I received a number of calls and emails regarding this particular article, all of them focusing less on the proposal itself and more on the process by which this proposal has come forward. I will stress this point–the objections raised were not about the specifics of the proposal. The objections and questions all focused on the issue of proper process. Is this proposal coming to the council in a proper manner or is there something unseemly about it?
The gist of the problem stems from the nature in which this issue has been brought forward–not from the planning staff and the normal planning process–but rather as an agenda item placed by a councilmember. As one former member of the council told me, the fact that such a complex proposal would be brought forward by a councilmember rather than fully analyzed by the staff and the planning commission is utterly irresponsible.
There were also expressed concerns that it was inappropriate for a councilmember, Stephen Souza, to enter into negotiations with a property owner and developer, without prior direction from the council to begin with.
As Mr. Souza puts it: “I’m a shrewd negotiator.”
Again, the statement itself seems ludicrous but it raises a number of issues about the propriety of such an arrangement. It also raises questions about the article itself which is very positive and does not quote anyone other than Councilmember Souza, it does not attempt to balance the issue out. Councilmembers when this issue was raised at last week’s city council meeting, raised vehement objections to the way in which this issue was brought forward, and yet the Davis Enterprise prints nary a word in opposition. The Enterprise does not interview anyone on the other side. It is simply a positive piece about the issue, quoting only Councilmember Souza and no one else.
That issue alone should raise the caution flags, but there are other problems with the story. The background in the story about Steve Gidaro and his role in the 2004 council elections is very misleading.
The story says:
“In 2004, Gidaro’s flared along Davis political circuits when he paid for telephone push polls for council candidates Stan Forbes, Mike Harrington, and Don Saylor… Gidaro legally reported large amounts of funding for the three candidates at the last minute, touching off a flurry of distrust and disappointment, not only from the voters but from the three candidates, who expressed anger at the unwanted donations.”
This statement is misleading for Mr. Gidaro’s campaign was aimed not at supporting Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington, but rather at destroying them. The paid push polls were not “for” Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington, they were aimed at destroying Mr. Forbes and Mr. Harrington. Moreover while he also spent money on the poll using Don Saylor’s name, he spent a merely few thousand dollars on Mr. Saylor while spending tens of thousands on the other two. In other words, article made it seem like the three expenditures were identical and they were anything but. The intent was to cripple the former two candidates and the intent of including Mr. Saylor in the expenditure was to confuse the voters about the intention of the expenditure.
The beneficiaries of the expenditure were Don Saylor who was elected and Stephen Souza, who had twice before run and lost, and may have suffered the same fate were it not for the fact that Gidaro’s expenditure crippled the chances of sitting Councilmember Mike Harrington from winning re-election.
The article cites anger by Mr. Souza directed at Mr. Gidaro, but in all likelihood Mr. Souza would not have been elected without that last second push, as Souza finished third, just slightly ahead of the damaged Michael Harrington. Maybe Souza has a sense for justice, but it seems odd that he would feel that strongly about tactics that clearly were aimed at getting him elected.
It is difficult to evaluate whether the emotions expressed in the article are genuine by Mr. Souza, however, when he discusses “good faith promises” and “good faith discussions about preserving this land” it rings hollow and casts severe doubt about what is being proposed. As even this favorable article makes clear there have been efforts over and over again at developing this land. Why would Mr. Gidaro abandon the land at the same time the city had specifically exempted adjacent mitigation along the Horse Ranch property that abuts Mr. Gidaro’s property?
There are also Measure J questions that come up. Will th acquisition of this land require a Measure J vote? Is the county involved in these talks since this is county land right now? Would an acquisition of this land as organic farms and sports fields mean that a Measure J vote would not be needed in the future for development?
Mr. Souza may say “there isn’t a catch” and “there’s no quid pro quo,” but given Gidaro’s history and the way this land deal is coming about, he will have to forgive those of us who are suspicious of both from thinking otherwise.
Finally, Mr. Souza says, “Maybe he really does have a conservation streak… His attorney said this isn’t unique for him; he’s done it in other locales.”
And maybe Tsakopoulos was really going to develop along the I-80 corridor just to finance a stem cell research center.
I do not know the motives of either Mr. Gidaro or Mr. Souza, but this whole issue is suspicious from the way in which the proposal was brought forward to the council last week, the fact that this is not going through the normal planning process, the fact that Mr. Souza was negotiating without council authorization, the fact that this involves Steve Gidaro, one of the more infamous figures in recent Davis history, and the fact that the council election is approaching.
Maybe this is on the level, but my thinking is that it should have gone through the planning department not Councilmember Souza to get here.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
I’m still somewhat undecided about this. Part of my problem is that I don’t know exactly what Steve Souza wants the City Council to do on Tuesday. If he is looking for an up or down vote on the acquisition decision, then I agree that the process is inappropriate. If on the other hand he is looking for the Council to simply decide whether Staff should devote valuable (and scarce) time analyzing the issue, then my concerns about process are substantially dissipated.
That may not make sense to a lot of the people who have emailed and called you, but here’s my logic. Good ideas often die when they enter a bureaucratic process, or enter a bureaucratic process too early. In those situations, the good idea frequently doesn’t have enough definition to stand up to the inevitable push-and-pull. Taking the time to “put some meat on the bones” before due dilligence is almost always a very good idea.
The fact that this project has come to public attention as more than a “skeleton” is troubling to manyn people, and if there was any hint that (like many developers) there was an effort to get a decision without public scrutiny, I would be very angry. However, there doesn’t appear to be any effort to avoid the public here. Souza gives us every appearance that he is 1) embracing the public process, and 2) trying to avoid wasting public resources on an ill-formed pie-in-the-sky idea.
Of course, appearances will become reality on Tuesday night. I will hold my judgment (either way) until then.
I’m still somewhat undecided about this. Part of my problem is that I don’t know exactly what Steve Souza wants the City Council to do on Tuesday. If he is looking for an up or down vote on the acquisition decision, then I agree that the process is inappropriate. If on the other hand he is looking for the Council to simply decide whether Staff should devote valuable (and scarce) time analyzing the issue, then my concerns about process are substantially dissipated.
That may not make sense to a lot of the people who have emailed and called you, but here’s my logic. Good ideas often die when they enter a bureaucratic process, or enter a bureaucratic process too early. In those situations, the good idea frequently doesn’t have enough definition to stand up to the inevitable push-and-pull. Taking the time to “put some meat on the bones” before due dilligence is almost always a very good idea.
The fact that this project has come to public attention as more than a “skeleton” is troubling to manyn people, and if there was any hint that (like many developers) there was an effort to get a decision without public scrutiny, I would be very angry. However, there doesn’t appear to be any effort to avoid the public here. Souza gives us every appearance that he is 1) embracing the public process, and 2) trying to avoid wasting public resources on an ill-formed pie-in-the-sky idea.
Of course, appearances will become reality on Tuesday night. I will hold my judgment (either way) until then.
I’m still somewhat undecided about this. Part of my problem is that I don’t know exactly what Steve Souza wants the City Council to do on Tuesday. If he is looking for an up or down vote on the acquisition decision, then I agree that the process is inappropriate. If on the other hand he is looking for the Council to simply decide whether Staff should devote valuable (and scarce) time analyzing the issue, then my concerns about process are substantially dissipated.
That may not make sense to a lot of the people who have emailed and called you, but here’s my logic. Good ideas often die when they enter a bureaucratic process, or enter a bureaucratic process too early. In those situations, the good idea frequently doesn’t have enough definition to stand up to the inevitable push-and-pull. Taking the time to “put some meat on the bones” before due dilligence is almost always a very good idea.
The fact that this project has come to public attention as more than a “skeleton” is troubling to manyn people, and if there was any hint that (like many developers) there was an effort to get a decision without public scrutiny, I would be very angry. However, there doesn’t appear to be any effort to avoid the public here. Souza gives us every appearance that he is 1) embracing the public process, and 2) trying to avoid wasting public resources on an ill-formed pie-in-the-sky idea.
Of course, appearances will become reality on Tuesday night. I will hold my judgment (either way) until then.
I’m still somewhat undecided about this. Part of my problem is that I don’t know exactly what Steve Souza wants the City Council to do on Tuesday. If he is looking for an up or down vote on the acquisition decision, then I agree that the process is inappropriate. If on the other hand he is looking for the Council to simply decide whether Staff should devote valuable (and scarce) time analyzing the issue, then my concerns about process are substantially dissipated.
That may not make sense to a lot of the people who have emailed and called you, but here’s my logic. Good ideas often die when they enter a bureaucratic process, or enter a bureaucratic process too early. In those situations, the good idea frequently doesn’t have enough definition to stand up to the inevitable push-and-pull. Taking the time to “put some meat on the bones” before due dilligence is almost always a very good idea.
The fact that this project has come to public attention as more than a “skeleton” is troubling to manyn people, and if there was any hint that (like many developers) there was an effort to get a decision without public scrutiny, I would be very angry. However, there doesn’t appear to be any effort to avoid the public here. Souza gives us every appearance that he is 1) embracing the public process, and 2) trying to avoid wasting public resources on an ill-formed pie-in-the-sky idea.
Of course, appearances will become reality on Tuesday night. I will hold my judgment (either way) until then.
Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lilly white community.
Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lilly white community.
Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lilly white community.
Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lilly white community.
Yeah okay, whatever
Yeah okay, whatever
Yeah okay, whatever
Yeah okay, whatever
Anonymous said…
“Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lily white community.”
I’m not sure where you got that from anything discussed thus far about Souza’s plan. Exactly where is there any housing for anyone in what has been discussed? Your comment is off the wall … at best.
Anonymous said…
“Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lily white community.”
I’m not sure where you got that from anything discussed thus far about Souza’s plan. Exactly where is there any housing for anyone in what has been discussed? Your comment is off the wall … at best.
Anonymous said…
“Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lily white community.”
I’m not sure where you got that from anything discussed thus far about Souza’s plan. Exactly where is there any housing for anyone in what has been discussed? Your comment is off the wall … at best.
Anonymous said…
“Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lily white community.”
I’m not sure where you got that from anything discussed thus far about Souza’s plan. Exactly where is there any housing for anyone in what has been discussed? Your comment is off the wall … at best.
I will hold to my “theory” until proven otherwise,namely candidate-for-reelection Souza has launched a lame attempt to change the subject away from his strong public support of Davis giving up the critical aspect of what we have been giving the County extra monies all these years for.. namely, that Davis makes the sole decision as to what development occurs on its borders.The outrage in our community was palpable on this subject and Souza is scambling for cover.In addition, with the two massive study areas now removed from the County General Plan, Souza’s developer patrons have returned to their final gambit at the end of their failed Measure X campaign,i.e. the Shriner propery and Gidaro’s threats to
try and terrorize the Davis voters into taking Covell Village(the end-game of all these political theatics). Timing is critical here what with the Steering Committee currently debating the CV property and the Council Majority set to push the CV site(whatever the Steering Committee recommends). Souza could not wait for the regular process of proposal submission to city staff for evaluation.
I will hold to my “theory” until proven otherwise,namely candidate-for-reelection Souza has launched a lame attempt to change the subject away from his strong public support of Davis giving up the critical aspect of what we have been giving the County extra monies all these years for.. namely, that Davis makes the sole decision as to what development occurs on its borders.The outrage in our community was palpable on this subject and Souza is scambling for cover.In addition, with the two massive study areas now removed from the County General Plan, Souza’s developer patrons have returned to their final gambit at the end of their failed Measure X campaign,i.e. the Shriner propery and Gidaro’s threats to
try and terrorize the Davis voters into taking Covell Village(the end-game of all these political theatics). Timing is critical here what with the Steering Committee currently debating the CV property and the Council Majority set to push the CV site(whatever the Steering Committee recommends). Souza could not wait for the regular process of proposal submission to city staff for evaluation.
I will hold to my “theory” until proven otherwise,namely candidate-for-reelection Souza has launched a lame attempt to change the subject away from his strong public support of Davis giving up the critical aspect of what we have been giving the County extra monies all these years for.. namely, that Davis makes the sole decision as to what development occurs on its borders.The outrage in our community was palpable on this subject and Souza is scambling for cover.In addition, with the two massive study areas now removed from the County General Plan, Souza’s developer patrons have returned to their final gambit at the end of their failed Measure X campaign,i.e. the Shriner propery and Gidaro’s threats to
try and terrorize the Davis voters into taking Covell Village(the end-game of all these political theatics). Timing is critical here what with the Steering Committee currently debating the CV property and the Council Majority set to push the CV site(whatever the Steering Committee recommends). Souza could not wait for the regular process of proposal submission to city staff for evaluation.
I will hold to my “theory” until proven otherwise,namely candidate-for-reelection Souza has launched a lame attempt to change the subject away from his strong public support of Davis giving up the critical aspect of what we have been giving the County extra monies all these years for.. namely, that Davis makes the sole decision as to what development occurs on its borders.The outrage in our community was palpable on this subject and Souza is scambling for cover.In addition, with the two massive study areas now removed from the County General Plan, Souza’s developer patrons have returned to their final gambit at the end of their failed Measure X campaign,i.e. the Shriner propery and Gidaro’s threats to
try and terrorize the Davis voters into taking Covell Village(the end-game of all these political theatics). Timing is critical here what with the Steering Committee currently debating the CV property and the Council Majority set to push the CV site(whatever the Steering Committee recommends). Souza could not wait for the regular process of proposal submission to city staff for evaluation.
Will there be iron-bound guarantees that this organic farm operation will not be declared a failed operation in the future and then be converted to residential development, already annexed into the city and not requiring a Measure J vote??
Will there be iron-bound guarantees that this organic farm operation will not be declared a failed operation in the future and then be converted to residential development, already annexed into the city and not requiring a Measure J vote??
Will there be iron-bound guarantees that this organic farm operation will not be declared a failed operation in the future and then be converted to residential development, already annexed into the city and not requiring a Measure J vote??
Will there be iron-bound guarantees that this organic farm operation will not be declared a failed operation in the future and then be converted to residential development, already annexed into the city and not requiring a Measure J vote??
Anonymous said… 7/30/07 8:12 AM
“Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lily white community.”
As a community activist, an African American woman, a senior with health issues who have lived in Davis since 197, I am well aware of race and class issues here. However, I am very suspicious of developers and other business interests most of whom do not live in Davis professing humanitarian concerns for minorities, the diabled and seniors. I think that their record and reputation should be examined to verify indications that they “walk the talk” beyond tax write-offs. I want to be sure that they are sincere and not trying to use us as dupes for massive developments.
Anonymous said… 7/30/07 8:12 AM
“Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lily white community.”
As a community activist, an African American woman, a senior with health issues who have lived in Davis since 197, I am well aware of race and class issues here. However, I am very suspicious of developers and other business interests most of whom do not live in Davis professing humanitarian concerns for minorities, the diabled and seniors. I think that their record and reputation should be examined to verify indications that they “walk the talk” beyond tax write-offs. I want to be sure that they are sincere and not trying to use us as dupes for massive developments.
Anonymous said… 7/30/07 8:12 AM
“Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lily white community.”
As a community activist, an African American woman, a senior with health issues who have lived in Davis since 197, I am well aware of race and class issues here. However, I am very suspicious of developers and other business interests most of whom do not live in Davis professing humanitarian concerns for minorities, the diabled and seniors. I think that their record and reputation should be examined to verify indications that they “walk the talk” beyond tax write-offs. I want to be sure that they are sincere and not trying to use us as dupes for massive developments.
Anonymous said… 7/30/07 8:12 AM
“Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lily white community.”
As a community activist, an African American woman, a senior with health issues who have lived in Davis since 197, I am well aware of race and class issues here. However, I am very suspicious of developers and other business interests most of whom do not live in Davis professing humanitarian concerns for minorities, the diabled and seniors. I think that their record and reputation should be examined to verify indications that they “walk the talk” beyond tax write-offs. I want to be sure that they are sincere and not trying to use us as dupes for massive developments.
Why does the city of Davis HAVE to acquire this property for Gidaro to go ahead with his selfless plan to convert this property into an organic farm? As for the Sports Complex, leave it as County land with a special arrangement to hook up with Davis services. Perhaps there is no need to for Davis to acquire the property and remove it from a future Measure J vote?
Why does the city of Davis HAVE to acquire this property for Gidaro to go ahead with his selfless plan to convert this property into an organic farm? As for the Sports Complex, leave it as County land with a special arrangement to hook up with Davis services. Perhaps there is no need to for Davis to acquire the property and remove it from a future Measure J vote?
Why does the city of Davis HAVE to acquire this property for Gidaro to go ahead with his selfless plan to convert this property into an organic farm? As for the Sports Complex, leave it as County land with a special arrangement to hook up with Davis services. Perhaps there is no need to for Davis to acquire the property and remove it from a future Measure J vote?
Why does the city of Davis HAVE to acquire this property for Gidaro to go ahead with his selfless plan to convert this property into an organic farm? As for the Sports Complex, leave it as County land with a special arrangement to hook up with Davis services. Perhaps there is no need to for Davis to acquire the property and remove it from a future Measure J vote?
Just as the property that Target now owns was greatly increased in value when Measure K rezoned it for Big Box retail, I would imagine that getting Davis to annex Gidaro’s property and so avoid a future Measure J vote would also significantly increase its value.
Just as the property that Target now owns was greatly increased in value when Measure K rezoned it for Big Box retail, I would imagine that getting Davis to annex Gidaro’s property and so avoid a future Measure J vote would also significantly increase its value.
Just as the property that Target now owns was greatly increased in value when Measure K rezoned it for Big Box retail, I would imagine that getting Davis to annex Gidaro’s property and so avoid a future Measure J vote would also significantly increase its value.
Just as the property that Target now owns was greatly increased in value when Measure K rezoned it for Big Box retail, I would imagine that getting Davis to annex Gidaro’s property and so avoid a future Measure J vote would also significantly increase its value.
Doug Paul Davis is complaining about someone else not being fair and balanced? He’s doing so in the very article he references just one former councilmember who shares Doug Paul’s agenda. Talk about hypocrisy. This DPD fellow is one-sided and he has the gall to complain about someone else being one sided?
The paid push polls were not “for” Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington, they were aimed at destroying Mr. Forbes and Mr. Harrington.
Has Mr. Gidaro claimed this was his intention? Has Doug Paul interviewed Gidaro? Or are his conclusions hot air?
Later, Doug Paul concedes, “I do not know the motives of either Mr. Gidaro or Mr. Souza.”
Which is it, DPD? Have you once spoken with Mr. Gidaro? It seems like you have drawn some horrible conclusions about this person who you apparently don’t know at all.
Has Gidaro ever developed any property in Davis? Or in Yolo County? Doug Paul speaks of ‘Gidaro’s history,’ but does he have any development history in this community to consider?
Doug Paul Davis is complaining about someone else not being fair and balanced? He’s doing so in the very article he references just one former councilmember who shares Doug Paul’s agenda. Talk about hypocrisy. This DPD fellow is one-sided and he has the gall to complain about someone else being one sided?
The paid push polls were not “for” Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington, they were aimed at destroying Mr. Forbes and Mr. Harrington.
Has Mr. Gidaro claimed this was his intention? Has Doug Paul interviewed Gidaro? Or are his conclusions hot air?
Later, Doug Paul concedes, “I do not know the motives of either Mr. Gidaro or Mr. Souza.”
Which is it, DPD? Have you once spoken with Mr. Gidaro? It seems like you have drawn some horrible conclusions about this person who you apparently don’t know at all.
Has Gidaro ever developed any property in Davis? Or in Yolo County? Doug Paul speaks of ‘Gidaro’s history,’ but does he have any development history in this community to consider?
Doug Paul Davis is complaining about someone else not being fair and balanced? He’s doing so in the very article he references just one former councilmember who shares Doug Paul’s agenda. Talk about hypocrisy. This DPD fellow is one-sided and he has the gall to complain about someone else being one sided?
The paid push polls were not “for” Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington, they were aimed at destroying Mr. Forbes and Mr. Harrington.
Has Mr. Gidaro claimed this was his intention? Has Doug Paul interviewed Gidaro? Or are his conclusions hot air?
Later, Doug Paul concedes, “I do not know the motives of either Mr. Gidaro or Mr. Souza.”
Which is it, DPD? Have you once spoken with Mr. Gidaro? It seems like you have drawn some horrible conclusions about this person who you apparently don’t know at all.
Has Gidaro ever developed any property in Davis? Or in Yolo County? Doug Paul speaks of ‘Gidaro’s history,’ but does he have any development history in this community to consider?
Doug Paul Davis is complaining about someone else not being fair and balanced? He’s doing so in the very article he references just one former councilmember who shares Doug Paul’s agenda. Talk about hypocrisy. This DPD fellow is one-sided and he has the gall to complain about someone else being one sided?
The paid push polls were not “for” Stan Forbes and Mike Harrington, they were aimed at destroying Mr. Forbes and Mr. Harrington.
Has Mr. Gidaro claimed this was his intention? Has Doug Paul interviewed Gidaro? Or are his conclusions hot air?
Later, Doug Paul concedes, “I do not know the motives of either Mr. Gidaro or Mr. Souza.”
Which is it, DPD? Have you once spoken with Mr. Gidaro? It seems like you have drawn some horrible conclusions about this person who you apparently don’t know at all.
Has Gidaro ever developed any property in Davis? Or in Yolo County? Doug Paul speaks of ‘Gidaro’s history,’ but does he have any development history in this community to consider?
“Doug Paul speaks of ‘Gidaro’s history,’ but does he have any development history in this community to consider?”
Gidaro threatened to fund a County-wide referendum to bypass Davis’ pass-through agreement and even the BOS votes so that he could develope his properties on Davis’ periphery.
“Doug Paul speaks of ‘Gidaro’s history,’ but does he have any development history in this community to consider?”
Gidaro threatened to fund a County-wide referendum to bypass Davis’ pass-through agreement and even the BOS votes so that he could develope his properties on Davis’ periphery.
“Doug Paul speaks of ‘Gidaro’s history,’ but does he have any development history in this community to consider?”
Gidaro threatened to fund a County-wide referendum to bypass Davis’ pass-through agreement and even the BOS votes so that he could develope his properties on Davis’ periphery.
“Doug Paul speaks of ‘Gidaro’s history,’ but does he have any development history in this community to consider?”
Gidaro threatened to fund a County-wide referendum to bypass Davis’ pass-through agreement and even the BOS votes so that he could develope his properties on Davis’ periphery.
Anonymous said…
“Why does the city of Davis HAVE to acquire this property for Gidaro to go ahead with his selfless plan to convert this property into an organic farm? As for the Sports Complex, leave it as County land with a special arrangement to hook up with Davis services. Perhaps there is no need to for Davis to acquire the property and remove it from a future Measure J vote?”
The real question that applies to Measure J is what the zoning of the property would be after this hypothetical acquisition. If the zoning remains Agriculture (with some kind of special use designation for the sports facility), then the property would still be subject to a Measure J vote should the organic farm go belly up some time in the future. Having the City as the owner of the property would seem to give Davis voters more control over the land’s use rather than less.
Since the Davis School District is currently wrestling with the fate of Nugget Fields, the idea of a sports complex on the Shriners land seems to provide the Davis youth soccer community with an alternative should the School District end up selling the Nugget Fields property.
Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lilly white community.
equal rights for heirloom tomatoes now!
Anonymous said…
“Why does the city of Davis HAVE to acquire this property for Gidaro to go ahead with his selfless plan to convert this property into an organic farm? As for the Sports Complex, leave it as County land with a special arrangement to hook up with Davis services. Perhaps there is no need to for Davis to acquire the property and remove it from a future Measure J vote?”
The real question that applies to Measure J is what the zoning of the property would be after this hypothetical acquisition. If the zoning remains Agriculture (with some kind of special use designation for the sports facility), then the property would still be subject to a Measure J vote should the organic farm go belly up some time in the future. Having the City as the owner of the property would seem to give Davis voters more control over the land’s use rather than less.
Since the Davis School District is currently wrestling with the fate of Nugget Fields, the idea of a sports complex on the Shriners land seems to provide the Davis youth soccer community with an alternative should the School District end up selling the Nugget Fields property.
Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lilly white community.
equal rights for heirloom tomatoes now!
Anonymous said…
“Why does the city of Davis HAVE to acquire this property for Gidaro to go ahead with his selfless plan to convert this property into an organic farm? As for the Sports Complex, leave it as County land with a special arrangement to hook up with Davis services. Perhaps there is no need to for Davis to acquire the property and remove it from a future Measure J vote?”
The real question that applies to Measure J is what the zoning of the property would be after this hypothetical acquisition. If the zoning remains Agriculture (with some kind of special use designation for the sports facility), then the property would still be subject to a Measure J vote should the organic farm go belly up some time in the future. Having the City as the owner of the property would seem to give Davis voters more control over the land’s use rather than less.
Since the Davis School District is currently wrestling with the fate of Nugget Fields, the idea of a sports complex on the Shriners land seems to provide the Davis youth soccer community with an alternative should the School District end up selling the Nugget Fields property.
Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lilly white community.
equal rights for heirloom tomatoes now!
Anonymous said…
“Why does the city of Davis HAVE to acquire this property for Gidaro to go ahead with his selfless plan to convert this property into an organic farm? As for the Sports Complex, leave it as County land with a special arrangement to hook up with Davis services. Perhaps there is no need to for Davis to acquire the property and remove it from a future Measure J vote?”
The real question that applies to Measure J is what the zoning of the property would be after this hypothetical acquisition. If the zoning remains Agriculture (with some kind of special use designation for the sports facility), then the property would still be subject to a Measure J vote should the organic farm go belly up some time in the future. Having the City as the owner of the property would seem to give Davis voters more control over the land’s use rather than less.
Since the Davis School District is currently wrestling with the fate of Nugget Fields, the idea of a sports complex on the Shriners land seems to provide the Davis youth soccer community with an alternative should the School District end up selling the Nugget Fields property.
Those against the plan just don’t want miniorities moving into their lilly white community.
equal rights for heirloom tomatoes now!
” Having the City as the owner of the property…”
Matt…do you really mean owner? Would the city buy the land from Gidaro?
” Having the City as the owner of the property…”
Matt…do you really mean owner? Would the city buy the land from Gidaro?
” Having the City as the owner of the property…”
Matt…do you really mean owner? Would the city buy the land from Gidaro?
” Having the City as the owner of the property…”
Matt…do you really mean owner? Would the city buy the land from Gidaro?
“In my now year of covering local issues on the Vanguard, I am not certain that there has been any issue that has more outraged a segment of the population than this one.”
Wow. Considering the number and volume of the permanently-outraged in this town, that’s saying something.
“In my now year of covering local issues on the Vanguard, I am not certain that there has been any issue that has more outraged a segment of the population than this one.”
Wow. Considering the number and volume of the permanently-outraged in this town, that’s saying something.
“In my now year of covering local issues on the Vanguard, I am not certain that there has been any issue that has more outraged a segment of the population than this one.”
Wow. Considering the number and volume of the permanently-outraged in this town, that’s saying something.
“In my now year of covering local issues on the Vanguard, I am not certain that there has been any issue that has more outraged a segment of the population than this one.”
Wow. Considering the number and volume of the permanently-outraged in this town, that’s saying something.
davisite said …
“Matt…do you really mean owner? Would the city buy the land from Gidaro?”
That is my understanding. That understanding appears to be supported by the first paragraph of yesterday’s Enterprise article. “At Wednesday morning’s pre-summer break Davis City Council meeting, Councilman Stephen Souza will ask the council if it wants to consider going into negotiations with Mace Covell Gateway, LLC to acquire the 228-acre property known as the Shriners property, and possibly turn it into organic farms and sports fields.”
BTW: does anyone know how to make what’s been typed appear in italics? Thanks.
davisite said …
“Matt…do you really mean owner? Would the city buy the land from Gidaro?”
That is my understanding. That understanding appears to be supported by the first paragraph of yesterday’s Enterprise article. “At Wednesday morning’s pre-summer break Davis City Council meeting, Councilman Stephen Souza will ask the council if it wants to consider going into negotiations with Mace Covell Gateway, LLC to acquire the 228-acre property known as the Shriners property, and possibly turn it into organic farms and sports fields.”
BTW: does anyone know how to make what’s been typed appear in italics? Thanks.
davisite said …
“Matt…do you really mean owner? Would the city buy the land from Gidaro?”
That is my understanding. That understanding appears to be supported by the first paragraph of yesterday’s Enterprise article. “At Wednesday morning’s pre-summer break Davis City Council meeting, Councilman Stephen Souza will ask the council if it wants to consider going into negotiations with Mace Covell Gateway, LLC to acquire the 228-acre property known as the Shriners property, and possibly turn it into organic farms and sports fields.”
BTW: does anyone know how to make what’s been typed appear in italics? Thanks.
davisite said …
“Matt…do you really mean owner? Would the city buy the land from Gidaro?”
That is my understanding. That understanding appears to be supported by the first paragraph of yesterday’s Enterprise article. “At Wednesday morning’s pre-summer break Davis City Council meeting, Councilman Stephen Souza will ask the council if it wants to consider going into negotiations with Mace Covell Gateway, LLC to acquire the 228-acre property known as the Shriners property, and possibly turn it into organic farms and sports fields.”
BTW: does anyone know how to make what’s been typed appear in italics? Thanks.
TAG:
“This DPD fellow is one-sided and he has the gall to complain about someone else being one sided?”
The Davis Enterprise is a mainstream newspaper that is supposed to be even-handed and non-biased. THIS is a blog, it is suppose to have a slant.
Do you understand the difference between a newspaper and a blog or do we have to go over that as well???
TAG:
“This DPD fellow is one-sided and he has the gall to complain about someone else being one sided?”
The Davis Enterprise is a mainstream newspaper that is supposed to be even-handed and non-biased. THIS is a blog, it is suppose to have a slant.
Do you understand the difference between a newspaper and a blog or do we have to go over that as well???
TAG:
“This DPD fellow is one-sided and he has the gall to complain about someone else being one sided?”
The Davis Enterprise is a mainstream newspaper that is supposed to be even-handed and non-biased. THIS is a blog, it is suppose to have a slant.
Do you understand the difference between a newspaper and a blog or do we have to go over that as well???
TAG:
“This DPD fellow is one-sided and he has the gall to complain about someone else being one sided?”
The Davis Enterprise is a mainstream newspaper that is supposed to be even-handed and non-biased. THIS is a blog, it is suppose to have a slant.
Do you understand the difference between a newspaper and a blog or do we have to go over that as well???
Matt, to make your words appear in italics, you need to preceed them with an i between the less than symbol < and the greater than symbol > (just as is shown on the top right of your screen where it says, “You can use some HTML tags”) and then after your words you need to do the same thing, but the i should have a forward slash in front of it, like this /i.
Matt, to make your words appear in italics, you need to preceed them with an i between the less than symbol < and the greater than symbol > (just as is shown on the top right of your screen where it says, “You can use some HTML tags”) and then after your words you need to do the same thing, but the i should have a forward slash in front of it, like this /i.
Matt, to make your words appear in italics, you need to preceed them with an i between the less than symbol < and the greater than symbol > (just as is shown on the top right of your screen where it says, “You can use some HTML tags”) and then after your words you need to do the same thing, but the i should have a forward slash in front of it, like this /i.
Matt, to make your words appear in italics, you need to preceed them with an i between the less than symbol < and the greater than symbol > (just as is shown on the top right of your screen where it says, “You can use some HTML tags”) and then after your words you need to do the same thing, but the i should have a forward slash in front of it, like this /i.
The School District owns Nugget Fields and, yes, they intend to sell it. They need the money to complete the renovation of Davis High School. However, the currently unused land on the east end of Harper Jr. High School has been identified as the location for soccer fields when that time comes. The District will never sell that land and it will never be developed, unless the Jr. High turns into a High School and the land is needed for other school uses.
The Gidaro land issue is confusing. If I was Gidaro, I would not work with Souza who used his name as an example of evil and sullied his reputation in two elections (the City Council campaign and Measure X) to forward Souza’s own political interests. If I was Gidaro, I’d appear at Wednesday’s City Council meeting and tell Souza to take a hike. I would respect that.
Also, Gidaro’s land is a more appropriate location for both residential and commercial growth in Davis than Covell Village, if that’s what the city wants to do. If Gidaro wants to throw in a youth sport complex or an organic farm, then he should propose it through regular channels.
I think Souza has done him a favor. Maybe the community will consider his ideas now.
The School District owns Nugget Fields and, yes, they intend to sell it. They need the money to complete the renovation of Davis High School. However, the currently unused land on the east end of Harper Jr. High School has been identified as the location for soccer fields when that time comes. The District will never sell that land and it will never be developed, unless the Jr. High turns into a High School and the land is needed for other school uses.
The Gidaro land issue is confusing. If I was Gidaro, I would not work with Souza who used his name as an example of evil and sullied his reputation in two elections (the City Council campaign and Measure X) to forward Souza’s own political interests. If I was Gidaro, I’d appear at Wednesday’s City Council meeting and tell Souza to take a hike. I would respect that.
Also, Gidaro’s land is a more appropriate location for both residential and commercial growth in Davis than Covell Village, if that’s what the city wants to do. If Gidaro wants to throw in a youth sport complex or an organic farm, then he should propose it through regular channels.
I think Souza has done him a favor. Maybe the community will consider his ideas now.
The School District owns Nugget Fields and, yes, they intend to sell it. They need the money to complete the renovation of Davis High School. However, the currently unused land on the east end of Harper Jr. High School has been identified as the location for soccer fields when that time comes. The District will never sell that land and it will never be developed, unless the Jr. High turns into a High School and the land is needed for other school uses.
The Gidaro land issue is confusing. If I was Gidaro, I would not work with Souza who used his name as an example of evil and sullied his reputation in two elections (the City Council campaign and Measure X) to forward Souza’s own political interests. If I was Gidaro, I’d appear at Wednesday’s City Council meeting and tell Souza to take a hike. I would respect that.
Also, Gidaro’s land is a more appropriate location for both residential and commercial growth in Davis than Covell Village, if that’s what the city wants to do. If Gidaro wants to throw in a youth sport complex or an organic farm, then he should propose it through regular channels.
I think Souza has done him a favor. Maybe the community will consider his ideas now.
The School District owns Nugget Fields and, yes, they intend to sell it. They need the money to complete the renovation of Davis High School. However, the currently unused land on the east end of Harper Jr. High School has been identified as the location for soccer fields when that time comes. The District will never sell that land and it will never be developed, unless the Jr. High turns into a High School and the land is needed for other school uses.
The Gidaro land issue is confusing. If I was Gidaro, I would not work with Souza who used his name as an example of evil and sullied his reputation in two elections (the City Council campaign and Measure X) to forward Souza’s own political interests. If I was Gidaro, I’d appear at Wednesday’s City Council meeting and tell Souza to take a hike. I would respect that.
Also, Gidaro’s land is a more appropriate location for both residential and commercial growth in Davis than Covell Village, if that’s what the city wants to do. If Gidaro wants to throw in a youth sport complex or an organic farm, then he should propose it through regular channels.
I think Souza has done him a favor. Maybe the community will consider his ideas now.
Vincente, I would also add that DPD provides his readers with an immediate forum to respond and dialogue about his opinions (and our own), which The Enterprise can not do.
Vincente, I would also add that DPD provides his readers with an immediate forum to respond and dialogue about his opinions (and our own), which The Enterprise can not do.
Vincente, I would also add that DPD provides his readers with an immediate forum to respond and dialogue about his opinions (and our own), which The Enterprise can not do.
Vincente, I would also add that DPD provides his readers with an immediate forum to respond and dialogue about his opinions (and our own), which The Enterprise can not do.
Thanks
Thanks
Thanks
Thanks
Anonymous said…
“Also, Gidaro’s land is a more appropriate location for both residential and commercial growth in Davis than Covell Village, if that’s what the city wants to do.”
Why is Gidaro’s land better? You have piqued my interest.
Anonymous said…
“Also, Gidaro’s land is a more appropriate location for both residential and commercial growth in Davis than Covell Village, if that’s what the city wants to do.”
Why is Gidaro’s land better? You have piqued my interest.
Anonymous said…
“Also, Gidaro’s land is a more appropriate location for both residential and commercial growth in Davis than Covell Village, if that’s what the city wants to do.”
Why is Gidaro’s land better? You have piqued my interest.
Anonymous said…
“Also, Gidaro’s land is a more appropriate location for both residential and commercial growth in Davis than Covell Village, if that’s what the city wants to do.”
Why is Gidaro’s land better? You have piqued my interest.
Also, in case you are interested in hyperlinking to another source, you can use this formula:
(a href=”http://www.dcn.davis.ca.us/go/greenwald2000/”)Mayor Greenwald(/a).
Where I have used parentheses, you need to replace them with less than < and greater than > symbols. If you changed the symbols on the link I listed, it would come out like this: Mayor Greenwald. And if you click on the blue Mayor Greenwald link, it will take you to Sue’s website.
Also, in case you are interested in hyperlinking to another source, you can use this formula:
(a href=”http://www.dcn.davis.ca.us/go/greenwald2000/”)Mayor Greenwald(/a).
Where I have used parentheses, you need to replace them with less than < and greater than > symbols. If you changed the symbols on the link I listed, it would come out like this: Mayor Greenwald. And if you click on the blue Mayor Greenwald link, it will take you to Sue’s website.
Also, in case you are interested in hyperlinking to another source, you can use this formula:
(a href=”http://www.dcn.davis.ca.us/go/greenwald2000/”)Mayor Greenwald(/a).
Where I have used parentheses, you need to replace them with less than < and greater than > symbols. If you changed the symbols on the link I listed, it would come out like this: Mayor Greenwald. And if you click on the blue Mayor Greenwald link, it will take you to Sue’s website.
Also, in case you are interested in hyperlinking to another source, you can use this formula:
(a href=”http://www.dcn.davis.ca.us/go/greenwald2000/”)Mayor Greenwald(/a).
Where I have used parentheses, you need to replace them with less than < and greater than > symbols. If you changed the symbols on the link I listed, it would come out like this: Mayor Greenwald. And if you click on the blue Mayor Greenwald link, it will take you to Sue’s website.
Readers of the Vanguard would also, I am sure, be interested in this link.
Readers of the Vanguard would also, I am sure, be interested in this link.
Readers of the Vanguard would also, I am sure, be interested in this link.
Readers of the Vanguard would also, I am sure, be interested in this link.
Perhaps Whitecombe will sell HIS property(at a bargain-basement price for land that is not feasible for residential development) to Davis to be developed into a showcase organic farm and Sports Complex? If Davis owned the land, they could work out easement deals with the potential developers of Cannery Row to alleviate their potential traffic flow problems.
Perhaps Whitecombe will sell HIS property(at a bargain-basement price for land that is not feasible for residential development) to Davis to be developed into a showcase organic farm and Sports Complex? If Davis owned the land, they could work out easement deals with the potential developers of Cannery Row to alleviate their potential traffic flow problems.
Perhaps Whitecombe will sell HIS property(at a bargain-basement price for land that is not feasible for residential development) to Davis to be developed into a showcase organic farm and Sports Complex? If Davis owned the land, they could work out easement deals with the potential developers of Cannery Row to alleviate their potential traffic flow problems.
Perhaps Whitecombe will sell HIS property(at a bargain-basement price for land that is not feasible for residential development) to Davis to be developed into a showcase organic farm and Sports Complex? If Davis owned the land, they could work out easement deals with the potential developers of Cannery Row to alleviate their potential traffic flow problems.
“Having the City as the owner of the property would seem to give Davis voters more control over the land’s use rather than less.”
The residential development of this 283 acre property on Davis’ periphery is now under the control of the Davis voters, by referendum, through their pass-through agreement. It probably is too small a parcel for the County to “blow off” the pass-through agreement and supply all the services and infrastucture without Davis’ cooperation. I do not see how dipping into Davis’ limited resources to purchase this property significantly inproves the Davis VOTER’S “control”.
“Having the City as the owner of the property would seem to give Davis voters more control over the land’s use rather than less.”
The residential development of this 283 acre property on Davis’ periphery is now under the control of the Davis voters, by referendum, through their pass-through agreement. It probably is too small a parcel for the County to “blow off” the pass-through agreement and supply all the services and infrastucture without Davis’ cooperation. I do not see how dipping into Davis’ limited resources to purchase this property significantly inproves the Davis VOTER’S “control”.
“Having the City as the owner of the property would seem to give Davis voters more control over the land’s use rather than less.”
The residential development of this 283 acre property on Davis’ periphery is now under the control of the Davis voters, by referendum, through their pass-through agreement. It probably is too small a parcel for the County to “blow off” the pass-through agreement and supply all the services and infrastucture without Davis’ cooperation. I do not see how dipping into Davis’ limited resources to purchase this property significantly inproves the Davis VOTER’S “control”.
“Having the City as the owner of the property would seem to give Davis voters more control over the land’s use rather than less.”
The residential development of this 283 acre property on Davis’ periphery is now under the control of the Davis voters, by referendum, through their pass-through agreement. It probably is too small a parcel for the County to “blow off” the pass-through agreement and supply all the services and infrastucture without Davis’ cooperation. I do not see how dipping into Davis’ limited resources to purchase this property significantly inproves the Davis VOTER’S “control”.
“Vincente, I would also add that DPD provides his readers with an immediate forum to respond and dialogue about his opinions (and our own), which The Enterprise can not do.”
Good point.
“Readers of the Vanguard would also, I am sure, be interested in this link.”
And they can all see me live tonight at 7 PM at the Odd Fellows Hall! Hope you plan to be there Rich.
“Vincente, I would also add that DPD provides his readers with an immediate forum to respond and dialogue about his opinions (and our own), which The Enterprise can not do.”
Good point.
“Readers of the Vanguard would also, I am sure, be interested in this link.”
And they can all see me live tonight at 7 PM at the Odd Fellows Hall! Hope you plan to be there Rich.
“Vincente, I would also add that DPD provides his readers with an immediate forum to respond and dialogue about his opinions (and our own), which The Enterprise can not do.”
Good point.
“Readers of the Vanguard would also, I am sure, be interested in this link.”
And they can all see me live tonight at 7 PM at the Odd Fellows Hall! Hope you plan to be there Rich.
“Vincente, I would also add that DPD provides his readers with an immediate forum to respond and dialogue about his opinions (and our own), which The Enterprise can not do.”
Good point.
“Readers of the Vanguard would also, I am sure, be interested in this link.”
And they can all see me live tonight at 7 PM at the Odd Fellows Hall! Hope you plan to be there Rich.
Vincente said…
7/30/07 11:21 AM
Mainstream Newspapers are supposed to be even-handed and non-biased.>
I do not know of a single newspaper, television broadcaster, blog or other media/information supplier that is not biased and slanted in its view points.
Vincente said…
7/30/07 11:21 AM
Mainstream Newspapers are supposed to be even-handed and non-biased.>
I do not know of a single newspaper, television broadcaster, blog or other media/information supplier that is not biased and slanted in its view points.
Vincente said…
7/30/07 11:21 AM
Mainstream Newspapers are supposed to be even-handed and non-biased.>
I do not know of a single newspaper, television broadcaster, blog or other media/information supplier that is not biased and slanted in its view points.
Vincente said…
7/30/07 11:21 AM
Mainstream Newspapers are supposed to be even-handed and non-biased.>
I do not know of a single newspaper, television broadcaster, blog or other media/information supplier that is not biased and slanted in its view points.
“I do not know of a single newspaper, television broadcaster, blog or other media/information supplier that is not biased and slanted in its view points.”
That is of course true, in general lack of bias is an unattainable goal. The way that journalists attempt to get around that is through balance. They interview one side, they interview the other. This leads to a more complete picture. However, the Davis Enterprise reporter only interview Souza and not the councilmembers who raised objections to the practice at last week’s meeting. In fact, the reporter did not even need to take the step of contacting them as she had public statements by the Mayor and Councilmember Heystek at her disposal. That is why the complaint is valid.
“I do not know of a single newspaper, television broadcaster, blog or other media/information supplier that is not biased and slanted in its view points.”
That is of course true, in general lack of bias is an unattainable goal. The way that journalists attempt to get around that is through balance. They interview one side, they interview the other. This leads to a more complete picture. However, the Davis Enterprise reporter only interview Souza and not the councilmembers who raised objections to the practice at last week’s meeting. In fact, the reporter did not even need to take the step of contacting them as she had public statements by the Mayor and Councilmember Heystek at her disposal. That is why the complaint is valid.
“I do not know of a single newspaper, television broadcaster, blog or other media/information supplier that is not biased and slanted in its view points.”
That is of course true, in general lack of bias is an unattainable goal. The way that journalists attempt to get around that is through balance. They interview one side, they interview the other. This leads to a more complete picture. However, the Davis Enterprise reporter only interview Souza and not the councilmembers who raised objections to the practice at last week’s meeting. In fact, the reporter did not even need to take the step of contacting them as she had public statements by the Mayor and Councilmember Heystek at her disposal. That is why the complaint is valid.
“I do not know of a single newspaper, television broadcaster, blog or other media/information supplier that is not biased and slanted in its view points.”
That is of course true, in general lack of bias is an unattainable goal. The way that journalists attempt to get around that is through balance. They interview one side, they interview the other. This leads to a more complete picture. However, the Davis Enterprise reporter only interview Souza and not the councilmembers who raised objections to the practice at last week’s meeting. In fact, the reporter did not even need to take the step of contacting them as she had public statements by the Mayor and Councilmember Heystek at her disposal. That is why the complaint is valid.
Vincente said…
7/30/07 12:27 PM
Yes but outrage sells newspapers. I personally believe they would leave out other comments from other council members just to sell more newspapers, not because they lean one way or the other politically.
Vincente said…
7/30/07 12:27 PM
Yes but outrage sells newspapers. I personally believe they would leave out other comments from other council members just to sell more newspapers, not because they lean one way or the other politically.
Vincente said…
7/30/07 12:27 PM
Yes but outrage sells newspapers. I personally believe they would leave out other comments from other council members just to sell more newspapers, not because they lean one way or the other politically.
Vincente said…
7/30/07 12:27 PM
Yes but outrage sells newspapers. I personally believe they would leave out other comments from other council members just to sell more newspapers, not because they lean one way or the other politically.
This above the fold, front page article about Steve Souza promoting the City buying Gidaro land is 100% intentional. EVERYTHING that council candidates do from here on out (including Steve Souza’s softball pitch of voting NO on the Anderson window lowering was) is intentional and meant to spin their next run.
Already barely edging out Harrington in the past race Steve Souza has done so much damage the first two and a half years of his council term that he’ll have to start doing everything from adopting droves of puppies from the lab rescue to shopping daily at the Co Op to make up for everything else. Spearheading Covell Village and Target are two developmental missteps that will be hard to erase from voters minds.
One more thing, where is the City planning to come up with 22 million dollars (based on the $96,000 to buy the bike underpass or $100K an acre) to buy this land? If we really had that kind of money sitting around, why did we need Measure G to pass …also touted by Mr. Souza.
This above the fold, front page article about Steve Souza promoting the City buying Gidaro land is 100% intentional. EVERYTHING that council candidates do from here on out (including Steve Souza’s softball pitch of voting NO on the Anderson window lowering was) is intentional and meant to spin their next run.
Already barely edging out Harrington in the past race Steve Souza has done so much damage the first two and a half years of his council term that he’ll have to start doing everything from adopting droves of puppies from the lab rescue to shopping daily at the Co Op to make up for everything else. Spearheading Covell Village and Target are two developmental missteps that will be hard to erase from voters minds.
One more thing, where is the City planning to come up with 22 million dollars (based on the $96,000 to buy the bike underpass or $100K an acre) to buy this land? If we really had that kind of money sitting around, why did we need Measure G to pass …also touted by Mr. Souza.
This above the fold, front page article about Steve Souza promoting the City buying Gidaro land is 100% intentional. EVERYTHING that council candidates do from here on out (including Steve Souza’s softball pitch of voting NO on the Anderson window lowering was) is intentional and meant to spin their next run.
Already barely edging out Harrington in the past race Steve Souza has done so much damage the first two and a half years of his council term that he’ll have to start doing everything from adopting droves of puppies from the lab rescue to shopping daily at the Co Op to make up for everything else. Spearheading Covell Village and Target are two developmental missteps that will be hard to erase from voters minds.
One more thing, where is the City planning to come up with 22 million dollars (based on the $96,000 to buy the bike underpass or $100K an acre) to buy this land? If we really had that kind of money sitting around, why did we need Measure G to pass …also touted by Mr. Souza.
This above the fold, front page article about Steve Souza promoting the City buying Gidaro land is 100% intentional. EVERYTHING that council candidates do from here on out (including Steve Souza’s softball pitch of voting NO on the Anderson window lowering was) is intentional and meant to spin their next run.
Already barely edging out Harrington in the past race Steve Souza has done so much damage the first two and a half years of his council term that he’ll have to start doing everything from adopting droves of puppies from the lab rescue to shopping daily at the Co Op to make up for everything else. Spearheading Covell Village and Target are two developmental missteps that will be hard to erase from voters minds.
One more thing, where is the City planning to come up with 22 million dollars (based on the $96,000 to buy the bike underpass or $100K an acre) to buy this land? If we really had that kind of money sitting around, why did we need Measure G to pass …also touted by Mr. Souza.
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
Anonymous said…
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
Anonymous, while I understand the point you are making regarding residential developments, this specific development proposal has no residential component. There are no houses in it at all, so it does not fall into the model you have described.
Anonymous said…
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
Anonymous, while I understand the point you are making regarding residential developments, this specific development proposal has no residential component. There are no houses in it at all, so it does not fall into the model you have described.
Anonymous said…
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
Anonymous, while I understand the point you are making regarding residential developments, this specific development proposal has no residential component. There are no houses in it at all, so it does not fall into the model you have described.
Anonymous said…
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
Anonymous, while I understand the point you are making regarding residential developments, this specific development proposal has no residential component. There are no houses in it at all, so it does not fall into the model you have described.
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
you’re planning to live on an organic tomato farm? i guess it’d be safer than camping out in a conventional one.
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
you’re planning to live on an organic tomato farm? i guess it’d be safer than camping out in a conventional one.
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
you’re planning to live on an organic tomato farm? i guess it’d be safer than camping out in a conventional one.
Every new developement has to have an affordable element. Fighting new development is a way to keep me and mind out of your community.
you’re planning to live on an organic tomato farm? i guess it’d be safer than camping out in a conventional one.
Is Souza now the front man for another project??
Reflecting upon the recently revealed Souza/Gidaro development proposal one should keep in mind their previous association.
During the 2004 city council campaign the least likely city council candidates willing to assist land speculators & developers such as Steve Gidaro develop their holdings were Sue Greenwald, Mike Harrington and Stan Forbes. To guide them, developers such as Gidaro purchase polls all the time to examine the popularity of their potential projects and the popularity of the politicians who have a say on those projects. Undoubtedly Steve Gidaro had polling information to guide him in his last minute expensive independent expenditure campaign effort designed to influence the outcome of that election.
In the 2004 campaign, Sue Greenwald was polling well ahead with Don Saylor in second place and the third place showing Mike Harrington leading both Stan Forbes and Stephen Souza.
Former “environmentalist” Stephen Souza who was desperate to be elected to the Davis City Council after loosing two prior attempts was a grateful recipient (as was Don Saylor) of Steve Gidaro’s misleading and dirty tactics designed to confuse and upset the voters. In the 2004 campaign, Steve Gidaro paid over $25,000 in GOTV calls designed to help Stephen Souza become a councilmember by running “push” calls to specifically harm Mike Harrington and Stan Forbes. Although, Gidaro declared his effort was in support of Harrington and Forbes it was in fact designed to harm them. The calls voters received were very aggressive, rude and made repeatedly over and over again which alienated those voters against Harrington & Forbes. Both Harrington’s and Forbes’s phones rang off the hook with complaints. This last minute campaign expenditure of Gidaro’s succeeded in helping Souza.
Now we have Stephen Souza’s old buddy (oh, I mean enemy—wink, wink) Gidaro again coming to his political aid by entering into unilateral “negotiations” with Souza. The purpose: restore an appearance of Souza as being pro-environmental, pro-open space and repair his shabby city council record which includes his 24/7 work promoting the Covell Village project. Stephen Souza long ago gave up protecting the land and has in fact become a shill for developer interests. This past Sunday, Davis Enterprise “reporter” Claire St. John’s front page flattering and biased editorial masquerading as a “news” article helped Souza launch his public relations campaign that is directly tied to his re-election efforts.
It will become increasing clear as the 2008 city council campaign ramps up as to what the two Steve’s are up to and why.
Is Souza now the front man for another project??
Reflecting upon the recently revealed Souza/Gidaro development proposal one should keep in mind their previous association.
During the 2004 city council campaign the least likely city council candidates willing to assist land speculators & developers such as Steve Gidaro develop their holdings were Sue Greenwald, Mike Harrington and Stan Forbes. To guide them, developers such as Gidaro purchase polls all the time to examine the popularity of their potential projects and the popularity of the politicians who have a say on those projects. Undoubtedly Steve Gidaro had polling information to guide him in his last minute expensive independent expenditure campaign effort designed to influence the outcome of that election.
In the 2004 campaign, Sue Greenwald was polling well ahead with Don Saylor in second place and the third place showing Mike Harrington leading both Stan Forbes and Stephen Souza.
Former “environmentalist” Stephen Souza who was desperate to be elected to the Davis City Council after loosing two prior attempts was a grateful recipient (as was Don Saylor) of Steve Gidaro’s misleading and dirty tactics designed to confuse and upset the voters. In the 2004 campaign, Steve Gidaro paid over $25,000 in GOTV calls designed to help Stephen Souza become a councilmember by running “push” calls to specifically harm Mike Harrington and Stan Forbes. Although, Gidaro declared his effort was in support of Harrington and Forbes it was in fact designed to harm them. The calls voters received were very aggressive, rude and made repeatedly over and over again which alienated those voters against Harrington & Forbes. Both Harrington’s and Forbes’s phones rang off the hook with complaints. This last minute campaign expenditure of Gidaro’s succeeded in helping Souza.
Now we have Stephen Souza’s old buddy (oh, I mean enemy—wink, wink) Gidaro again coming to his political aid by entering into unilateral “negotiations” with Souza. The purpose: restore an appearance of Souza as being pro-environmental, pro-open space and repair his shabby city council record which includes his 24/7 work promoting the Covell Village project. Stephen Souza long ago gave up protecting the land and has in fact become a shill for developer interests. This past Sunday, Davis Enterprise “reporter” Claire St. John’s front page flattering and biased editorial masquerading as a “news” article helped Souza launch his public relations campaign that is directly tied to his re-election efforts.
It will become increasing clear as the 2008 city council campaign ramps up as to what the two Steve’s are up to and why.
Is Souza now the front man for another project??
Reflecting upon the recently revealed Souza/Gidaro development proposal one should keep in mind their previous association.
During the 2004 city council campaign the least likely city council candidates willing to assist land speculators & developers such as Steve Gidaro develop their holdings were Sue Greenwald, Mike Harrington and Stan Forbes. To guide them, developers such as Gidaro purchase polls all the time to examine the popularity of their potential projects and the popularity of the politicians who have a say on those projects. Undoubtedly Steve Gidaro had polling information to guide him in his last minute expensive independent expenditure campaign effort designed to influence the outcome of that election.
In the 2004 campaign, Sue Greenwald was polling well ahead with Don Saylor in second place and the third place showing Mike Harrington leading both Stan Forbes and Stephen Souza.
Former “environmentalist” Stephen Souza who was desperate to be elected to the Davis City Council after loosing two prior attempts was a grateful recipient (as was Don Saylor) of Steve Gidaro’s misleading and dirty tactics designed to confuse and upset the voters. In the 2004 campaign, Steve Gidaro paid over $25,000 in GOTV calls designed to help Stephen Souza become a councilmember by running “push” calls to specifically harm Mike Harrington and Stan Forbes. Although, Gidaro declared his effort was in support of Harrington and Forbes it was in fact designed to harm them. The calls voters received were very aggressive, rude and made repeatedly over and over again which alienated those voters against Harrington & Forbes. Both Harrington’s and Forbes’s phones rang off the hook with complaints. This last minute campaign expenditure of Gidaro’s succeeded in helping Souza.
Now we have Stephen Souza’s old buddy (oh, I mean enemy—wink, wink) Gidaro again coming to his political aid by entering into unilateral “negotiations” with Souza. The purpose: restore an appearance of Souza as being pro-environmental, pro-open space and repair his shabby city council record which includes his 24/7 work promoting the Covell Village project. Stephen Souza long ago gave up protecting the land and has in fact become a shill for developer interests. This past Sunday, Davis Enterprise “reporter” Claire St. John’s front page flattering and biased editorial masquerading as a “news” article helped Souza launch his public relations campaign that is directly tied to his re-election efforts.
It will become increasing clear as the 2008 city council campaign ramps up as to what the two Steve’s are up to and why.
Is Souza now the front man for another project??
Reflecting upon the recently revealed Souza/Gidaro development proposal one should keep in mind their previous association.
During the 2004 city council campaign the least likely city council candidates willing to assist land speculators & developers such as Steve Gidaro develop their holdings were Sue Greenwald, Mike Harrington and Stan Forbes. To guide them, developers such as Gidaro purchase polls all the time to examine the popularity of their potential projects and the popularity of the politicians who have a say on those projects. Undoubtedly Steve Gidaro had polling information to guide him in his last minute expensive independent expenditure campaign effort designed to influence the outcome of that election.
In the 2004 campaign, Sue Greenwald was polling well ahead with Don Saylor in second place and the third place showing Mike Harrington leading both Stan Forbes and Stephen Souza.
Former “environmentalist” Stephen Souza who was desperate to be elected to the Davis City Council after loosing two prior attempts was a grateful recipient (as was Don Saylor) of Steve Gidaro’s misleading and dirty tactics designed to confuse and upset the voters. In the 2004 campaign, Steve Gidaro paid over $25,000 in GOTV calls designed to help Stephen Souza become a councilmember by running “push” calls to specifically harm Mike Harrington and Stan Forbes. Although, Gidaro declared his effort was in support of Harrington and Forbes it was in fact designed to harm them. The calls voters received were very aggressive, rude and made repeatedly over and over again which alienated those voters against Harrington & Forbes. Both Harrington’s and Forbes’s phones rang off the hook with complaints. This last minute campaign expenditure of Gidaro’s succeeded in helping Souza.
Now we have Stephen Souza’s old buddy (oh, I mean enemy—wink, wink) Gidaro again coming to his political aid by entering into unilateral “negotiations” with Souza. The purpose: restore an appearance of Souza as being pro-environmental, pro-open space and repair his shabby city council record which includes his 24/7 work promoting the Covell Village project. Stephen Souza long ago gave up protecting the land and has in fact become a shill for developer interests. This past Sunday, Davis Enterprise “reporter” Claire St. John’s front page flattering and biased editorial masquerading as a “news” article helped Souza launch his public relations campaign that is directly tied to his re-election efforts.
It will become increasing clear as the 2008 city council campaign ramps up as to what the two Steve’s are up to and why.
Is it finally the time to consider a campaign that lets our local businesses understand that their advertising in The Enterprise will HURT rather than help their business?
Is it finally the time to consider a campaign that lets our local businesses understand that their advertising in The Enterprise will HURT rather than help their business?
Is it finally the time to consider a campaign that lets our local businesses understand that their advertising in The Enterprise will HURT rather than help their business?
Is it finally the time to consider a campaign that lets our local businesses understand that their advertising in The Enterprise will HURT rather than help their business?
Deb W. said…
7/30/07 12:42 PM
One more thing, where is the City planning to come up with 22 million dollars (based on the $96,000 to buy the bike underpass or $100K an acre) to buy this land? If we really had that kind of money sitting around, why did we need Measure G to pass …also touted by Mr. Souza.
Davis has exactly the fund, (about $5 million back in 2003 and growing), to make purchases of properties on our current periphery to convert specifically to permanent open space. Measure O, Davis Open Space Protection Tax (Moat Tax), was passed by a landslide in 2000; Results. This is a “dwelling unit tax” which is currently in place for 30 years; Information. However, it is not being used for its intended purpose and probably will not be as long as there is a developer driven majority council in place.
Deb W. said…
7/30/07 12:42 PM
One more thing, where is the City planning to come up with 22 million dollars (based on the $96,000 to buy the bike underpass or $100K an acre) to buy this land? If we really had that kind of money sitting around, why did we need Measure G to pass …also touted by Mr. Souza.
Davis has exactly the fund, (about $5 million back in 2003 and growing), to make purchases of properties on our current periphery to convert specifically to permanent open space. Measure O, Davis Open Space Protection Tax (Moat Tax), was passed by a landslide in 2000; Results. This is a “dwelling unit tax” which is currently in place for 30 years; Information. However, it is not being used for its intended purpose and probably will not be as long as there is a developer driven majority council in place.
Deb W. said…
7/30/07 12:42 PM
One more thing, where is the City planning to come up with 22 million dollars (based on the $96,000 to buy the bike underpass or $100K an acre) to buy this land? If we really had that kind of money sitting around, why did we need Measure G to pass …also touted by Mr. Souza.
Davis has exactly the fund, (about $5 million back in 2003 and growing), to make purchases of properties on our current periphery to convert specifically to permanent open space. Measure O, Davis Open Space Protection Tax (Moat Tax), was passed by a landslide in 2000; Results. This is a “dwelling unit tax” which is currently in place for 30 years; Information. However, it is not being used for its intended purpose and probably will not be as long as there is a developer driven majority council in place.
Deb W. said…
7/30/07 12:42 PM
One more thing, where is the City planning to come up with 22 million dollars (based on the $96,000 to buy the bike underpass or $100K an acre) to buy this land? If we really had that kind of money sitting around, why did we need Measure G to pass …also touted by Mr. Souza.
Davis has exactly the fund, (about $5 million back in 2003 and growing), to make purchases of properties on our current periphery to convert specifically to permanent open space. Measure O, Davis Open Space Protection Tax (Moat Tax), was passed by a landslide in 2000; Results. This is a “dwelling unit tax” which is currently in place for 30 years; Information. However, it is not being used for its intended purpose and probably will not be as long as there is a developer driven majority council in place.
Isn’t Stephen Souza’s description of himself as a “shrewd negotiator” akin to George W. Bush’s description of himself as “the decider”?
Isn’t Stephen Souza’s description of himself as a “shrewd negotiator” akin to George W. Bush’s description of himself as “the decider”?
Isn’t Stephen Souza’s description of himself as a “shrewd negotiator” akin to George W. Bush’s description of himself as “the decider”?
Isn’t Stephen Souza’s description of himself as a “shrewd negotiator” akin to George W. Bush’s description of himself as “the decider”?
There was nothing at all wrong with Claire’s article. Sometimes I think people on this blog expect 10,000 word analyses instead of newspaper articles in the Enterprise. She had 500 – 1,000 words in which to describe Stephen’s proposal and some of the background on the property, and she did that. There will be followup articles, I’m sure, if the council chooses to move forward.
I actually compliment Stephen Souza for bringing this forward. He did so in a public and above-board manner. He is getting a sense from his colleagues about whether it should even move forward. Staff time isn’t being wasted on something that might go nowhere. As to the specific project, obviously much more detail would be needed, especially about the nature of the agriculture easements.
I think people are seeing nefarious intent unnecessarily here. Maybe, just maybe, Stephen Souza is working on this because he thinks it would be beneficial to the city of Davis. I have profound disagreements with him on many issues, but I do assume that he ran for city council to improve the community, not for personal enrichment or to act as some kind of shill for developers. There is nothing in this proposal that necessarily leads to peripheral housing. From what we know so far, it is just an organic farm and a sports complex.
Given the history of the property, the developer may see any other option for the land as being unlikely. Selling the land to the city might be the best deal Gidaro and his partners are going to get.
There was nothing at all wrong with Claire’s article. Sometimes I think people on this blog expect 10,000 word analyses instead of newspaper articles in the Enterprise. She had 500 – 1,000 words in which to describe Stephen’s proposal and some of the background on the property, and she did that. There will be followup articles, I’m sure, if the council chooses to move forward.
I actually compliment Stephen Souza for bringing this forward. He did so in a public and above-board manner. He is getting a sense from his colleagues about whether it should even move forward. Staff time isn’t being wasted on something that might go nowhere. As to the specific project, obviously much more detail would be needed, especially about the nature of the agriculture easements.
I think people are seeing nefarious intent unnecessarily here. Maybe, just maybe, Stephen Souza is working on this because he thinks it would be beneficial to the city of Davis. I have profound disagreements with him on many issues, but I do assume that he ran for city council to improve the community, not for personal enrichment or to act as some kind of shill for developers. There is nothing in this proposal that necessarily leads to peripheral housing. From what we know so far, it is just an organic farm and a sports complex.
Given the history of the property, the developer may see any other option for the land as being unlikely. Selling the land to the city might be the best deal Gidaro and his partners are going to get.
There was nothing at all wrong with Claire’s article. Sometimes I think people on this blog expect 10,000 word analyses instead of newspaper articles in the Enterprise. She had 500 – 1,000 words in which to describe Stephen’s proposal and some of the background on the property, and she did that. There will be followup articles, I’m sure, if the council chooses to move forward.
I actually compliment Stephen Souza for bringing this forward. He did so in a public and above-board manner. He is getting a sense from his colleagues about whether it should even move forward. Staff time isn’t being wasted on something that might go nowhere. As to the specific project, obviously much more detail would be needed, especially about the nature of the agriculture easements.
I think people are seeing nefarious intent unnecessarily here. Maybe, just maybe, Stephen Souza is working on this because he thinks it would be beneficial to the city of Davis. I have profound disagreements with him on many issues, but I do assume that he ran for city council to improve the community, not for personal enrichment or to act as some kind of shill for developers. There is nothing in this proposal that necessarily leads to peripheral housing. From what we know so far, it is just an organic farm and a sports complex.
Given the history of the property, the developer may see any other option for the land as being unlikely. Selling the land to the city might be the best deal Gidaro and his partners are going to get.
There was nothing at all wrong with Claire’s article. Sometimes I think people on this blog expect 10,000 word analyses instead of newspaper articles in the Enterprise. She had 500 – 1,000 words in which to describe Stephen’s proposal and some of the background on the property, and she did that. There will be followup articles, I’m sure, if the council chooses to move forward.
I actually compliment Stephen Souza for bringing this forward. He did so in a public and above-board manner. He is getting a sense from his colleagues about whether it should even move forward. Staff time isn’t being wasted on something that might go nowhere. As to the specific project, obviously much more detail would be needed, especially about the nature of the agriculture easements.
I think people are seeing nefarious intent unnecessarily here. Maybe, just maybe, Stephen Souza is working on this because he thinks it would be beneficial to the city of Davis. I have profound disagreements with him on many issues, but I do assume that he ran for city council to improve the community, not for personal enrichment or to act as some kind of shill for developers. There is nothing in this proposal that necessarily leads to peripheral housing. From what we know so far, it is just an organic farm and a sports complex.
Given the history of the property, the developer may see any other option for the land as being unlikely. Selling the land to the city might be the best deal Gidaro and his partners are going to get.
Don… You are probably correct. Steve Souza probably DOES believe in what he says. The question is: do the Davis voters believe in HIM? He has clearly expressed his belief that HE is the Decider(Yes.. our current Council Majority is a strange mirror-reflection of our Great Leader in Washington). He also believes that Davis should greatly expand its borders with peripheral development..his repeated public description of those who hold a more cautious approach to peripheral growth is to tell them to “get their heads out of the sand!” In spite of his Hawaiian shirts and curly locks(recently shorn for a less Hippy look), he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.
Don… You are probably correct. Steve Souza probably DOES believe in what he says. The question is: do the Davis voters believe in HIM? He has clearly expressed his belief that HE is the Decider(Yes.. our current Council Majority is a strange mirror-reflection of our Great Leader in Washington). He also believes that Davis should greatly expand its borders with peripheral development..his repeated public description of those who hold a more cautious approach to peripheral growth is to tell them to “get their heads out of the sand!” In spite of his Hawaiian shirts and curly locks(recently shorn for a less Hippy look), he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.
Don… You are probably correct. Steve Souza probably DOES believe in what he says. The question is: do the Davis voters believe in HIM? He has clearly expressed his belief that HE is the Decider(Yes.. our current Council Majority is a strange mirror-reflection of our Great Leader in Washington). He also believes that Davis should greatly expand its borders with peripheral development..his repeated public description of those who hold a more cautious approach to peripheral growth is to tell them to “get their heads out of the sand!” In spite of his Hawaiian shirts and curly locks(recently shorn for a less Hippy look), he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.
Don… You are probably correct. Steve Souza probably DOES believe in what he says. The question is: do the Davis voters believe in HIM? He has clearly expressed his belief that HE is the Decider(Yes.. our current Council Majority is a strange mirror-reflection of our Great Leader in Washington). He also believes that Davis should greatly expand its borders with peripheral development..his repeated public description of those who hold a more cautious approach to peripheral growth is to tell them to “get their heads out of the sand!” In spite of his Hawaiian shirts and curly locks(recently shorn for a less Hippy look), he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.
“he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.”
Personal attacks like this one do more to weaken the arguments against Mr. Souza’s position than anything else.
“he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.”
Personal attacks like this one do more to weaken the arguments against Mr. Souza’s position than anything else.
“he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.”
Personal attacks like this one do more to weaken the arguments against Mr. Souza’s position than anything else.
“he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.”
Personal attacks like this one do more to weaken the arguments against Mr. Souza’s position than anything else.
John Robertson: I disagree with your observation that personal attacks(I would prefer to call them evaluations) are not appropriate. This is the most important aspect of assessing a candidate as it is the best measure of how they will carry out their duties of office when elected if all the Davis voter is offered are campaign platitudes and obfuscations. Feel free to refute my evaluation with your fact-supported observations. I feel that I have based mine on his public record and public statements from the dais.
John Robertson: I disagree with your observation that personal attacks(I would prefer to call them evaluations) are not appropriate. This is the most important aspect of assessing a candidate as it is the best measure of how they will carry out their duties of office when elected if all the Davis voter is offered are campaign platitudes and obfuscations. Feel free to refute my evaluation with your fact-supported observations. I feel that I have based mine on his public record and public statements from the dais.
John Robertson: I disagree with your observation that personal attacks(I would prefer to call them evaluations) are not appropriate. This is the most important aspect of assessing a candidate as it is the best measure of how they will carry out their duties of office when elected if all the Davis voter is offered are campaign platitudes and obfuscations. Feel free to refute my evaluation with your fact-supported observations. I feel that I have based mine on his public record and public statements from the dais.
John Robertson: I disagree with your observation that personal attacks(I would prefer to call them evaluations) are not appropriate. This is the most important aspect of assessing a candidate as it is the best measure of how they will carry out their duties of office when elected if all the Davis voter is offered are campaign platitudes and obfuscations. Feel free to refute my evaluation with your fact-supported observations. I feel that I have based mine on his public record and public statements from the dais.
john robertson said…
“he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.”
Personal attacks like this one do more to weaken the arguments against Mr. Souza’s position than anything else.
————————–
Does Souza have contempt for populist politics? Any facts to support that contention?
I’ve read here that his vote not to degrade the Anderson Bank Building was a sop to progressives, to “lull” them, so to speak.
If true, that would seem sorta contemptuous of progressive values, I mean if Souza really doesn’t care what the Bank looks like.
john robertson said…
“he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.”
Personal attacks like this one do more to weaken the arguments against Mr. Souza’s position than anything else.
————————–
Does Souza have contempt for populist politics? Any facts to support that contention?
I’ve read here that his vote not to degrade the Anderson Bank Building was a sop to progressives, to “lull” them, so to speak.
If true, that would seem sorta contemptuous of progressive values, I mean if Souza really doesn’t care what the Bank looks like.
john robertson said…
“he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.”
Personal attacks like this one do more to weaken the arguments against Mr. Souza’s position than anything else.
————————–
Does Souza have contempt for populist politics? Any facts to support that contention?
I’ve read here that his vote not to degrade the Anderson Bank Building was a sop to progressives, to “lull” them, so to speak.
If true, that would seem sorta contemptuous of progressive values, I mean if Souza really doesn’t care what the Bank looks like.
john robertson said…
“he has contempt for populist politics and relishes the role/power of being the “Decider”. These are the fundamental measures that one takes of those whom we choose to represent us..Souza fails to measure up.”
Personal attacks like this one do more to weaken the arguments against Mr. Souza’s position than anything else.
————————–
Does Souza have contempt for populist politics? Any facts to support that contention?
I’ve read here that his vote not to degrade the Anderson Bank Building was a sop to progressives, to “lull” them, so to speak.
If true, that would seem sorta contemptuous of progressive values, I mean if Souza really doesn’t care what the Bank looks like.
And let’s not forget that, along with Gidaro’s last minute campaign expenditure in helping tank Harrington, came Ted Puntillo’s attack on Harrington launched from Dunning’s column the same day the Gidaro story broke in The Empty.
And let’s not forget that, along with Gidaro’s last minute campaign expenditure in helping tank Harrington, came Ted Puntillo’s attack on Harrington launched from Dunning’s column the same day the Gidaro story broke in The Empty.
And let’s not forget that, along with Gidaro’s last minute campaign expenditure in helping tank Harrington, came Ted Puntillo’s attack on Harrington launched from Dunning’s column the same day the Gidaro story broke in The Empty.
And let’s not forget that, along with Gidaro’s last minute campaign expenditure in helping tank Harrington, came Ted Puntillo’s attack on Harrington launched from Dunning’s column the same day the Gidaro story broke in The Empty.
“I’ve read here that his vote not to degrade the Anderson Bank Building was a sop to progressives, to “lull” them, so to speak. “
Really, you read that here? Can you show us where, because it certainly did not come from me.
“I’ve read here that his vote not to degrade the Anderson Bank Building was a sop to progressives, to “lull” them, so to speak. “
Really, you read that here? Can you show us where, because it certainly did not come from me.
“I’ve read here that his vote not to degrade the Anderson Bank Building was a sop to progressives, to “lull” them, so to speak. “
Really, you read that here? Can you show us where, because it certainly did not come from me.
“I’ve read here that his vote not to degrade the Anderson Bank Building was a sop to progressives, to “lull” them, so to speak. “
Really, you read that here? Can you show us where, because it certainly did not come from me.
If the “Roberson” posting here is the same individual who was so outraged by the Council Majority’s(Souza,Saylor and Asmundson)refusal to give his Davis Planning Commission( he was the chair)the information or time it needed to adequately evaluate the Covell Village proposals, then he does not have to look any further for evidence of Souza’s arrogance and anti-populist leanings.
If the “Roberson” posting here is the same individual who was so outraged by the Council Majority’s(Souza,Saylor and Asmundson)refusal to give his Davis Planning Commission( he was the chair)the information or time it needed to adequately evaluate the Covell Village proposals, then he does not have to look any further for evidence of Souza’s arrogance and anti-populist leanings.
If the “Roberson” posting here is the same individual who was so outraged by the Council Majority’s(Souza,Saylor and Asmundson)refusal to give his Davis Planning Commission( he was the chair)the information or time it needed to adequately evaluate the Covell Village proposals, then he does not have to look any further for evidence of Souza’s arrogance and anti-populist leanings.
If the “Roberson” posting here is the same individual who was so outraged by the Council Majority’s(Souza,Saylor and Asmundson)refusal to give his Davis Planning Commission( he was the chair)the information or time it needed to adequately evaluate the Covell Village proposals, then he does not have to look any further for evidence of Souza’s arrogance and anti-populist leanings.
Considering that with the Anderson Bank vote, Souza, for one rare time, “broke” the Gang of Three ranks to vote to leave the Anderson Bank windows alone, makes me wonder about his motivation…Be great if he nudged Kidd to clean up the place and give it a much-needed paint job, too.
Considering that with the Anderson Bank vote, Souza, for one rare time, “broke” the Gang of Three ranks to vote to leave the Anderson Bank windows alone, makes me wonder about his motivation…Be great if he nudged Kidd to clean up the place and give it a much-needed paint job, too.
Considering that with the Anderson Bank vote, Souza, for one rare time, “broke” the Gang of Three ranks to vote to leave the Anderson Bank windows alone, makes me wonder about his motivation…Be great if he nudged Kidd to clean up the place and give it a much-needed paint job, too.
Considering that with the Anderson Bank vote, Souza, for one rare time, “broke” the Gang of Three ranks to vote to leave the Anderson Bank windows alone, makes me wonder about his motivation…Be great if he nudged Kidd to clean up the place and give it a much-needed paint job, too.