There MAY not have been a May version of Al's Corner.  People got by.  They posted May stuff in April.  We all lived.

June's Al's Corner will feature ketchup and mustard on top.  Peace.  Over & Out.

By Alan Pryor

The Davis City Council recently decided at their April 4, 2023 meeting that they would explore all options for putting a new general tax measure on the November 2024 ballot while declining to place a peripheral housing project on the same ballot. The Council’s stated reasons are that they did not believe Staff had the “bandwidth” to process both ballot measures simultaneously and that they feared the controversy of placing a peripheral ballot measure on the same ballot as their preferred general tax measure ballot may harm the tax measure’s chances of success.

And at last Tuesday night's Council meeting they agreed to relegate all future peripheral Measure J/R/D housing ballot measure to special elections over at least the next few years. I believe this decision was shortsighted and made without a complete understanding of what motivates Davis voters to approve or disapprove of tax measures in Davis.

Aside from the obvious charge that the City is favoring adding new revenue to their coffers over providing needed housing in the community (after standing on their soap boxes and proclaiming the dire need for housing over and over again in the past), this decision displays a misunderstanding of the realities of Davis electoral politics and this lack of awareness may presage the failure of both the expected November 2024 general tax measure AND any new peripheral housing ballot measure on later special election ballots.

Let me explain.

By Larry Guenther

I live in District 3, and I emphatically support Francesca Wright for Davis City Council.

We are governed by a representative democracy. On a City Council of five members, those individuals need to represent many and diverse groups. So the primary traits I like to see in a Council Member are the ability to A) listen, and B) create win-win solutions from situations where there appears to be adversity. People talk about candidates having a specific 'expertise.' My view is that the expertise required of a true representative is the ability to bring people of different views together to come up with solutions that work for everyone.

As a member of the Tree Commission, I signed the open letter on "Improving City of Davis Decision Making," written by other Davis Commissioners in 2020. This letter laid out many great steps to improve engagement with the Commissions and to improve the outcomes of issues that came before City Council. I felt then and, as a current commissioner, I still feel that there are fundamental issues with the participation of City Commissions and that these recommendations would address these issues very well. There has yet to be any movement on these recommendations.  I believe that Francesca Wright actually appreciates the Commission system and the expertise the members of these commissions bring to the table. As someone who I have witnessed really listening to people and incorporating their ideas into a final plan of action, I have no doubt that Francesca Wright would move forward on really engaging the Commissions and using them to their full potential.

There were significant errors, omissions, and mischaracterizations about zoning, the EIR, and contractual obligations.

By Rik Keller

Screen Shot from the City of Davis website

Note: The following has been set to members of the Planning Commission and members of the City Council

I’ve been following the U-Mall/University Commons/The Davis Collection discussions with interest. I have decades of land use planning experience as a consultant for cities and counties since receiving my Master of Science in Community and Regional Planning degree in the mid-1990s, including general plan policy review and development, zoning ordinances, housing elements, and project consistency review. Based on my knowledge and experience in the field, I have some very strong questions about the process that the City has conducted.

Looking at the 3/8/2023 staff report for the Planning Commission in detail:

1. There are significant errors, omissions, and mischaracterizations about the Mixed Use (MU) land use designation and associated Planned Development (PD) zoning district adopted for the site by the City Council on August 25, 2020. I believe these errors may be significant enough to re-open the discussion about a required residential component for the site and possibly require additional City Council votes;
2. There are also significant errors, omissions, and mischaracterizations about the required environmental analysis under CEQA for the revised project. Specifically, because the project no longer has a residential component, the streamlining procedures that allowed for some CEQA analysis exemptions no longer apply, and additional EIR analysis appears to be required;
3. Finally, many of the contractual obligations under Development Agreement (DA) no longer apply, but an amended DA was not completed by the project proponent and City Council.

In summary, there appear to be numerous shortcuts taken to approve the modified project that aren’t legally adequate.

As a note: In his 3/20/23 appeal to the 3/8/2023 PC decision, Councilmember Bapu Vaitla did question the consistency of The Davis Collection proposal with broader General Plan vision statements but did not directly address the specific language and requirements for the Mixed Use designation and the PD zoning district for the site.

Francesca Wright is an inclusive and innovative leader who is not going to follow insular ways of doing things that have led to stalled Davis business opportunity and housing logjams.

With her experience, Francesca successfully brought about constructive change to how we keep each other safe and how we plan and implement policy. As a leader within Yolo People Power, Francesca worked to create the Davis Department of Social Services and Housing. Francesca Wright was also instrumental in the implementation of community law-enforcement oversight, a positive model for the nation; a framework where we are all part of the solution to keep each other safe.

Francesca has consistently sided with democracy and access to decision makers. I got to know Francesca these past five years on foot, visiting people in their apartments and single family homes all over Yolo County — to encourage them to vote. She won't wait for city meetings to get voter input.

Her success at solving problems comes from the people. Francesca brings strength to the council, strength to remove barriers and build trust in decisions for business, housing, climate action, and equity.

Please join me in voting for Francesca Wright for Davis City Council.

Scott Steward
Davis

March, like February, starts early at Al's Corner.  We'll start off trashing the Davis Vanguard, as common a theme on Al's Corner as housing articles on the Davis Vanguard.  Recently posted:

Walter Shwe February 26, 2023 at 6:00 pm

Has anyone at Davis Vanguard lately tried to comment on an article or replied to a prior comment on an iPhone? The experience is atrocious. Articles always load slowly except late at night. Ads interfere with the top page buttons, particularly the Login button. Most importantly to you the Donate button is inaccessible. Earlier today I had to login by first tapping the Register button. Will anyone at Davis Vanguard ever fix these frustrating issues? I realize that ads help pay for site costs, but this is simply ridiculous.

Moderator February 26, 2023 at 6:26 pm

We’ll forward this comment to the webmaster and then remove it in a few hours. Thanks for your feedback.

Funny, myself and I believe RO and KO all pointed out that since the Vanguard added Newsy and other advertising that it has become an annoying, almost unusable piece of sh*t, and most especially on a phone, where you might as well drop your phone in the toilet and flush.  But no, we were ignored.  Maybe because we also, in not so many words, or maybe in so many words, also called the content of the DV sh*t also.   But hey, you should listen to your critics, because we know what is best for you.  But no, y'all wait until a fan-of-the- blog points out the very same thing.  Good going.

And one bit of housekeeping to our thousands or hundreds or tens or single-digits or negative-number of fans:  In February we ran over the previously-unknown-to-me 100 comment limit.  This caused a "Page 2" to be created that many did not find, and missed brilliant commentary.  To find Page 2, either dig up the corpse of Paul Harvey, or scroll to the bottom of Page 1 and click on the "Newer >>>" button.   Yeehaw

Happy Early March Everyone!  Happy Easter!  Happy Passover!  Happy Good Friday, if that is a happy holy day otherwise maybe a solemn one!  And then there are other holidays for all the people of the world and I am now going to list them all and celebrate all of them . . . or not!

PG&E crew working into the night to fix a leaning power pole near Cesar Chavez Elementary

By Roberta Millstein

The recent storms have made it amply clear that the City lacks any sort of coherent plan for dealing with storms (and presumably other sorts of emergencies).  Every action taken in response to the recent storm was late, and in some cases, inadequate. 

Yet these storms were comparable to other big storms that Davis has experienced in past years.  And even if they weren’t, the storm that occurred over New Year’s Eve and into New Year’s Day ought to have been a warm up, with lessons learned for the storms Jan 4-8, all of which were well-predicted by weather forecasters. 

The City seemed to make things up as they go.  To be clear, I am not faulting rank-and-file staff, who clearly were working hard under difficult circumstances.  It has also been reported that the City did a good job finding shelter for people lacking housing.  I am grateful for these efforts.  I am faulting the City Council  and the City Manager for failure to provide leadership.  There should have been plans in place for these kind of events long ago.

Here are the areas that need to improve.  I have broken them into short-term, medium-term, and long term, in the sense that the things in the short term can and should be fixed right away.  The others will take a little longer.

By Colin Walsh

Please pick the side of Democracy.

Tonight, the City Council has the opportunity to set in motion their own private pick of the successor to Lucas Frerichs for the District 3 Council seat, or they can side with democracy and let voters decide.

I can certainly understand the temptation to save money and sidestep elections and appoint their selected candidate (likely Donna Neville). After all, the council all endorsed each other and almost always votes together. Even our newest council member Bapu Vaitla arrives as a consummate insider with strong relationships with the other council members. I mean really the Davis power clique has dominated the last elections and has every reason to believe their handpicked appointment would win in an election anyway. After all – the inside candidates dominate in fundraising, endorsements, and opportunities in all recent council elections.

The mechanism for picking might look like this - we would probably see the Council set in motion a process where they would pick the pickers. The council could appoint a committee to go through the process of interviewing and evaluating candidates and then pick exactly the same person the council would pick. After all, the council would surely pick the pickers that would pick the council’s pick of choice anyway - all while the voters of district 3 would be left picking their noses.

But maybe district 3 would vote differently than the power clique prefers. They certainly should have a chance to pick for themselves.

Some argue precedent, that the council has picked replacements candidates in the past, but things are different now with district elections. All of the current council members are elected by voters from specific districts and not by district 3 voters. District 3 voters deserve the chance to pick their own council person without interference from the candidates representing the other districts.

Even if the council chooses an election sometime in the future, but picks an interim council member, it amounts to the biggest endorsement they can give providing a very unfair advantage to their pick in the election. Better to leave the seat open until the voters of District 3 can vote democratically for the council member to fill the remaining term that Frerichs has left behind. Frankly if district 3 voters are upset about not being represented for a period of time, they should send their complaints to Frerichs who abandoned his council seat mid term for a better paying gig.

Let’s face it, the council has been voting in lockstep on just about every major issue for years now. A vacancy for a few months is not going to make a big difference in outcome. Especially considering the lockstep council would likely just pick another person to join them in lockstep.

Or maybe the council will pick democracy and district 3 can pick the next council person to represent them. One can hope.

I woke up this New Year's morning and the Davis Vanguard wouldn't load.  I thought God had smiled down upon me and Davis and our civic nightmare was over -- The Davis Vanguard was GONE!!! 

But a couple of hours later it loaded again.  Shit.

God fails again.

So I would wish you all a Happy New Year, but why?

But is there hope?  I dunno, I got some letter from an anonymous sender referencing articles in the "California Globe" from October 2021 and April 2022.  Seriously, I don't know who sent it to me, but they knew my mailing address.  The article they referenced seems to refer to:

https://californiaglobe.com/articles/new-irs-complaint-against-non-profit-davis-vanguard-news-service/

AND . . .

   [See "Pages" --> "Al's Corner - What It Is" for Rulez.]

Marginally enjoyable holidays from Al's Corner :-|     . . .       'Tis the season to be an a-hole. 

Express your inner a-hole at Al's Corner!

   [See "Pages" --> "Al's Corner - What It Is" for Rulez.]

Let's all gather around the Al's Corner Thanksgiving table and give thanks that Al's Corner provides a place to moan & complain about what is stupid in Davis.

Let the complaining begin!

   [See "Pages" --> "Al's Corner - What It Is" for Rulez.]

A place for YOU to make comments about stuff because why not.  Special election edition for no particular reason nor content.

Election Voting Happening People - Vote if you can rub two brain cells together!  AND  if you vote similar to me.  If not, please stay home and forget to turn in the envelope. Thank you.

.   [See "Pages" --> "Al's Corner - What It Is" for Rulez.]

Alan C. Miller’s One-Man Protest of the Davis Vanguard, for Sucking. – Photo Credit: Alan C. Miller (also available as a poster or as a t-shirt!)

An Al’s Corner Special Report. Dateline Sacramento. Alan C. Miller Reporting on Alan C. Miller.

The Davis Vanguard (DV) held an event last Thursday night in Sacramento. The event honored some people for doing stuff. Entry into the event was $100 to $5000.   Why?   Do those contributing not realize that giving money to something perpetuates its existence?

As of last Thursday morning, there were 167 $100 tickets ‘available’. But one shouldn’t draw any conclusions as people often wait until the last minute on events. As one person did. As of 6:00pm last Thursday there were 166 $100 dollar tickets available. Not sure how many $5000 tickets were still available.

The entrance had no obvious signs of the event, though some A-frames advertised a food establishment within the becolumned ex-bank. I arrived at 5:45pm and found a spot near the A-frames across from the door where I could be seen but be out of the way of anyone who showed up. I held up my 11x17 protest sign which read, “The Davis Vanguard Sucks Donkey Balls” on one side and “$100 - $5000 WHY?” on the other.

Councilman Carson Violated Two City Policies Using City Resources for Campaign Emails

By David L. Johnson and Colin Walsh

New documents obtained through a Public Records Act request reveal that City of Davis Councilman Dan Carson violated two City of Davis policies when he sent numerous campaign emails from his publicly-funded city email account concerning Measure H, a ballot measure to approve the DiSC development project.

New documents from the city also reveal that all emails Carson sent in 2022 regarding measure H appear to have been deleted from his city account.

Statement By Gloria Partida

There has been discussion on social media over the past week concerning whether I was truthful in answering a question that was asked by an audience member during a candidate forum sponsored by Yolo People Power on September 26, 2022. I was asked whether I had ever been arrested or convicted of a crime.

I responded by giving examples of police encounters I had had while driving. I also affirmed in my response that I had the experience of being arrested.

Have I ever been convicted of a crime? Yes. Do I currently have a conviction? No.

Answering this question in a way that doesn’t create misunderstanding, takes more than the brief response time allowed in the forum. Moreover, I have received legal advice that I am under no obligation to disclose this prior conviction, given that it was reduced to a misdemeanor and set aside.

The events around this occurred in 1996, and resulted in charges being filed against me. The details of this incident involve my extended family and the circumstances are deeply personal and painful. The bottom line is that I followed all legally authorized processes to resolve the matter, including what was needed to obtain court orders to render the incident a misdemeanor for all purposes and obtain an expungement of my record. When I filed for a new term on the City Council and declared that I met the eligibility criteria, I did so in good faith and in accordance with the law. I have been assured by my legal counsel and the District Attorney’s office that my response was in full compliance with the law.

In response to Alan Pryor’s statements regarding my background, I do not have a criminal conviction. I did have a prior conviction from 22 years ago. That conviction was dismissed and set aside by the Yolo County Superior Court in 2005, based on my “continued law-abiding lifestyle, education and involvement in family and community.”  Simple fact: I do not currently have a conviction.

Seventeen years ago, my court case file should have been updated to correctly show a “dismissal” of the charges. I learned only recently that, due to a record-keeping error, the Court website was not properly updated to show this dismissal until I notified them several days ago that the court website contained incorrect information. Contrary to Mr. Pryor’s assertion that the court website was “scrubbed” the Court Clerk’s Office acknowledged that the website had not been properly updated.  The Court Clerk then sealed the record, as required by Senate Bill 731, which took effect on July 1 of this year. No scrubbing involved, just compliance with applicable legal requirements.

I did not have any legal obligation to disclose this when I filed my papers for candidacy.  At that point, I was asked if I had a felony conviction, and I did not have one. The prior conviction had by then been reduced to a misdemeanor and dismissed. You have a right to hold me to a high standard, and my sincere hope in sharing this information with you is that you will take into account my long history of commitment to our community. I sincerely hope that all of my work in the community will allow you to put this issue into the proper context.

-----------------

link to Alan Pryor's previous article "Does Gloria Partida’s Conviction for a Felony in 2000 Disallow Her from Holding an Elected Public Office in California?"

link to answer Gloria's Answer at forum

And did Gloria Partida sign a false statement and wrongfully fail to disclose the conviction as required by law in her Statement of Candidacy in 2022?

By Alan Pryor

The Alleged Felony Crimes, the Conviction, and the Sentencing

Based on official court records, Gloria Partida, current at-large Davis City Councilmember who is running for reelection in the newly created District 4 (East Davis and Wildhorse), was apparently charged in 1999 with four felony counts of “Forgery, Statute 470(A)” and one felony count of “Fraud to Obtain Aid, Statute 10980(C)(2)” for offenses committed in 1995 and 1996.

The following screenshot of the initial charges filed in Yolo County Superior Court was obtained from the Court’s document retrieval system (see https://portal-cayolo.tylertech.cloud/Portal/Home/WorkspaceMode?p=0, using “Partida, Gloria Jean” to search). Note that as of the evening of 10/10/2022, the records appear to have been scrubbed from the Court’s website although they were available earlier in the day:

The initial complaint against Ms. Partida was filed on 3/12/1999 and she was arraigned on all of the charges on 3/30/1999.

At the Preliminary Hearing on 2/2/2000, Ms. Partida entered a conditional plea of “guilty/Nolo” to the Fraud to Obtain Aid felony charge with the stipulation that no time in a State Prison would be imposed upon sentencing on the assigned date of 3/20/2000.

Al's Corner is a space for YOU to comment on local issues.  What is stopping you?  Huh?

.   [See "Pages" --> "Al's Corner - What It Is" for Rulez.]

By Nancy Price

I was stunned to read that Bapu Vaitla, who is a candidate for Davis City Council in District 1, is considering overturning the City's phase out of glyphosate (manufactured and commonly sold as RoundUp by Monsanto) instead of improving and strengthening the City's Integrated Pest Management (IPM) program. (see Question #2 at  https://www.davisite.org/2022/09/part-5-candidate-responses-to-the-sierra-club-yolano-group-questionnaire-for-the-2022-davis-city-cou.html#more). None of the other candidates made this audacious proposal.

Here is some background. The City decided to phase out glyphosate in 2017; finally discontinuing its use in 2020.  The process involved three City citizen-advisory commissions: Natural Resources, Recreation and Parks, and Open Space & Habitat. It took over a year and a half and involved a widely attended public citizens forum, a city-wide citizen survey, many individual Commission meetings, and a 3-way joint Commission meeting. Despite considerable stonewalling from staff, who attempted to derail and water down THIS [the] citizen-based effort, the measure was finally unanimously approved by the City Council. What passed in 2017 wasn’t perfect, but it was well-received by citizens. (For more details, see https://www.davisite.org/2018/07/bad-process-leads-to-mediocre-decision-on-pesticide-use-in-davis-and-not-without-wasted-time-and-eff.html). 

Around the same time, the city forced out its popular and highly respected IPM specialist (see https://www.davisite.org/2018/05/martin-guerenas-statement-city-of-davis-environmental-recognition-award-2018.html). Regrettably, that position still hasn’t been filled. But given the clear desire expressed by many staff to continue using non-organic pesticides over other less toxic weed management strategies, it is hard to see the ongoing long-term failure to fill the position as an unintended accident. 

Instead of advocating for hiring an IPM Specialist, Vaitla thinks we should go back to glyphosate because, he says, — “we cannot reasonably resort to mechanical weed management.”

There are several problems here. One is Vaitla offering an opinion that either ignores or is ignorant of this recent controversial history of pesticide use by the City. A second problem is his complete dismissal and disregard of the work of the public and three citizen-advisory commissions which collectively devoted many hundreds of hours of work to this effort, most of which occurred prior to Mr. Vaitla's most recent move to Davis. 

A third problem is that, although Mr. Vaitla gives lip service to the Precautionary Principle, he doesn’t follow it. Notably, just this past June, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected EPA's analysis for determining that glyphosate is likely not carcinogenic to people and ordered EPA to conduct "further analysis and explanation." The science is far from settled, and since there are valid reasons to think that glyphosate is a human carcinogen supported by respected international authorities and agencies, we should avoid using it especially since we have other methods at our disposal. 

Vaitla's position is hasty, overlooks a long City history and the latest Court rulings, and lacks respect for the citizen and commissions-led process in Davis. And, most importantly, it fails to protect our health. This attitude generally does not bode well for the sort of Councilmember he would make.