Recruitment for Advisory Commissions Continues
July 05, 2024
City of Davis Extends Recruitment for Advisory Commissions
From Press Release
Post Date: July 03, 2024 4:00 pm
The City of Davis announced that applications to serve on one of the following City Commissions have been extended to July 19, 2024:
• Fiscal Commission
• Senior Citizen
• Social Services
• Transportation
Due to a rescheduled City Council meeting in late July and an added commission recruitment, interested residents now have more time and options to submit an application for a City commission. Commissions have a critical role in the community and serve at the direction of the City Council. Commissions study issues within their scope of authority, analyze and recommend policies and programs and serve as public forums to hear resident interests and perspectives.
Applications are tentatively scheduled to be submitted to City Council for appointment at a public meeting in late July. For an application, visit: https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/city-clerk/apply-to-serve-on-a-city-commission. Applications may be submitted via email to: [email protected], via mail to the City Clerk’s Office at: City Hall (23 Russell Blvd., Suite 1, Davis, CA, 95616) or via the drop box located in the City Hall parking lot. All applications and accompanying documents are considered public information and may be disclosed or released pursuant to the California Public Records Act.
In addition to the application form, commission applicants will participate in a 15-minute interview via Zoom with the City Council Subcommittee and City staff. For more information, contact the City Clerk’s Office at 530-757-5648 or visit the City of Davis website at: https://www.cityofdavis.org/city-hall/commissions-and-committees.
COMMISSION INFORMATION:
Fiscal Commission
• Provide accountability and transparency in spending tax-payer dollars. Review spending outlined in the City budget for appropriateness and alignment with Council goals and priorities.
• Consider potential cost saving measures and revenue generators.
• Review and make recommendations on City rates, fees, and charges for all funds including annual or multi-year adjustments to the City's utility rates.
• Review and provide recommendations on financial policies. Review and provide recommendations on financial impacts of projects at the request of City Council.
Senior Citizen Commission
• Review and make recommendations related to city policies and programs affecting seniors.
• Support city forums, activities and public outreach events related to senior services.
Social Services Commission
• Review and make recommendations on policies and programs to support City-driven social services. Advise on critical needs involving vulnerable populations, including health, food security/nutrition, disabilities and childcare; refer individuals to appropriate agency, official or process.
• Review and make recommendations on policies, procedures and standards related to housing affordability across the continuum from unhoused to renters and home buyers, including affordable housing plans of development proposals.
• Review and make recommendations on Community Development Block Grant, Home Investment Partnership Program and other Federal, State and local grant programs to support vulnerable populations in the city. Liaise with providers involved with serving vulnerable populations.
Transportation Commission
• Advise on transportation programs, policies, projects and planning efforts for all modes including active transportation (bicycle, pedestrian, scooters, etc.), transit (Unitrans, Yolobus, etc.) and vehicular.
• Serve as the lead commission on implementation of transportation aspects of the Climate Action & Adaptation Plan.
• Hold a public meeting once a year to review any proposed Unitrans route, schedule and fare changes.
Press contact: Barbara Archer, [email protected], 530-400-3418
What if they held a City committee recruitment, and nobody came?
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | July 05, 2024 at 08:11 AM
From the Voonspard:
https://www.davisvanguard.org/2024/07/davis-still-recruiting-for-more-advisory-commissions/#comments
"Ron Glick, July 5, 2024 at 7:02 am
What about the nasty treatment some council members have received from current and former commission members?"
RG, are you denying what CW is saying that Commission members have been disrespected by the Council, or are you just what-abouting for the sake of what-abouting? Because I sure as F--- agree with CW. City Council members are *supposed* to take some gruff from the public, it's part of the job. I don't mean personal insults, but certainly criticism about how they conduct themselves and their policies. City Council members, however, should have a bit more restraint, however, in dissing members of the public. I'm not saying it's never deserved, but you seem really close to having morphed into a straight up City Council apologist.
[Pardon my answering here instead of on the Voonsplard; I've been banned permanently from the Voonspard after committing commenticide you see.]
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | July 05, 2024 at 09:13 AM
Also from Voonsplard:
AP say: " . . . replace independent thinking Commissioners with more compliant but less innovative and experieinced Commissioners has resulted in a wholesale exodus of the citizen brain trust we have spent decades developing in Davis."
"They" wanted "us/them" (citizen brain trust) out, replaced by progressive activist blue-city types. And "they" won. R.I.P. The Davis Brain Trust.
We're (brain trust) doomed.
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | July 05, 2024 at 09:21 AM
There is a significant power imbalance between public commenters and City Council Members. Individuals from the public get 2 minutes to make their case on any given subject. There is not much you can say in 2 minutes if you're not really focused in your delivery so there just is not a lot of time to be disrespectful, or polite for that matter. Council members on the other hand have all the time they want, and they use it to wax poetic about how amazing their colleagues are and not infrequently to denigrate commenters.
Both are examples of how they use their privilege. The over the top adulation is used to set themselves apart from the public and to remind everyone that they are so very special. Then they turn to bloviating about any troubling comment. What Council members say may only be partially true, or not even address commenters’ concerns at all – no matter, the Council gets the last word and no member of the Council will hold their peers accountable for half-truths.
So, when someone wants to “what about” supposed bad behavior of commenters I have to just laugh at the shallow insincerity of the kowtowing.
Posted by: Colin Walsh | July 05, 2024 at 11:19 AM
CW say: "There is a significant power imbalance between public commenters and City Council Members."
Because "we" agree to that.
CW say: "There is not much you can say in 2 minutes if you're not really focused in your delivery . . . "
I am very focused on my delivery. It's everyone else I feel sorry for.
CW say: " . . . so there just is not a lot of time to be disrespectful, or polite for that matter."
I can be disrespectful in five seconds. Without profanity, ten seconds.
CW say: "Council members on the other hand have all the time they want, and they use it to wax poetic about how amazing their colleagues are . . . "
They all are amazing though; haven't you noticed ? They glow like royalty under the dais lights :-|
CW say: " . . . and not infrequently to denigrate commenters."
Some more than others . . . I have a feeling all reading this just pictured in their minds pretty much the same "some".
CW say: "Both are examples of how they use their privilege."
Their privilege ??? Wait . . . what? I thought it was committee members that had privilege . . . it's almost like 'privilege' has become a pejorative in the 2020's, like "white" and "zionist" and "cis".
CW say: "The over the top adulation is used to set themselves apart from the public and to remind everyone that they are so very special."
The are so very special. Haven't you noticed? Their skin gleams . . . oh forgot it . . .
CW say: "Then they turn to bloviating about any troubling comment."
Then don't make troubling comments . . . any of you. Stop it. Lock step 1-2-3-4, 1-2-3-4 . . . right over the cliff, following the lead sheep . . .
I will say I don't believe I've ever seen DN make such a bloviation. She's District 3! My district! Go District 3! Go District 3! Disembodied Voice: "But I thought you hated council districts, Alan"; Alan: "I do, but since we have them right now, I'm gonna root for mine" :-| Go District 3! Go District 3!
CW say: "What Council members say may only be partially true, or not even address commenters’ concerns at all – no matter, the Council gets the last word . . . "
True :-|
CW say: " . . . and no member of the Council will hold their peers accountable for half-truths."
True of this Council. But I'm not sure that's a bad thing: witness Greewald-Asmundson.
CW say: "So, when someone wants to “what about” supposed bad behavior of commenters I have to just laugh at the shallow insincerity of the kowtowing."
"The Shallow Insincerity of the Kowtowing" -- I'm going to steal that line. Even if it was, um, "disrespectful" :-|
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | July 05, 2024 at 04:14 PM
A.M. - “I am very focused on my delivery. It's everyone else I feel sorry for.” Agreed, especially first-time commenters. Worse, they often think they need to faun and kiss the ring because that is the behavior the council models (rather than a professional business like meeting) before getting to the actual comment *poof* 45 seconds gone. The 2 minute rule mostly makes it hard for inexperienced public speakers to address the council which is at odds with what the council claims to want.
A.M. – “ it's almost like 'privilege' has become a pejorative in the 2020's” – I am using the word privilege in a very traditional way. The elected council members do have the special right of speech granted to them because they are elected. It is not wrong that they have the privilege of speech in a council meeting – what I am getting at is how they use their privilege to engage in over-the-top adulation of their peers, denigration of the lowly commenters, and to always have the unfact checked last word. They could do better.
As to the S. Greenwald / R. Asmundson incident I think it is important to remember that Sue was objecting to a massive pension increase in a non-public portion of the meeting, but during the public report back what happened in the closed-door meeting was misrepresented. There is no doubt Sue did not handle it well after Ruth laid down on the floor but there was a lot that happened before that. This incident is often used to tarnish Sue’s record as council person. While it is true that Sue was sometimes challenging for her council peers (frankly they were challenging to her too), it is also true that she did exhaustive research before council meetings and her arguments were exceptionally well informed. With our current council I often get the impression that some of them haven’t even read the staff report on the item before them. I wish we had a Sue on this Council to help maintain accountability.
D.N. stands apart from the rest of the council in being well informed at meetings. It is one of several good reasons to appreciate her.
Please, feel free to adopt the phrase “The Shallow Insincerity of the Kowtowing” as your own. I hope it makes you rich.
Posted by: Coln Walsh | July 05, 2024 at 06:17 PM
From Blanglaard comments, same topic:
Matt Williams
July 5, 2024 at 9:40 am
MW say: "What you refer to as nasty Ron, would be referred to as honest and/or candid by others."
Others, such as everyone who isn't a CounShill.
MW say: "Unfortunately some of the Council members volunteered to be in the cross hairs when they lied . . . "
No one lied . . . they just distorted the F out of the truth :-|
MW say: " . . . about meeting with all the Commission chairs during their process … and then doubling down on the lies when confronted with clear statements by individual Commission chairs that they had never been met with."
Oh, but at the same meeting at comments Judy Judy said that they met with her and her commission, so she didn't see what the issue was.
. . . Coun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Shill
"The whole process has been a giant cluster #@&! from beginning to end."
I can't predict the outcome, but my hope is that not only do CounShills continue to expose themselves, as they are doing, proudly . . . but also that it tanks the sales tax. At least those of us in the DBT (Davis Brain Trust) can gloat in our excellence . . . . . . . . . I mean campaign on their "giant cluster #@&!". Yup, it's the DBT vs. CSs. Davis! Oh, Davis!!!
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | July 05, 2024 at 06:28 PM
CW: "I hope it makes you rich."
Rich in spirit my dear CW, rich in spirit.
Posted by: Alan C. Miller | July 06, 2024 at 02:06 AM
The "first" Transportation Commission meeting is supposed to be on Monday. There have been no notifications.
My guess is that there was an internal staff screw up, and the meeting is going to be on Thursday (meeting time of the BTSSC), but typically a Thursday meeting agenda would have also been announced by now.
Posted by: Tuvia ben Olam DBA Todd Edelman | July 06, 2024 at 02:25 PM
Regarding my BTSSC/TC comment: At the June 13 2024 BTSSC meeting Commissioner Campbell mentioned that he had received an email from the City Clerk's office suggesting a couple of days for the TC meetings - NOT on the 2nd Thursday, like the BTSSC meetings. BTSSC liaison Staff said that they had not seen the email.
This reminds me that BTSSC liaison Staff was not really informed about the Commission changes until late.
Commissioners are volunteers and are likely fitting their (work and family etc) schedule. Curious if anyone can't do the new meeting times for any of "new" Commissions.
Posted by: TbODBATE | July 06, 2024 at 06:46 PM