ignored the impact that MRIC (or whatever it was called after several iterations) would have on housing demand - supposedly their "primary concern".
Folks, let me ask you (anyone) - do you not see the Vanguard for what it is? I will respond to you (without insult), if you think my understanding is wrong. Again, the facts themselves speak volumes.
Let me repeat it, here: They only "feign" interest in regard to economic or racial disparity when it corresponds with their actual interest. Nor are they actually concerned about the fiscal status of the city, since they already know that housing is a money-loser for municipalities.
Their actual interest consisting of a constant search to "rope in" those who don't think for themselves, in support of development.
And given how often David mentions DJUSD, this is one of his primary interests - at the expense of farmland/open space.
Unlike Alan M, I promise not to use #&*!! in my response - if you want to respond (assuming you think that Alan's use of keyboard symbols is an actual problem).
On a related note, "pay your taxes" Davis Vanguard - as the Enterprise is required to do. The Vanguard is worse than Trump regarding that. :-)
Posted by: Ron O | June 25, 2024 at 07:21 PM
Perhaps overshadowed by the debate, this ruling should return some sanity regarding the homeless situation:
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2024-06-28/how-will-supreme-court-ruling-on-homeless-encampments-impact-california-city-officials-across-state-weigh-in
So perhaps the conservative Supreme Court gets some things right, after all? (Truth be told, the Supreme Court is overly-relied upon regarding issues that CONGRESS should address - but apparently won't. Yes, that's a reference to Roe v. Wade.)
Posted by: Ron O | June 28, 2024 at 01:55 PM
Ron, there were some great SCOTUS rulings yesterday that all got somewhat lost in the Biden dementia fueled mumbling in the debate. The Chevron and the Jan 6 rulings along with the homeless decision are all good for America.
Posted by: Keith | June 29, 2024 at 07:39 AM
From today's Vanguard:
“It is hard to imagine a starker example of excessive punishment than fining and jailing a person for the basic human act of sleeping,” said Scout Katovich, staff attorney in the Trone Center for Justice and Equality."
So is "shitting" - but that doesn't mean it should be allowed on public sidewalks or parks.
“As Justice Sotomayor’s dissent powerfully acknowledged, sleep is a biological necessity, not a crime. We cannot arrest our way out of homelessness, and we will continue litigating against cities that are emboldened by this decision to treat unhoused people as criminals.”
This is misdirection. No one is suggesting that arrest is the solution, especially since these people ignore fines anyway. It is not a form of "punishment" under any definition to ban living in areas where it has a negative impact on others. In fact, one cannot even do so on their own property without adhering to zoning laws, etc.
But just as with shitting and pissing, sleep somewhere else (rather than in front of someone's home, business, or park). Truth be told, there's vast areas of public land where one can engage in all of those activities without being harassed. (And there are people who are doing just that.)
Or at least do so where you're not creating a nuisance and health hazard for others - assuming that you reject the shelters that are available.
Posted by: Ron O | June 29, 2024 at 09:43 AM
Exactly Ron, one shouldn't be able to set up camp wherever the "f" they feel like.
Posted by: Keith | June 29, 2024 at 11:36 AM
Has anyone noticed that the people that make "more" money when "less" people shop in stores (like Amazon), meet in parks (like Facebook), meet in office buildings (like Zoom) and go out to dinner (like DoorDash) tend to fund the politicians that over the past ten years have made it harder to shop in stores (more shoplifting, more homeless and more car break ins in parking lots), harder to go to the park (more illegals playing Ranchero music, more homeless with unlicensed and unleased pit bulls), harder to go to the office (with more homeless downtown and most office building parking lots smelling like a construction site porta-potty) and go out to dinner (we met some friends from East Sac in Downtown Sac a while back and I am done going out to dinner in Sac since there we passed close to a hundred street zombies going to and from the restaurant and the parking structure - that in addition to being expensive smelled like a construction site porta potty). This morning I got an (group) email from a guy married to my wife's roommate at Princeton (they live in a ~$8mm home in Woodside and have a ~$6mm "cabin" in Martis Camp) telling me that we need to support Biden (who had a cold last week) since we can't let Trump get elected. As I've posted before I'm no MAGA guy and I'm 90% sure that Trump is a narcissistic sociopath (and as a modest fit guy married to the same woman for years that hates anything gold plated I hate almost everything about him), but it make me wonder why a super rich VC investor (and almost every "Billionaire" are supporting the people that are making is crappier for almost everyone (who does not fly in private planes and play golf at private clubs)...
Posted by: South of Davis | June 29, 2024 at 06:26 PM
Similar, SOD, to all the goodie goodie Methodists (GGMs) who support "homeless" programs who spoke en masse at the City Council meeting last Tuesday in favor of spending more money on homelessness. I'm not going to go figure out where most of them live, but I'd bet most of the GGMs don't live near the Respite Center, along the RR tracks, next to the North Davis drainage canal, or along the Hwy. 40 bike path north of I-80 or along Putah Creek. No, they foist that carp upon those of us who do live in these places, and bike in these places. And what do the Visible Homeless do, they leave trash en masse. Lots of trash and a few human feces to boot. Me and a neighbor have spent years and thousands of dollars to make our area VHU (visible homeless unfriendly) and called the cops 100's of times. Thanks GGMs and others, for nothing, for less than nothing . . . Oh, yeah, I know, one GGM is going to say, "I live near the Respite Center". Well, good for you, martyr :-|
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | June 29, 2024 at 07:29 PM
I knew that David would pick up on the story regarding SF "missing" its housing targets.
So it does seem that the state is now "requiring" cities to approve developments during the housing cycle (at some pre-determined pace), regardless of whether or not developers even submit applications. This is a fundamental change from previous RHNA processes, in which cities were only required to provide the zoning/ability for developers to pursue housing.
As a couple of SF supervisors have noted, Wiener and his buddies wrote the laws in an attempt to ensure failure. Thereby allowing the destruction of any planning process.
https://www.sfchronicle.com/sf/article/peskin-chan-weiner-housing-18585523.php
An audit has been approved, to determine the following:
"California cities are scrambling to comply with state-mandated housing element goals, and they may be scrambling too hard, as a state committee is going to audit whether the goals are too demanding and the penalties too harsh."
https://sfist.com/2024/05/22/state-auditors-step-into-housing-element-mandate-mess-question-whether-regulators-are-doing-enough-to-help-cities/
Truth be told, the actions by Wiener and his buddies "need" to cause some chaos and suffering, to expose just how extreme they are. Hopefully, the housing market itself is healthy-enough to ensure that developers inflict some detrimental effects on cities such as San Francisco - sufficient to create a REAL backlash against these draconian laws and politicians.
Posted by: Ron O | July 02, 2024 at 08:43 AM
From today's Vanguard: "Criminalizing homelessness can “cause a destabilizing cascade of harm,” Sotomayor added. When a person is arrested or separated from their belongings, the items that are frequently destroyed include important documents needed for accessing jobs and housing or items required for work such as uniforms and bicycles, Sotomayor wrote."
Right - because the shopping carts full of crap that I've seen were overflowing with resumes, uniforms, etc. And the bicycles were going to be used for transportation to their resulting new job.
But again, no one is actually supporting "criminalizing homelessness".
Posted by: Ron O | July 03, 2024 at 07:34 AM
Regarding today's Voonsplard on itself:
https://www.davisvanguard.org/2024/07/behind-the-scenes-at-the-vanguard/
It's the same promo video as before, but it has that same, solemn piano background now added that goes behind videos of suffering animals and children with cancer for nonprofits that you used to see at 2:00am on TV, and now see at the beginning of YouTube videos. The two examples I gave do tug at the heartstrings of even this jaded main-streamer. No such heartstrings are tugged at the thought of the Vanguard not making it through the month to reach 'the light at the end of the tunnel' that speak of, very confident that they will prevail in court and receive grants they've applied for -- neither one a sure thing. Unfortunately for the Vanguard, its future seems built upon a similar quicksand asto the Davis Economic Development Program. So maybe the Vanguard, as with Davis, could propose posing a sales tax upon the people of Davis to keep the Vanguard afloat? That would be OK with me, as long as that sales tax included salaries for those hard working folk at The Davisite :-|
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | July 03, 2024 at 12:49 PM
“By the way, I’m proud to be, as I said, the first vice-president, first black woman… to serve with a black president,” he said, mangling his own time serving as vice-president for Barack Obama.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2024/07/05/biden-first-black-woman-serve-with-black-president/
(Sounds like a good reason to vote for him. Who am I to question his identity?)
Posted by: Ron O | July 04, 2024 at 07:52 PM
Ron, I was away from the news for a few days and missed that gaffe.
Unbelievable.....LMAO
He's totally mentally unfit to serve.
Posted by: Keith | July 05, 2024 at 03:57 PM
I was hoping you'd see that one, Keith!
The part that I find amusing is the change of (both) skin color AND sex (in regard to another current topic).
But aside from politics, it's kind of sad to see someone decline. I'd say the same thing about Trump, if it was happening to him. I don't hate Trump.
None of this will matter in regard to California's presidential selection.
Posted by: Ron O | July 05, 2024 at 08:00 PM