However, they left the sign ordinance on the agenda. Six UC Davis students stayed until late in the evening on their winter break on behalf of this issue.
The item was not without some controversy. As originally written, the ordinance would only impact those renters whose landlords did not have a provision in their lease that would ban campaign signs. While that turns out to be most of the rental agreements, the fear was that for this election cycle, renters would be able to display signs, but new rental agreements would contain provisions that would prevent the display of signs.
City Clerk Margaret Roberts during her staff report said:
“The ordinance that’s before you minimally addresses that in that it says that they [political signs] are allowable, however, currently if a lease between a landlord and a tenant prohibits political signs, or any signage in their windows, that contract would supersede our ordinance. With that said, the city attorney has prepared at my request some alternatives that would disallow landlords from forbidding them to put that in.”
City Attorney Harriett Steiner suggested that nothing would preclude the city from adding a section to the ordinance dealing with non-commercial advertising signs, that would enable renters to post signs on their rental unit space.
Councilmember Don Saylor voted in favor of the first reading, however, he requested to see material for the second reading. He suggested that the new language has not been seen by people outside of the room (I am not certain that has been a concern in the past when he has proposed amended language to agenda items and ordinances).
One item of interest was Senate Bill 540, which passed both houses of the legislature but was vetoed by the Governor.
That bill would have established:
“that a landlord may not prohibit a tenant from posting a sign, flag, or banner relating to an election or legislative vote, or the initiative, referendum, or recall process, subject to certain limitations.”
Councilmember Stephen Souza had similar reservations about the change in langauge as Mr. Saylor, but he also had a concern about the timing since the primary election is around the corner in February 2008.
The council settled on presenting material on the second reading.
Lamar Heystek, lauded and applauded ASUCD for bringing forward this issue and getting it to the city council. He wanted to honor their commitment and the fact that they were there late into the evening during Winter Break, with appropriate action.
“It’s very clear that tenant’s should have equal freedom of speech rights, that they have political views, that they have opinions to express, and if they do them within the constraints of other residents, be they owners or not, I think it’s a reasonable accommodation to make and I think frankly it’s unfair to ask tenants to shop around for that right. To ask tenants to look for a place that will allow you to do that. It’s a fundamental freedom of speech right. And just because students don’t own the land that they live on doesn’t mean that they don’t get that right either.”
He concluded by suggesting that around 40% of our residents are renters, and therefore if we do not pass this ordinance, we will be excluding 40% of our residents from an ability to post political signs.
Don Saylor supported the ordinance but he had reservations.
“I think as we express our heartfelt appreciation for the six people who are here this evening and who have worked to bring this to us… I think as we applaud free speech, and the opportunity for all people who are interested in an issue to be present to discuss it. It’s also important to understand that many people who might have been interested in this issue aren’t here. And one reason that they aren’t here is that they weren’t aware that this issue was going to be discussed in this fashion. I’m going to support the resolution, the ordinance with the amendment that has been suggested, I think it’s appropriate that we proceed. But I have to say that we don’t have information for alternatives for how to approach this. We have one point of view represented. That is not a good way to do business. For that reason, I’m giving you a little bit of a cold shoulder on loving it to death, because I want to know on all issues what the various points of view are so that when we pass something, we know that we have weighed them carefully and understood the tradeoffs and understood what the points of view are that may not be represented. There is always something that we pay attention to whether we agree with it or not is another questions. So democracy and free speech includes all points of view.”
A few thoughts from my perspective. This is the most committed and most organized I have seen students in this community since I arrived in 1996. Don Saylor’s view is ironic because the students felt that the timing of this item was inappropriate–students were on winter break, finals were over, most have left town. So it is greatly ironic that students who do not permanently live in town in some cases would show up and stay until 11:30 p.m. and that town residents would not.
Secondly, it is also interesting that no one showed up. From our description of the October commission meeting, this was indeed a lively and at times contentious debate. The CEO of the Chamber of Commerce was present for that debate. As was a representative from one of the largest property management companies in town–Tandem Properties owned by John Whitcombe. This is to suggest that if they were not aware of this issue, I would have a tendency to put it on them.
Finally, it is ironic because Mr. Saylor, is just a bit disingenuous throughout this statement. He is concerned about these factors on issues that he cares about. The fact that he and Mr. Souza supported the ordinance reflects political realities more than personal preferences.
Nevertheless this is a moment for applause rather than criticism. The work of members of the ASUCD Senate should be applauded. As should their dedication. It was their work and the strong support of Councilmember Lamar Heystek that made this passage possible.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Bravo to the students!!! They have proven to the council majority that they must pay attention to students and their concerns.
I hope that this is not the last that we hear from students. Let’s hope they bring more issues forth and force council to address their concerns as well.After all, the city would be very different if it were not for the students.
I commend Lamar for acknowledging the students and their hard work too.
Bravo to the students!!! They have proven to the council majority that they must pay attention to students and their concerns.
I hope that this is not the last that we hear from students. Let’s hope they bring more issues forth and force council to address their concerns as well.After all, the city would be very different if it were not for the students.
I commend Lamar for acknowledging the students and their hard work too.
Bravo to the students!!! They have proven to the council majority that they must pay attention to students and their concerns.
I hope that this is not the last that we hear from students. Let’s hope they bring more issues forth and force council to address their concerns as well.After all, the city would be very different if it were not for the students.
I commend Lamar for acknowledging the students and their hard work too.
Bravo to the students!!! They have proven to the council majority that they must pay attention to students and their concerns.
I hope that this is not the last that we hear from students. Let’s hope they bring more issues forth and force council to address their concerns as well.After all, the city would be very different if it were not for the students.
I commend Lamar for acknowledging the students and their hard work too.
Bravo that renters — be they Covell Gardens seniors or UC Davis students — have an advocate in Lamar Heystek. He has brought a much-needed voice to the City Council.
Bravo that renters — be they Covell Gardens seniors or UC Davis students — have an advocate in Lamar Heystek. He has brought a much-needed voice to the City Council.
Bravo that renters — be they Covell Gardens seniors or UC Davis students — have an advocate in Lamar Heystek. He has brought a much-needed voice to the City Council.
Bravo that renters — be they Covell Gardens seniors or UC Davis students — have an advocate in Lamar Heystek. He has brought a much-needed voice to the City Council.
Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?
Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?
Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?
Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?
What I have noticed is the more controversial items on the City Council agenda are left to the very last – to cut down on public comment. Backfired this time, huh? The students stuck it out. Good for them!
What I have noticed is the more controversial items on the City Council agenda are left to the very last – to cut down on public comment. Backfired this time, huh? The students stuck it out. Good for them!
What I have noticed is the more controversial items on the City Council agenda are left to the very last – to cut down on public comment. Backfired this time, huh? The students stuck it out. Good for them!
What I have noticed is the more controversial items on the City Council agenda are left to the very last – to cut down on public comment. Backfired this time, huh? The students stuck it out. Good for them!
“Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?”
That’s an interesting characterization of things. What did he do that I liked? Well he voted to push the first reading on to a second reading, while setting the stage perhaps for another showdown on the issue and issued forth a long diatribe that was concerning to say the least. Or should we not listen to what he says as he strategically plots the next move?
“Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?”
That’s an interesting characterization of things. What did he do that I liked? Well he voted to push the first reading on to a second reading, while setting the stage perhaps for another showdown on the issue and issued forth a long diatribe that was concerning to say the least. Or should we not listen to what he says as he strategically plots the next move?
“Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?”
That’s an interesting characterization of things. What did he do that I liked? Well he voted to push the first reading on to a second reading, while setting the stage perhaps for another showdown on the issue and issued forth a long diatribe that was concerning to say the least. Or should we not listen to what he says as he strategically plots the next move?
“Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?”
That’s an interesting characterization of things. What did he do that I liked? Well he voted to push the first reading on to a second reading, while setting the stage perhaps for another showdown on the issue and issued forth a long diatribe that was concerning to say the least. Or should we not listen to what he says as he strategically plots the next move?
I thought DPD wasn’t covering City Council issues and election issues due to conflict?
I thought DPD wasn’t covering City Council issues and election issues due to conflict?
I thought DPD wasn’t covering City Council issues and election issues due to conflict?
I thought DPD wasn’t covering City Council issues and election issues due to conflict?
He’s not covering the election, he never said he wasn’t covering city issues.
He’s not covering the election, he never said he wasn’t covering city issues.
He’s not covering the election, he never said he wasn’t covering city issues.
He’s not covering the election, he never said he wasn’t covering city issues.
This was a constitutional 1st amendment issue, plain and simple. Don was really reaching here to obstruct, when unable to defeat,an ordinance that he believes is contrary to the desires of the “deep pocket” Establishment in Yolo. They are, after all, the ones who choose and fund Democratic candidates for higher office.
This was a constitutional 1st amendment issue, plain and simple. Don was really reaching here to obstruct, when unable to defeat,an ordinance that he believes is contrary to the desires of the “deep pocket” Establishment in Yolo. They are, after all, the ones who choose and fund Democratic candidates for higher office.
This was a constitutional 1st amendment issue, plain and simple. Don was really reaching here to obstruct, when unable to defeat,an ordinance that he believes is contrary to the desires of the “deep pocket” Establishment in Yolo. They are, after all, the ones who choose and fund Democratic candidates for higher office.
This was a constitutional 1st amendment issue, plain and simple. Don was really reaching here to obstruct, when unable to defeat,an ordinance that he believes is contrary to the desires of the “deep pocket” Establishment in Yolo. They are, after all, the ones who choose and fund Democratic candidates for higher office.
I’m curious to see how much leeway Debbie Davis gives Claire St. John in “quoting” fully Don Saylor’s position here. I would venture to guess that Don will get a “pass” on his overt attempt to obstruct this ordinance.
I’m curious to see how much leeway Debbie Davis gives Claire St. John in “quoting” fully Don Saylor’s position here. I would venture to guess that Don will get a “pass” on his overt attempt to obstruct this ordinance.
I’m curious to see how much leeway Debbie Davis gives Claire St. John in “quoting” fully Don Saylor’s position here. I would venture to guess that Don will get a “pass” on his overt attempt to obstruct this ordinance.
I’m curious to see how much leeway Debbie Davis gives Claire St. John in “quoting” fully Don Saylor’s position here. I would venture to guess that Don will get a “pass” on his overt attempt to obstruct this ordinance.
I’ll be interested to see it because the Enterprise reporter there was Beth Curda not Claire.
I’ll be interested to see it because the Enterprise reporter there was Beth Curda not Claire.
I’ll be interested to see it because the Enterprise reporter there was Beth Curda not Claire.
I’ll be interested to see it because the Enterprise reporter there was Beth Curda not Claire.
Beth will put a spin on it to make Saylor look good. Debbie Davis is his PR person, remember?
Beth will put a spin on it to make Saylor look good. Debbie Davis is his PR person, remember?
Beth will put a spin on it to make Saylor look good. Debbie Davis is his PR person, remember?
Beth will put a spin on it to make Saylor look good. Debbie Davis is his PR person, remember?
Beth is not wonderful but she is a far better reporter than Claire at this point in time. Claire has become just a hack. Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out. Beth at least attempts to be fair. Claire is simply lazy, yesterday’s article is a great example of it.
Beth is not wonderful but she is a far better reporter than Claire at this point in time. Claire has become just a hack. Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out. Beth at least attempts to be fair. Claire is simply lazy, yesterday’s article is a great example of it.
Beth is not wonderful but she is a far better reporter than Claire at this point in time. Claire has become just a hack. Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out. Beth at least attempts to be fair. Claire is simply lazy, yesterday’s article is a great example of it.
Beth is not wonderful but she is a far better reporter than Claire at this point in time. Claire has become just a hack. Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out. Beth at least attempts to be fair. Claire is simply lazy, yesterday’s article is a great example of it.
re “Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out.”
Claire came to the Enterprise with extraordinary energy and desire to do real journalism. For whatever reason, working for the Enterprise appears to have taken the stuffing out of her.
I do not believe that “laziness” is the explanation.
re “Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out.”
Claire came to the Enterprise with extraordinary energy and desire to do real journalism. For whatever reason, working for the Enterprise appears to have taken the stuffing out of her.
I do not believe that “laziness” is the explanation.
re “Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out.”
Claire came to the Enterprise with extraordinary energy and desire to do real journalism. For whatever reason, working for the Enterprise appears to have taken the stuffing out of her.
I do not believe that “laziness” is the explanation.
re “Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out.”
Claire came to the Enterprise with extraordinary energy and desire to do real journalism. For whatever reason, working for the Enterprise appears to have taken the stuffing out of her.
I do not believe that “laziness” is the explanation.
I’m not saying laziness is the culprit, but whatever has occurred has led to lazy reporting.
Example, Davis Enterprise article yesterday.
Claire quotes the report. But she never bothers to call anyone either in the city offices or among the council members. As the result, the Enterprise which went to press late morning, reports that the council will hear an issue when the Vanguard is already reporting that this issue will be pulled from the agenda.
Claire missed out completely on the behind the scenes furor over the issue because she was out of the loop. The Enterprise was a day late in reporting on this story in the first place, missed completely the controversy surrounding it, and therefore was not on the ball to know that the item was going to be pulled from the agenda.
In a nutshell, this is everything that is wrong with the Enterprise and the chief reason many of us have turned to the Vanguard as our source for city news.
I’m not saying laziness is the culprit, but whatever has occurred has led to lazy reporting.
Example, Davis Enterprise article yesterday.
Claire quotes the report. But she never bothers to call anyone either in the city offices or among the council members. As the result, the Enterprise which went to press late morning, reports that the council will hear an issue when the Vanguard is already reporting that this issue will be pulled from the agenda.
Claire missed out completely on the behind the scenes furor over the issue because she was out of the loop. The Enterprise was a day late in reporting on this story in the first place, missed completely the controversy surrounding it, and therefore was not on the ball to know that the item was going to be pulled from the agenda.
In a nutshell, this is everything that is wrong with the Enterprise and the chief reason many of us have turned to the Vanguard as our source for city news.
I’m not saying laziness is the culprit, but whatever has occurred has led to lazy reporting.
Example, Davis Enterprise article yesterday.
Claire quotes the report. But she never bothers to call anyone either in the city offices or among the council members. As the result, the Enterprise which went to press late morning, reports that the council will hear an issue when the Vanguard is already reporting that this issue will be pulled from the agenda.
Claire missed out completely on the behind the scenes furor over the issue because she was out of the loop. The Enterprise was a day late in reporting on this story in the first place, missed completely the controversy surrounding it, and therefore was not on the ball to know that the item was going to be pulled from the agenda.
In a nutshell, this is everything that is wrong with the Enterprise and the chief reason many of us have turned to the Vanguard as our source for city news.
I’m not saying laziness is the culprit, but whatever has occurred has led to lazy reporting.
Example, Davis Enterprise article yesterday.
Claire quotes the report. But she never bothers to call anyone either in the city offices or among the council members. As the result, the Enterprise which went to press late morning, reports that the council will hear an issue when the Vanguard is already reporting that this issue will be pulled from the agenda.
Claire missed out completely on the behind the scenes furor over the issue because she was out of the loop. The Enterprise was a day late in reporting on this story in the first place, missed completely the controversy surrounding it, and therefore was not on the ball to know that the item was going to be pulled from the agenda.
In a nutshell, this is everything that is wrong with the Enterprise and the chief reason many of us have turned to the Vanguard as our source for city news.
“Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?”
“I thought DPD wasn’t covering City Council issues and election issues due to conflict?”
I guess it is easier to go ad hominem rather than make a coherent and convincing argument. DPD in my mind raises a fair point. Don Saylor made a long statement mitigating his stance. Why is that not fair game just because he also voted to move the process forward?
“Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?”
“I thought DPD wasn’t covering City Council issues and election issues due to conflict?”
I guess it is easier to go ad hominem rather than make a coherent and convincing argument. DPD in my mind raises a fair point. Don Saylor made a long statement mitigating his stance. Why is that not fair game just because he also voted to move the process forward?
“Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?”
“I thought DPD wasn’t covering City Council issues and election issues due to conflict?”
I guess it is easier to go ad hominem rather than make a coherent and convincing argument. DPD in my mind raises a fair point. Don Saylor made a long statement mitigating his stance. Why is that not fair game just because he also voted to move the process forward?
“Even when Don Saylor does something you like, you still have to get a dig in at him, don’t you?”
“I thought DPD wasn’t covering City Council issues and election issues due to conflict?”
I guess it is easier to go ad hominem rather than make a coherent and convincing argument. DPD in my mind raises a fair point. Don Saylor made a long statement mitigating his stance. Why is that not fair game just because he also voted to move the process forward?
“Beth is not wonderful but she is a far better reporter than Claire at this point in time. Claire has become just a hack. Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out. Beth at least attempts to be fair. Claire is simply lazy, yesterday’s article is a great example of it.”
This commentary is beautiful. It sums up everything that is wrong with the entire Greenwald-Escamilla coalition. They make anonymous boadsides against people, just to be mean and nasty. A young lady is doing her job the best she can and somebody who is a friend of the Greenwald-Escamilla’s finds it necessary to demean her and call her a hack. I’m looking forward to seeing Mrs. Greenwald-Escamilla run for public office. She and her husband will discover there are a lot more people in Davis who don’t care for their nasty brand of hate politics than there are folks who would call reporters names.
“Beth is not wonderful but she is a far better reporter than Claire at this point in time. Claire has become just a hack. Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out. Beth at least attempts to be fair. Claire is simply lazy, yesterday’s article is a great example of it.”
This commentary is beautiful. It sums up everything that is wrong with the entire Greenwald-Escamilla coalition. They make anonymous boadsides against people, just to be mean and nasty. A young lady is doing her job the best she can and somebody who is a friend of the Greenwald-Escamilla’s finds it necessary to demean her and call her a hack. I’m looking forward to seeing Mrs. Greenwald-Escamilla run for public office. She and her husband will discover there are a lot more people in Davis who don’t care for their nasty brand of hate politics than there are folks who would call reporters names.
“Beth is not wonderful but she is a far better reporter than Claire at this point in time. Claire has become just a hack. Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out. Beth at least attempts to be fair. Claire is simply lazy, yesterday’s article is a great example of it.”
This commentary is beautiful. It sums up everything that is wrong with the entire Greenwald-Escamilla coalition. They make anonymous boadsides against people, just to be mean and nasty. A young lady is doing her job the best she can and somebody who is a friend of the Greenwald-Escamilla’s finds it necessary to demean her and call her a hack. I’m looking forward to seeing Mrs. Greenwald-Escamilla run for public office. She and her husband will discover there are a lot more people in Davis who don’t care for their nasty brand of hate politics than there are folks who would call reporters names.
“Beth is not wonderful but she is a far better reporter than Claire at this point in time. Claire has become just a hack. Someone suggested to me that she was burnt out. Beth at least attempts to be fair. Claire is simply lazy, yesterday’s article is a great example of it.”
This commentary is beautiful. It sums up everything that is wrong with the entire Greenwald-Escamilla coalition. They make anonymous boadsides against people, just to be mean and nasty. A young lady is doing her job the best she can and somebody who is a friend of the Greenwald-Escamilla’s finds it necessary to demean her and call her a hack. I’m looking forward to seeing Mrs. Greenwald-Escamilla run for public office. She and her husband will discover there are a lot more people in Davis who don’t care for their nasty brand of hate politics than there are folks who would call reporters names.
Paul:
It’s interesting that you point out nastiness by being nasty yourself and that you attack the writer of this blog for a statement not made by him because they have besmirched the reputation of a reporter that you apparently somehow believe is doing a good job.
Rather than making such ad hominem attacks as someone else put it, why not make a coherent argument defending the body of work of the reporter?
Paul:
It’s interesting that you point out nastiness by being nasty yourself and that you attack the writer of this blog for a statement not made by him because they have besmirched the reputation of a reporter that you apparently somehow believe is doing a good job.
Rather than making such ad hominem attacks as someone else put it, why not make a coherent argument defending the body of work of the reporter?
Paul:
It’s interesting that you point out nastiness by being nasty yourself and that you attack the writer of this blog for a statement not made by him because they have besmirched the reputation of a reporter that you apparently somehow believe is doing a good job.
Rather than making such ad hominem attacks as someone else put it, why not make a coherent argument defending the body of work of the reporter?
Paul:
It’s interesting that you point out nastiness by being nasty yourself and that you attack the writer of this blog for a statement not made by him because they have besmirched the reputation of a reporter that you apparently somehow believe is doing a good job.
Rather than making such ad hominem attacks as someone else put it, why not make a coherent argument defending the body of work of the reporter?
Additional point:
While I did indeed call Claire a hack, I also put logic and reason behind my viewpoint in the next post I made.
I also have never met either David or Cecilia.
Additional point:
While I did indeed call Claire a hack, I also put logic and reason behind my viewpoint in the next post I made.
I also have never met either David or Cecilia.
Additional point:
While I did indeed call Claire a hack, I also put logic and reason behind my viewpoint in the next post I made.
I also have never met either David or Cecilia.
Additional point:
While I did indeed call Claire a hack, I also put logic and reason behind my viewpoint in the next post I made.
I also have never met either David or Cecilia.
Apparently nasty means criticizing public figures. I think Paul will be surprised by how many people in this community are tired of business as usual. I suspect the reason this blog is so popular is that DPD (aka David) has struck a chord with a segment of the population who had no voice in this process previously.
Apparently nasty means criticizing public figures. I think Paul will be surprised by how many people in this community are tired of business as usual. I suspect the reason this blog is so popular is that DPD (aka David) has struck a chord with a segment of the population who had no voice in this process previously.
Apparently nasty means criticizing public figures. I think Paul will be surprised by how many people in this community are tired of business as usual. I suspect the reason this blog is so popular is that DPD (aka David) has struck a chord with a segment of the population who had no voice in this process previously.
Apparently nasty means criticizing public figures. I think Paul will be surprised by how many people in this community are tired of business as usual. I suspect the reason this blog is so popular is that DPD (aka David) has struck a chord with a segment of the population who had no voice in this process previously.
Paul McD said:
“This commentary is beautiful.”
Paul: Commentary is what the DPD does here and I believe that you are railing against one thread poster here whom, I also believe(and I include myself in the “Greenwald-Escamilla coaltion”), was too personal in her criticism of Claire’s work. Debbie Davis is the gatekeeper for all the work that we see in the Enterprise, period.
Paul McD said:
“This commentary is beautiful.”
Paul: Commentary is what the DPD does here and I believe that you are railing against one thread poster here whom, I also believe(and I include myself in the “Greenwald-Escamilla coaltion”), was too personal in her criticism of Claire’s work. Debbie Davis is the gatekeeper for all the work that we see in the Enterprise, period.
Paul McD said:
“This commentary is beautiful.”
Paul: Commentary is what the DPD does here and I believe that you are railing against one thread poster here whom, I also believe(and I include myself in the “Greenwald-Escamilla coaltion”), was too personal in her criticism of Claire’s work. Debbie Davis is the gatekeeper for all the work that we see in the Enterprise, period.
Paul McD said:
“This commentary is beautiful.”
Paul: Commentary is what the DPD does here and I believe that you are railing against one thread poster here whom, I also believe(and I include myself in the “Greenwald-Escamilla coaltion”), was too personal in her criticism of Claire’s work. Debbie Davis is the gatekeeper for all the work that we see in the Enterprise, period.
I agree with the last anonymous, we can criticize people without calling them names like “hack” or “lazy”–in fact, I would suggest the criticism would be more powerful not less.
I try not to censor on here, but please refrain from personal attacks.
I agree with the last anonymous, we can criticize people without calling them names like “hack” or “lazy”–in fact, I would suggest the criticism would be more powerful not less.
I try not to censor on here, but please refrain from personal attacks.
I agree with the last anonymous, we can criticize people without calling them names like “hack” or “lazy”–in fact, I would suggest the criticism would be more powerful not less.
I try not to censor on here, but please refrain from personal attacks.
I agree with the last anonymous, we can criticize people without calling them names like “hack” or “lazy”–in fact, I would suggest the criticism would be more powerful not less.
I try not to censor on here, but please refrain from personal attacks.
The comments about Claire and Beth are ridiculous. Both are excellent reporters. Writing an article for the Enterprise, as with any newspaper, is a limited by space considerations and printing deadlines. Both do their jobs well within those constraints.
The Vanguard fills a great niche because the blog can be updated at any time. The Enterprise has many other virtues. Both are useful resources, and it isn’t necessary or productive to keep bashing them. It is perfectly reasonable to argue with the editorial positions of the paper. But for content, the Davis Enterprise is probably the best local newspaper I’ve seen.
The comments about Claire and Beth are ridiculous. Both are excellent reporters. Writing an article for the Enterprise, as with any newspaper, is a limited by space considerations and printing deadlines. Both do their jobs well within those constraints.
The Vanguard fills a great niche because the blog can be updated at any time. The Enterprise has many other virtues. Both are useful resources, and it isn’t necessary or productive to keep bashing them. It is perfectly reasonable to argue with the editorial positions of the paper. But for content, the Davis Enterprise is probably the best local newspaper I’ve seen.
The comments about Claire and Beth are ridiculous. Both are excellent reporters. Writing an article for the Enterprise, as with any newspaper, is a limited by space considerations and printing deadlines. Both do their jobs well within those constraints.
The Vanguard fills a great niche because the blog can be updated at any time. The Enterprise has many other virtues. Both are useful resources, and it isn’t necessary or productive to keep bashing them. It is perfectly reasonable to argue with the editorial positions of the paper. But for content, the Davis Enterprise is probably the best local newspaper I’ve seen.
The comments about Claire and Beth are ridiculous. Both are excellent reporters. Writing an article for the Enterprise, as with any newspaper, is a limited by space considerations and printing deadlines. Both do their jobs well within those constraints.
The Vanguard fills a great niche because the blog can be updated at any time. The Enterprise has many other virtues. Both are useful resources, and it isn’t necessary or productive to keep bashing them. It is perfectly reasonable to argue with the editorial positions of the paper. But for content, the Davis Enterprise is probably the best local newspaper I’ve seen.
With all due respect Don Shore, the Enterprise is not the best local paper. The Aggie even does a better job. Readership has declined significantly and we can see why.
With all due respect Don Shore, the Enterprise is not the best local paper. The Aggie even does a better job. Readership has declined significantly and we can see why.
With all due respect Don Shore, the Enterprise is not the best local paper. The Aggie even does a better job. Readership has declined significantly and we can see why.
With all due respect Don Shore, the Enterprise is not the best local paper. The Aggie even does a better job. Readership has declined significantly and we can see why.
former Enterprise subsricber:
The Aggie is HORRIBLE. Just one example: they won’t print letters to the editor if they think the letter will be in any way controversial.
If you want to talk about a horrible editor look at Eddie Lee of the Aggie.
former Enterprise subsricber:
The Aggie is HORRIBLE. Just one example: they won’t print letters to the editor if they think the letter will be in any way controversial.
If you want to talk about a horrible editor look at Eddie Lee of the Aggie.
former Enterprise subsricber:
The Aggie is HORRIBLE. Just one example: they won’t print letters to the editor if they think the letter will be in any way controversial.
If you want to talk about a horrible editor look at Eddie Lee of the Aggie.
former Enterprise subsricber:
The Aggie is HORRIBLE. Just one example: they won’t print letters to the editor if they think the letter will be in any way controversial.
If you want to talk about a horrible editor look at Eddie Lee of the Aggie.
The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise. That is my point. The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.
Don’t let then get to you DPD. They’re upset because you report what they want to keep quiet.
The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise. That is my point. The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.
Don’t let then get to you DPD. They’re upset because you report what they want to keep quiet.
The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise. That is my point. The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.
Don’t let then get to you DPD. They’re upset because you report what they want to keep quiet.
The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise. That is my point. The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.
Don’t let then get to you DPD. They’re upset because you report what they want to keep quiet.
The comparison between the Davis Enterprise and this blog is a silly one. I find this blog interesting, provocative, and thorough usually about one subject a day. The Davis Enterprise has many interesting articles, Op-Eds, sports, local news, human interest stories, comics, and a plethora of non-political pieces. They both do a good job with the staff they have and their intended purpose. If you are getting your news (viewpoint) from only one source, you are missing some interesting perspectives concerning life in Davis. So many people on this blog refer to the paper as The Emptyprise, I find that short-sighted.
The comparison between the Davis Enterprise and this blog is a silly one. I find this blog interesting, provocative, and thorough usually about one subject a day. The Davis Enterprise has many interesting articles, Op-Eds, sports, local news, human interest stories, comics, and a plethora of non-political pieces. They both do a good job with the staff they have and their intended purpose. If you are getting your news (viewpoint) from only one source, you are missing some interesting perspectives concerning life in Davis. So many people on this blog refer to the paper as The Emptyprise, I find that short-sighted.
The comparison between the Davis Enterprise and this blog is a silly one. I find this blog interesting, provocative, and thorough usually about one subject a day. The Davis Enterprise has many interesting articles, Op-Eds, sports, local news, human interest stories, comics, and a plethora of non-political pieces. They both do a good job with the staff they have and their intended purpose. If you are getting your news (viewpoint) from only one source, you are missing some interesting perspectives concerning life in Davis. So many people on this blog refer to the paper as The Emptyprise, I find that short-sighted.
The comparison between the Davis Enterprise and this blog is a silly one. I find this blog interesting, provocative, and thorough usually about one subject a day. The Davis Enterprise has many interesting articles, Op-Eds, sports, local news, human interest stories, comics, and a plethora of non-political pieces. They both do a good job with the staff they have and their intended purpose. If you are getting your news (viewpoint) from only one source, you are missing some interesting perspectives concerning life in Davis. So many people on this blog refer to the paper as The Emptyprise, I find that short-sighted.
“The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.”
This is a lie. It’s sad when your argument is so weak you feel compelled to make up crap to justify your bias.
Blog detractors decry the fact that all comments, of whatever quality,seem to carry the same weight. The “special” blogs like the Vanguard have a vigorous self-correcting mechanism in their contributors who critically monitor the thread postings for veracity.
“The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.”
This is a lie. It’s sad when your argument is so weak you feel compelled to make up crap to justify your bias.
Blog detractors decry the fact that all comments, of whatever quality,seem to carry the same weight. The “special” blogs like the Vanguard have a vigorous self-correcting mechanism in their contributors who critically monitor the thread postings for veracity.
“The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.”
This is a lie. It’s sad when your argument is so weak you feel compelled to make up crap to justify your bias.
Blog detractors decry the fact that all comments, of whatever quality,seem to carry the same weight. The “special” blogs like the Vanguard have a vigorous self-correcting mechanism in their contributors who critically monitor the thread postings for veracity.
“The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.”
This is a lie. It’s sad when your argument is so weak you feel compelled to make up crap to justify your bias.
Blog detractors decry the fact that all comments, of whatever quality,seem to carry the same weight. The “special” blogs like the Vanguard have a vigorous self-correcting mechanism in their contributors who critically monitor the thread postings for veracity.
“This is a lie. It’s sad when your argument is so weak you feel compelled to make up crap to justify your bias.”
It’s actually a common complaint that I hear on a continual basis throughout the community. On the other hand, I can say categorically, I have never had that type of problem.
One thing I find very interesting–is the amount of venomous posts complaining about the posts of others. It is ironic. I think people need to cool down a bit there are clearly some topics that would provide for interesting discussion if people could settle down and discuss them.
For those of you who think the Enterprise is great in their reporting, give us examples of why you think so.
For those who hate the Enterprise, I want to hear those too.
“This is a lie. It’s sad when your argument is so weak you feel compelled to make up crap to justify your bias.”
It’s actually a common complaint that I hear on a continual basis throughout the community. On the other hand, I can say categorically, I have never had that type of problem.
One thing I find very interesting–is the amount of venomous posts complaining about the posts of others. It is ironic. I think people need to cool down a bit there are clearly some topics that would provide for interesting discussion if people could settle down and discuss them.
For those of you who think the Enterprise is great in their reporting, give us examples of why you think so.
For those who hate the Enterprise, I want to hear those too.
“This is a lie. It’s sad when your argument is so weak you feel compelled to make up crap to justify your bias.”
It’s actually a common complaint that I hear on a continual basis throughout the community. On the other hand, I can say categorically, I have never had that type of problem.
One thing I find very interesting–is the amount of venomous posts complaining about the posts of others. It is ironic. I think people need to cool down a bit there are clearly some topics that would provide for interesting discussion if people could settle down and discuss them.
For those of you who think the Enterprise is great in their reporting, give us examples of why you think so.
For those who hate the Enterprise, I want to hear those too.
“This is a lie. It’s sad when your argument is so weak you feel compelled to make up crap to justify your bias.”
It’s actually a common complaint that I hear on a continual basis throughout the community. On the other hand, I can say categorically, I have never had that type of problem.
One thing I find very interesting–is the amount of venomous posts complaining about the posts of others. It is ironic. I think people need to cool down a bit there are clearly some topics that would provide for interesting discussion if people could settle down and discuss them.
For those of you who think the Enterprise is great in their reporting, give us examples of why you think so.
For those who hate the Enterprise, I want to hear those too.
“The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise.”
The Enterprise has won the most awards of any newspaper in the western United States among papers of its circulation category. These prizes are judged by news professionals with a lot of experience. Every year the Enterprise is judged to be among the best.
You ought to read the Woodland paper or the Chico paper or the Red Bluff paper or the Merced paper to see how good the Davis Enterprise is by comparison. You would change your tune if you knew what you were talking about.
“The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise.”
The Enterprise has won the most awards of any newspaper in the western United States among papers of its circulation category. These prizes are judged by news professionals with a lot of experience. Every year the Enterprise is judged to be among the best.
You ought to read the Woodland paper or the Chico paper or the Red Bluff paper or the Merced paper to see how good the Davis Enterprise is by comparison. You would change your tune if you knew what you were talking about.
“The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise.”
The Enterprise has won the most awards of any newspaper in the western United States among papers of its circulation category. These prizes are judged by news professionals with a lot of experience. Every year the Enterprise is judged to be among the best.
You ought to read the Woodland paper or the Chico paper or the Red Bluff paper or the Merced paper to see how good the Davis Enterprise is by comparison. You would change your tune if you knew what you were talking about.
“The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise.”
The Enterprise has won the most awards of any newspaper in the western United States among papers of its circulation category. These prizes are judged by news professionals with a lot of experience. Every year the Enterprise is judged to be among the best.
You ought to read the Woodland paper or the Chico paper or the Red Bluff paper or the Merced paper to see how good the Davis Enterprise is by comparison. You would change your tune if you knew what you were talking about.
“It’s actually a common complaint that I hear on a continual basis throughout the community.”
It’s a lie.
“On the other hand, I can say categorically, I have never had that type of problem.”
Of course not.
re “It is perfectly reasonable to argue with the editorial positions of the paper. But for content, the Davis Enterprise is probably the best local newspaper I’ve seen.”
The problem, very common in individual/family-owned local newspapers, is that the bright line between locally-generated news content and editorial position is too often blurred and most would agree that this is the case with the Enterprise; both editorial position and content are then fair game.
“It’s actually a common complaint that I hear on a continual basis throughout the community.”
It’s a lie.
“On the other hand, I can say categorically, I have never had that type of problem.”
Of course not.
re “It is perfectly reasonable to argue with the editorial positions of the paper. But for content, the Davis Enterprise is probably the best local newspaper I’ve seen.”
The problem, very common in individual/family-owned local newspapers, is that the bright line between locally-generated news content and editorial position is too often blurred and most would agree that this is the case with the Enterprise; both editorial position and content are then fair game.
“It’s actually a common complaint that I hear on a continual basis throughout the community.”
It’s a lie.
“On the other hand, I can say categorically, I have never had that type of problem.”
Of course not.
re “It is perfectly reasonable to argue with the editorial positions of the paper. But for content, the Davis Enterprise is probably the best local newspaper I’ve seen.”
The problem, very common in individual/family-owned local newspapers, is that the bright line between locally-generated news content and editorial position is too often blurred and most would agree that this is the case with the Enterprise; both editorial position and content are then fair game.
“It’s actually a common complaint that I hear on a continual basis throughout the community.”
It’s a lie.
“On the other hand, I can say categorically, I have never had that type of problem.”
Of course not.
re “It is perfectly reasonable to argue with the editorial positions of the paper. But for content, the Davis Enterprise is probably the best local newspaper I’ve seen.”
The problem, very common in individual/family-owned local newspapers, is that the bright line between locally-generated news content and editorial position is too often blurred and most would agree that this is the case with the Enterprise; both editorial position and content are then fair game.
“It’s a lie.”
I don’t think it is.
“The Enterprise has won the most awards of any newspaper in the western United States among papers of its circulation category. These prizes are judged by news professionals with a lot of experience. Every year the Enterprise is judged to be among the best.”
I guess I would have to disagree.
I will explain:
1. I don’t think they cover a wide range of topics
2. I don’t think they do any sort of in-depth reporting
3. I think they are tremendously biased towards the establishment in both their news coverage and their editorials
“You ought to read the Woodland paper or the Chico paper or the Red Bluff paper or the Merced paper to see how good the Davis Enterprise is by comparison. You would change your tune if you knew what you were talking about.”
Now you are making assumptions about me and you have no idea what I read or what my background is.
“It’s a lie.”
I don’t think it is.
“The Enterprise has won the most awards of any newspaper in the western United States among papers of its circulation category. These prizes are judged by news professionals with a lot of experience. Every year the Enterprise is judged to be among the best.”
I guess I would have to disagree.
I will explain:
1. I don’t think they cover a wide range of topics
2. I don’t think they do any sort of in-depth reporting
3. I think they are tremendously biased towards the establishment in both their news coverage and their editorials
“You ought to read the Woodland paper or the Chico paper or the Red Bluff paper or the Merced paper to see how good the Davis Enterprise is by comparison. You would change your tune if you knew what you were talking about.”
Now you are making assumptions about me and you have no idea what I read or what my background is.
“It’s a lie.”
I don’t think it is.
“The Enterprise has won the most awards of any newspaper in the western United States among papers of its circulation category. These prizes are judged by news professionals with a lot of experience. Every year the Enterprise is judged to be among the best.”
I guess I would have to disagree.
I will explain:
1. I don’t think they cover a wide range of topics
2. I don’t think they do any sort of in-depth reporting
3. I think they are tremendously biased towards the establishment in both their news coverage and their editorials
“You ought to read the Woodland paper or the Chico paper or the Red Bluff paper or the Merced paper to see how good the Davis Enterprise is by comparison. You would change your tune if you knew what you were talking about.”
Now you are making assumptions about me and you have no idea what I read or what my background is.
“It’s a lie.”
I don’t think it is.
“The Enterprise has won the most awards of any newspaper in the western United States among papers of its circulation category. These prizes are judged by news professionals with a lot of experience. Every year the Enterprise is judged to be among the best.”
I guess I would have to disagree.
I will explain:
1. I don’t think they cover a wide range of topics
2. I don’t think they do any sort of in-depth reporting
3. I think they are tremendously biased towards the establishment in both their news coverage and their editorials
“You ought to read the Woodland paper or the Chico paper or the Red Bluff paper or the Merced paper to see how good the Davis Enterprise is by comparison. You would change your tune if you knew what you were talking about.”
Now you are making assumptions about me and you have no idea what I read or what my background is.
“In a project with the city of Woodland and UC Davis, Davis has been looking at drawing water from the Sacramento River and providing water to its residents and businesses that way, instead of drawing ground water.”
Above is taken from Beth’s Enterprise article today. It is patently false as presented. In the best scenerio,we will need to maintain a dual system with river water replacing/supplementing our current ground water system for 6-8/months a year. The argument will immediately be made that shortage of prints space forced this inaccuracy but we all know that these “inaccuracies” ALWAYS offer “facts” that give credence to those/and projects that the Entrprise supports.
“In a project with the city of Woodland and UC Davis, Davis has been looking at drawing water from the Sacramento River and providing water to its residents and businesses that way, instead of drawing ground water.”
Above is taken from Beth’s Enterprise article today. It is patently false as presented. In the best scenerio,we will need to maintain a dual system with river water replacing/supplementing our current ground water system for 6-8/months a year. The argument will immediately be made that shortage of prints space forced this inaccuracy but we all know that these “inaccuracies” ALWAYS offer “facts” that give credence to those/and projects that the Entrprise supports.
“In a project with the city of Woodland and UC Davis, Davis has been looking at drawing water from the Sacramento River and providing water to its residents and businesses that way, instead of drawing ground water.”
Above is taken from Beth’s Enterprise article today. It is patently false as presented. In the best scenerio,we will need to maintain a dual system with river water replacing/supplementing our current ground water system for 6-8/months a year. The argument will immediately be made that shortage of prints space forced this inaccuracy but we all know that these “inaccuracies” ALWAYS offer “facts” that give credence to those/and projects that the Entrprise supports.
“In a project with the city of Woodland and UC Davis, Davis has been looking at drawing water from the Sacramento River and providing water to its residents and businesses that way, instead of drawing ground water.”
Above is taken from Beth’s Enterprise article today. It is patently false as presented. In the best scenerio,we will need to maintain a dual system with river water replacing/supplementing our current ground water system for 6-8/months a year. The argument will immediately be made that shortage of prints space forced this inaccuracy but we all know that these “inaccuracies” ALWAYS offer “facts” that give credence to those/and projects that the Entrprise supports.
Not only that but the amount and availability of the water is determined by the amount of available water, so during dry years, we may not get any river water. This is something not often discussed.
Not only that but the amount and availability of the water is determined by the amount of available water, so during dry years, we may not get any river water. This is something not often discussed.
Not only that but the amount and availability of the water is determined by the amount of available water, so during dry years, we may not get any river water. This is something not often discussed.
Not only that but the amount and availability of the water is determined by the amount of available water, so during dry years, we may not get any river water. This is something not often discussed.
That’s why I referred to it as a best-case scenerio. Contrary to Beth’s article that touts increased reliability, if we expanded our usage to include the river water which would not be available in our dry months at any time and perhaps only a few winter months in dry years, then we would really be up sh##’s creek.
That’s why I referred to it as a best-case scenerio. Contrary to Beth’s article that touts increased reliability, if we expanded our usage to include the river water which would not be available in our dry months at any time and perhaps only a few winter months in dry years, then we would really be up sh##’s creek.
That’s why I referred to it as a best-case scenerio. Contrary to Beth’s article that touts increased reliability, if we expanded our usage to include the river water which would not be available in our dry months at any time and perhaps only a few winter months in dry years, then we would really be up sh##’s creek.
That’s why I referred to it as a best-case scenerio. Contrary to Beth’s article that touts increased reliability, if we expanded our usage to include the river water which would not be available in our dry months at any time and perhaps only a few winter months in dry years, then we would really be up sh##’s creek.
The surface water would partially replace ground water. So, if you object to the lack of clarity, you can go to the Enterprise web site and post your comments about the article there.
Beth’s article was primarily about the council’s action approving the waste water treatment. It also mentioned that the council is having the water plan reviewed, that Sue opposes the plan, and that Stephen Souza is concerned about costs.
500 words, more or less.
Ananymous 3:30 –
You ARE WRONG. I know for a fact, because it has happened to me and my friends that have written letters to the editor and not had them in for weeks at a time, or at all. Then we read letters from people who defend the establishment week wafter week and their letters are published.
Sorry Anonymous at 3:30, but what you say is a lie.
I don’t need to go by anonymous. My name is Diane and I am a former Enterprise subscriber too.
The surface water would partially replace ground water. So, if you object to the lack of clarity, you can go to the Enterprise web site and post your comments about the article there.
Beth’s article was primarily about the council’s action approving the waste water treatment. It also mentioned that the council is having the water plan reviewed, that Sue opposes the plan, and that Stephen Souza is concerned about costs.
500 words, more or less.
Ananymous 3:30 –
You ARE WRONG. I know for a fact, because it has happened to me and my friends that have written letters to the editor and not had them in for weeks at a time, or at all. Then we read letters from people who defend the establishment week wafter week and their letters are published.
Sorry Anonymous at 3:30, but what you say is a lie.
I don’t need to go by anonymous. My name is Diane and I am a former Enterprise subscriber too.
The surface water would partially replace ground water. So, if you object to the lack of clarity, you can go to the Enterprise web site and post your comments about the article there.
Beth’s article was primarily about the council’s action approving the waste water treatment. It also mentioned that the council is having the water plan reviewed, that Sue opposes the plan, and that Stephen Souza is concerned about costs.
500 words, more or less.
Ananymous 3:30 –
You ARE WRONG. I know for a fact, because it has happened to me and my friends that have written letters to the editor and not had them in for weeks at a time, or at all. Then we read letters from people who defend the establishment week wafter week and their letters are published.
Sorry Anonymous at 3:30, but what you say is a lie.
I don’t need to go by anonymous. My name is Diane and I am a former Enterprise subscriber too.
The surface water would partially replace ground water. So, if you object to the lack of clarity, you can go to the Enterprise web site and post your comments about the article there.
Beth’s article was primarily about the council’s action approving the waste water treatment. It also mentioned that the council is having the water plan reviewed, that Sue opposes the plan, and that Stephen Souza is concerned about costs.
500 words, more or less.
Ananymous 3:30 –
You ARE WRONG. I know for a fact, because it has happened to me and my friends that have written letters to the editor and not had them in for weeks at a time, or at all. Then we read letters from people who defend the establishment week wafter week and their letters are published.
Sorry Anonymous at 3:30, but what you say is a lie.
I don’t need to go by anonymous. My name is Diane and I am a former Enterprise subscriber too.
“I don’t need to go by anonymous. My name is Diane and I am a former Enterprise subscriber too.”
Diane, what is your last name?
“I don’t need to go by anonymous. My name is Diane and I am a former Enterprise subscriber too.”
Diane, what is your last name?
“I don’t need to go by anonymous. My name is Diane and I am a former Enterprise subscriber too.”
Diane, what is your last name?
“I don’t need to go by anonymous. My name is Diane and I am a former Enterprise subscriber too.”
Diane, what is your last name?
“Davis has been looking at drawing water from the Sacramento River and providing water to its residents and businesses that way, instead of drawing ground water.”
“It is patently false as presented.”
I would say it is misleading, not patently false. It is completely true that river water would provide Davis water instead of ground water, whenever river water was available.
The next sentence in the same story is:
“Engineers designing the river water project say the new plan would offer a cleaner, more reliable water source that also would make treating wastewater easier.”
With that sentence, I understand the river water to be “a source,” not the only source.
If the story said that we would never need ground water again, that would be patently false. The story does not say that.
“Davis has been looking at drawing water from the Sacramento River and providing water to its residents and businesses that way, instead of drawing ground water.”
“It is patently false as presented.”
I would say it is misleading, not patently false. It is completely true that river water would provide Davis water instead of ground water, whenever river water was available.
The next sentence in the same story is:
“Engineers designing the river water project say the new plan would offer a cleaner, more reliable water source that also would make treating wastewater easier.”
With that sentence, I understand the river water to be “a source,” not the only source.
If the story said that we would never need ground water again, that would be patently false. The story does not say that.
“Davis has been looking at drawing water from the Sacramento River and providing water to its residents and businesses that way, instead of drawing ground water.”
“It is patently false as presented.”
I would say it is misleading, not patently false. It is completely true that river water would provide Davis water instead of ground water, whenever river water was available.
The next sentence in the same story is:
“Engineers designing the river water project say the new plan would offer a cleaner, more reliable water source that also would make treating wastewater easier.”
With that sentence, I understand the river water to be “a source,” not the only source.
If the story said that we would never need ground water again, that would be patently false. The story does not say that.
“Davis has been looking at drawing water from the Sacramento River and providing water to its residents and businesses that way, instead of drawing ground water.”
“It is patently false as presented.”
I would say it is misleading, not patently false. It is completely true that river water would provide Davis water instead of ground water, whenever river water was available.
The next sentence in the same story is:
“Engineers designing the river water project say the new plan would offer a cleaner, more reliable water source that also would make treating wastewater easier.”
With that sentence, I understand the river water to be “a source,” not the only source.
If the story said that we would never need ground water again, that would be patently false. The story does not say that.
Don… while your reply is accurate, you KNOW that it does not address the issue that I was raising, namely that the Enterprise shapes its news articles based upon editorial decisions
Yes, anonymous 5:53 PM, it is more misleading than patently false. To the Enterprise reader relying upon the Enterprise for local inforamtion, they are both equally effective in manipulating reader opinion. Misleading by omission is the Enterprise’s most often used tool in this regard.
Don… while your reply is accurate, you KNOW that it does not address the issue that I was raising, namely that the Enterprise shapes its news articles based upon editorial decisions
Yes, anonymous 5:53 PM, it is more misleading than patently false. To the Enterprise reader relying upon the Enterprise for local inforamtion, they are both equally effective in manipulating reader opinion. Misleading by omission is the Enterprise’s most often used tool in this regard.
Don… while your reply is accurate, you KNOW that it does not address the issue that I was raising, namely that the Enterprise shapes its news articles based upon editorial decisions
Yes, anonymous 5:53 PM, it is more misleading than patently false. To the Enterprise reader relying upon the Enterprise for local inforamtion, they are both equally effective in manipulating reader opinion. Misleading by omission is the Enterprise’s most often used tool in this regard.
Don… while your reply is accurate, you KNOW that it does not address the issue that I was raising, namely that the Enterprise shapes its news articles based upon editorial decisions
Yes, anonymous 5:53 PM, it is more misleading than patently false. To the Enterprise reader relying upon the Enterprise for local inforamtion, they are both equally effective in manipulating reader opinion. Misleading by omission is the Enterprise’s most often used tool in this regard.
Another manipulation of public opinion by omission?
Souza publicly stated that Davis would pay for the bulk of the cost of the sewer project through grants/low interest loans. Souza’s statement were offered without any clarity as to whether these POTENTIAL loans/grants were guaranteed available or just possibilities.
He half- asked/stated this “fact” and waited for a supporting reply from Public Works sitting before him. What we got was an enigmatic expression and SILENCE.
Another manipulation of public opinion by omission?
Souza publicly stated that Davis would pay for the bulk of the cost of the sewer project through grants/low interest loans. Souza’s statement were offered without any clarity as to whether these POTENTIAL loans/grants were guaranteed available or just possibilities.
He half- asked/stated this “fact” and waited for a supporting reply from Public Works sitting before him. What we got was an enigmatic expression and SILENCE.
Another manipulation of public opinion by omission?
Souza publicly stated that Davis would pay for the bulk of the cost of the sewer project through grants/low interest loans. Souza’s statement were offered without any clarity as to whether these POTENTIAL loans/grants were guaranteed available or just possibilities.
He half- asked/stated this “fact” and waited for a supporting reply from Public Works sitting before him. What we got was an enigmatic expression and SILENCE.
Another manipulation of public opinion by omission?
Souza publicly stated that Davis would pay for the bulk of the cost of the sewer project through grants/low interest loans. Souza’s statement were offered without any clarity as to whether these POTENTIAL loans/grants were guaranteed available or just possibilities.
He half- asked/stated this “fact” and waited for a supporting reply from Public Works sitting before him. What we got was an enigmatic expression and SILENCE.
re “With that sentence, I understand the river water to be “a source,” not the only source.”
Perhaps I missed it, please show me where you got the information in Beth’s article to bring you to that understanding.
re “With that sentence, I understand the river water to be “a source,” not the only source.”
Perhaps I missed it, please show me where you got the information in Beth’s article to bring you to that understanding.
re “With that sentence, I understand the river water to be “a source,” not the only source.”
Perhaps I missed it, please show me where you got the information in Beth’s article to bring you to that understanding.
re “With that sentence, I understand the river water to be “a source,” not the only source.”
Perhaps I missed it, please show me where you got the information in Beth’s article to bring you to that understanding.
Why can’t Beth’s error in wording be just that rather than a conspiracy or some hidden agenda to deceive the people?
Why can’t Beth’s error in wording be just that rather than a conspiracy or some hidden agenda to deceive the people?
Why can’t Beth’s error in wording be just that rather than a conspiracy or some hidden agenda to deceive the people?
Why can’t Beth’s error in wording be just that rather than a conspiracy or some hidden agenda to deceive the people?
Darnell,
When Beth or other reporters make the same “errors” or cover stories from one perspective time and time again having it only play in favor of the establishment, rather than provide full, neutral coverage of an issue I have an issue with that too.
I understand she’s in turn feeding the hand that feeds her so to speak, but Debbie should provide us with a better paper. Not much to say for the 2nd most educated community.
Darnell,
When Beth or other reporters make the same “errors” or cover stories from one perspective time and time again having it only play in favor of the establishment, rather than provide full, neutral coverage of an issue I have an issue with that too.
I understand she’s in turn feeding the hand that feeds her so to speak, but Debbie should provide us with a better paper. Not much to say for the 2nd most educated community.
Darnell,
When Beth or other reporters make the same “errors” or cover stories from one perspective time and time again having it only play in favor of the establishment, rather than provide full, neutral coverage of an issue I have an issue with that too.
I understand she’s in turn feeding the hand that feeds her so to speak, but Debbie should provide us with a better paper. Not much to say for the 2nd most educated community.
Darnell,
When Beth or other reporters make the same “errors” or cover stories from one perspective time and time again having it only play in favor of the establishment, rather than provide full, neutral coverage of an issue I have an issue with that too.
I understand she’s in turn feeding the hand that feeds her so to speak, but Debbie should provide us with a better paper. Not much to say for the 2nd most educated community.
davisite said…
“Don… while your reply is accurate, you KNOW that it does not address the issue that I was raising, namely that the Enterprise shapes its news articles based upon editorial decisions”
I don’t consider this article to be an example of your premise at all. In fact, I seriously doubt that the newsroom at the Enterprise works that way at any substantive level.
davisite said…
“Don… while your reply is accurate, you KNOW that it does not address the issue that I was raising, namely that the Enterprise shapes its news articles based upon editorial decisions”
I don’t consider this article to be an example of your premise at all. In fact, I seriously doubt that the newsroom at the Enterprise works that way at any substantive level.
davisite said…
“Don… while your reply is accurate, you KNOW that it does not address the issue that I was raising, namely that the Enterprise shapes its news articles based upon editorial decisions”
I don’t consider this article to be an example of your premise at all. In fact, I seriously doubt that the newsroom at the Enterprise works that way at any substantive level.
davisite said…
“Don… while your reply is accurate, you KNOW that it does not address the issue that I was raising, namely that the Enterprise shapes its news articles based upon editorial decisions”
I don’t consider this article to be an example of your premise at all. In fact, I seriously doubt that the newsroom at the Enterprise works that way at any substantive level.
“When Beth or other reporters make the same “errors” or cover stories from one perspective time and time again having it only play in favor of the establishment, rather than provide full, neutral coverage of an issue I have an issue with that too.”
Are you under the care of a psychiatrist? Or are you just pretending to sound like a paranoid nut case?
This could be the craziest, most ill-informed bit of crackpot conspiracy I’ve read on this silly blog.
Even the character who writes the inflamatory essays which appear on the front page is not this bad.
“When Beth or other reporters make the same “errors” or cover stories from one perspective time and time again having it only play in favor of the establishment, rather than provide full, neutral coverage of an issue I have an issue with that too.”
Are you under the care of a psychiatrist? Or are you just pretending to sound like a paranoid nut case?
This could be the craziest, most ill-informed bit of crackpot conspiracy I’ve read on this silly blog.
Even the character who writes the inflamatory essays which appear on the front page is not this bad.
“When Beth or other reporters make the same “errors” or cover stories from one perspective time and time again having it only play in favor of the establishment, rather than provide full, neutral coverage of an issue I have an issue with that too.”
Are you under the care of a psychiatrist? Or are you just pretending to sound like a paranoid nut case?
This could be the craziest, most ill-informed bit of crackpot conspiracy I’ve read on this silly blog.
Even the character who writes the inflamatory essays which appear on the front page is not this bad.
“When Beth or other reporters make the same “errors” or cover stories from one perspective time and time again having it only play in favor of the establishment, rather than provide full, neutral coverage of an issue I have an issue with that too.”
Are you under the care of a psychiatrist? Or are you just pretending to sound like a paranoid nut case?
This could be the craziest, most ill-informed bit of crackpot conspiracy I’ve read on this silly blog.
Even the character who writes the inflamatory essays which appear on the front page is not this bad.
Honestly, stop reading the blog if you don’t like it and think it’s a silly blog, you post enough all day for crying out loud.
Honestly, stop reading the blog if you don’t like it and think it’s a silly blog, you post enough all day for crying out loud.
Honestly, stop reading the blog if you don’t like it and think it’s a silly blog, you post enough all day for crying out loud.
Honestly, stop reading the blog if you don’t like it and think it’s a silly blog, you post enough all day for crying out loud.
Anonymous said …”in a nutshell, this is everything that is wrong with the Enterprise and the chief reason many of us have turned to the Vanguard as our source for city news.
If you rely solely on dpd for city news, then you are not getting a “balanced” reporting of the events — maybe you don’t get “balanced” with the Enterprise either, but this blog has been provided very sloppy “reporting” on numerous occasions. I would be very appreciative if this blog was reporting in a balanced way, but it isn’t the path that dpd has chosen. The readers then can only put anything written here into context.
Former Enterprise Subscriber said…
The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise. That is my point. The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.
Readership at virtually all newspapers has declined, a fact that has little to do with quality of reporting. To suggest that is the cause at the Enterprise is not fair.
Anonymous said …”in a nutshell, this is everything that is wrong with the Enterprise and the chief reason many of us have turned to the Vanguard as our source for city news.
If you rely solely on dpd for city news, then you are not getting a “balanced” reporting of the events — maybe you don’t get “balanced” with the Enterprise either, but this blog has been provided very sloppy “reporting” on numerous occasions. I would be very appreciative if this blog was reporting in a balanced way, but it isn’t the path that dpd has chosen. The readers then can only put anything written here into context.
Former Enterprise Subscriber said…
The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise. That is my point. The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.
Readership at virtually all newspapers has declined, a fact that has little to do with quality of reporting. To suggest that is the cause at the Enterprise is not fair.
Anonymous said …”in a nutshell, this is everything that is wrong with the Enterprise and the chief reason many of us have turned to the Vanguard as our source for city news.
If you rely solely on dpd for city news, then you are not getting a “balanced” reporting of the events — maybe you don’t get “balanced” with the Enterprise either, but this blog has been provided very sloppy “reporting” on numerous occasions. I would be very appreciative if this blog was reporting in a balanced way, but it isn’t the path that dpd has chosen. The readers then can only put anything written here into context.
Former Enterprise Subscriber said…
The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise. That is my point. The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.
Readership at virtually all newspapers has declined, a fact that has little to do with quality of reporting. To suggest that is the cause at the Enterprise is not fair.
Anonymous said …”in a nutshell, this is everything that is wrong with the Enterprise and the chief reason many of us have turned to the Vanguard as our source for city news.
If you rely solely on dpd for city news, then you are not getting a “balanced” reporting of the events — maybe you don’t get “balanced” with the Enterprise either, but this blog has been provided very sloppy “reporting” on numerous occasions. I would be very appreciative if this blog was reporting in a balanced way, but it isn’t the path that dpd has chosen. The readers then can only put anything written here into context.
Former Enterprise Subscriber said…
The Aggie is not a good paper at this time, but neither is the Enterprise. That is my point. The Enterprise is known for not printing letters and editing them significantly if they don’t agree with the writer or the issue.
Readership at virtually all newspapers has declined, a fact that has little to do with quality of reporting. To suggest that is the cause at the Enterprise is not fair.
that’s great, that this violation of the first amendment rights of renters was resolved. good for the council.
and while i have many complaints about the enterprise, i have to agree with don that – in a relative sense at least – other papers of similar circulation are often far, far worse, often just cut and paste jobs from AP and various syndicated columnists, with no reporting on anything local of substance.
that’s great, that this violation of the first amendment rights of renters was resolved. good for the council.
and while i have many complaints about the enterprise, i have to agree with don that – in a relative sense at least – other papers of similar circulation are often far, far worse, often just cut and paste jobs from AP and various syndicated columnists, with no reporting on anything local of substance.
that’s great, that this violation of the first amendment rights of renters was resolved. good for the council.
and while i have many complaints about the enterprise, i have to agree with don that – in a relative sense at least – other papers of similar circulation are often far, far worse, often just cut and paste jobs from AP and various syndicated columnists, with no reporting on anything local of substance.
that’s great, that this violation of the first amendment rights of renters was resolved. good for the council.
and while i have many complaints about the enterprise, i have to agree with don that – in a relative sense at least – other papers of similar circulation are often far, far worse, often just cut and paste jobs from AP and various syndicated columnists, with no reporting on anything local of substance.
The process was a bit messy, but in the end, the $250 limit item was postponed, and the rental unit sign item passed.
When I was on the CC, the large landlords hotly opposed a specific ordinance permitting the window signs. Most of the large landowners supported the large exterior developments, and their specific candidates, so the owners did not want a competing viewpoint from their land.
I always thought it was a first amendment right. (I rent an apt; I get to put something in my window stating my political view.) No one ever sued, which surprised me.
In the end, the night turned out well for everyone.
Happy Holidays to the Blog and its contributors!!
Mike
The process was a bit messy, but in the end, the $250 limit item was postponed, and the rental unit sign item passed.
When I was on the CC, the large landlords hotly opposed a specific ordinance permitting the window signs. Most of the large landowners supported the large exterior developments, and their specific candidates, so the owners did not want a competing viewpoint from their land.
I always thought it was a first amendment right. (I rent an apt; I get to put something in my window stating my political view.) No one ever sued, which surprised me.
In the end, the night turned out well for everyone.
Happy Holidays to the Blog and its contributors!!
Mike
The process was a bit messy, but in the end, the $250 limit item was postponed, and the rental unit sign item passed.
When I was on the CC, the large landlords hotly opposed a specific ordinance permitting the window signs. Most of the large landowners supported the large exterior developments, and their specific candidates, so the owners did not want a competing viewpoint from their land.
I always thought it was a first amendment right. (I rent an apt; I get to put something in my window stating my political view.) No one ever sued, which surprised me.
In the end, the night turned out well for everyone.
Happy Holidays to the Blog and its contributors!!
Mike
The process was a bit messy, but in the end, the $250 limit item was postponed, and the rental unit sign item passed.
When I was on the CC, the large landlords hotly opposed a specific ordinance permitting the window signs. Most of the large landowners supported the large exterior developments, and their specific candidates, so the owners did not want a competing viewpoint from their land.
I always thought it was a first amendment right. (I rent an apt; I get to put something in my window stating my political view.) No one ever sued, which surprised me.
In the end, the night turned out well for everyone.
Happy Holidays to the Blog and its contributors!!
Mike
Don,
Regarding today’s Enterprise article about the wastewater treatment plant,
I posted the following at the Enterprise site today:
“I would like to emphasize that I am not “an opponent” of the surface water project. I am in favor of studying to the feasibility of phasing in the wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project, so that the new wastewater plant can be paid off before citizens have to start paying for the surface water project.
I am proposing this only after having talked with the leading University water experts and a top state water rights expert, and having received feedback that postponing the surface water project was worthy of consideration.
I suggest postponing the project because I am concerned about the cumulative impact of the costs of the new wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project.
The combined projects are currently estimated to cost over $340 million dollars. If the water project goes through, supplementary charges on average the average home’s property tax bill (supplementary taxes, water, sewer and garbage fees) are now forecast to be around $3,300 in seven years, when the full costs of paying for the water and sewer projects kick in. (This doesn’t count the sales tax supplement). These charges are over and above the base property tax.
This forecast does not include any of the new city or school district taxes that will probably be coming. The new $165 million wastewater treatment plant, which we must rebuild by law, and the new $175 million surface water project, are far and away the largest components of these supplementary charges.
In short, I believe that we will need to import surface water sometime in the future, but that we should consider postponing the project. Again, I have consulted with top water and water rights experts, exploring with them all the pros and cons and fears and risks, before offering this suggestion.”
Don,
Regarding today’s Enterprise article about the wastewater treatment plant,
I posted the following at the Enterprise site today:
“I would like to emphasize that I am not “an opponent” of the surface water project. I am in favor of studying to the feasibility of phasing in the wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project, so that the new wastewater plant can be paid off before citizens have to start paying for the surface water project.
I am proposing this only after having talked with the leading University water experts and a top state water rights expert, and having received feedback that postponing the surface water project was worthy of consideration.
I suggest postponing the project because I am concerned about the cumulative impact of the costs of the new wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project.
The combined projects are currently estimated to cost over $340 million dollars. If the water project goes through, supplementary charges on average the average home’s property tax bill (supplementary taxes, water, sewer and garbage fees) are now forecast to be around $3,300 in seven years, when the full costs of paying for the water and sewer projects kick in. (This doesn’t count the sales tax supplement). These charges are over and above the base property tax.
This forecast does not include any of the new city or school district taxes that will probably be coming. The new $165 million wastewater treatment plant, which we must rebuild by law, and the new $175 million surface water project, are far and away the largest components of these supplementary charges.
In short, I believe that we will need to import surface water sometime in the future, but that we should consider postponing the project. Again, I have consulted with top water and water rights experts, exploring with them all the pros and cons and fears and risks, before offering this suggestion.”
Don,
Regarding today’s Enterprise article about the wastewater treatment plant,
I posted the following at the Enterprise site today:
“I would like to emphasize that I am not “an opponent” of the surface water project. I am in favor of studying to the feasibility of phasing in the wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project, so that the new wastewater plant can be paid off before citizens have to start paying for the surface water project.
I am proposing this only after having talked with the leading University water experts and a top state water rights expert, and having received feedback that postponing the surface water project was worthy of consideration.
I suggest postponing the project because I am concerned about the cumulative impact of the costs of the new wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project.
The combined projects are currently estimated to cost over $340 million dollars. If the water project goes through, supplementary charges on average the average home’s property tax bill (supplementary taxes, water, sewer and garbage fees) are now forecast to be around $3,300 in seven years, when the full costs of paying for the water and sewer projects kick in. (This doesn’t count the sales tax supplement). These charges are over and above the base property tax.
This forecast does not include any of the new city or school district taxes that will probably be coming. The new $165 million wastewater treatment plant, which we must rebuild by law, and the new $175 million surface water project, are far and away the largest components of these supplementary charges.
In short, I believe that we will need to import surface water sometime in the future, but that we should consider postponing the project. Again, I have consulted with top water and water rights experts, exploring with them all the pros and cons and fears and risks, before offering this suggestion.”
Don,
Regarding today’s Enterprise article about the wastewater treatment plant,
I posted the following at the Enterprise site today:
“I would like to emphasize that I am not “an opponent” of the surface water project. I am in favor of studying to the feasibility of phasing in the wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project, so that the new wastewater plant can be paid off before citizens have to start paying for the surface water project.
I am proposing this only after having talked with the leading University water experts and a top state water rights expert, and having received feedback that postponing the surface water project was worthy of consideration.
I suggest postponing the project because I am concerned about the cumulative impact of the costs of the new wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project.
The combined projects are currently estimated to cost over $340 million dollars. If the water project goes through, supplementary charges on average the average home’s property tax bill (supplementary taxes, water, sewer and garbage fees) are now forecast to be around $3,300 in seven years, when the full costs of paying for the water and sewer projects kick in. (This doesn’t count the sales tax supplement). These charges are over and above the base property tax.
This forecast does not include any of the new city or school district taxes that will probably be coming. The new $165 million wastewater treatment plant, which we must rebuild by law, and the new $175 million surface water project, are far and away the largest components of these supplementary charges.
In short, I believe that we will need to import surface water sometime in the future, but that we should consider postponing the project. Again, I have consulted with top water and water rights experts, exploring with them all the pros and cons and fears and risks, before offering this suggestion.”
Sue,
You often refer to the statewide water experts. Who are they? If they are experts we should know their credentials.
Sue,
You often refer to the statewide water experts. Who are they? If they are experts we should know their credentials.
Sue,
You often refer to the statewide water experts. Who are they? If they are experts we should know their credentials.
Sue,
You often refer to the statewide water experts. Who are they? If they are experts we should know their credentials.