In one of the least kept secrets locally, soon-to-be Mayor Don Saylor has announced his candidacy for Yolo County Supervisor last night at Central Park. He will be running in District 2, where current Supervisor Helen Thomson will be stepping down after two terms following her exit from Sacramento as a three-term Assemblymember.
Mr. Saylor who will become Mayor in June would make things interesting if he wins the seat. The election for Supervisor is in June of 2010. Should he gain 50 percent of the vote at that time, he would be declared the winner without the race having to go to a run off in November. However, like Supervisor Jim Provenza, he would not actually become Supervisor until January 2011. So for six months he would be the Mayor of Davis while he is Supervisor-in-waiting.
Mr. Saylor would then step down from council and instead of a council majority, there would be a 2-2 deadlocked council that has to appoint a replacement for Mr. Saylor. So somehow, some way, the city council would have to find a compromise candidate acceptable to at least three of Ruth Asmundson, Stephen Souza, Sue Greenwald, and Lamar Heystek.
Of course, that series of events only occurs if Don Saylor wins the Supervisor seat and if the incumbents both win in the June 2010 Council Elections. There is a long way to go.
One of the questions that will need to be resolved is who runs against Don Saylor for the Supervisor Seat. On the current council only Sue Greenwald lives in the second Supervisorial District. She seems to prefer not to run, but she would make an intriguing match up. On the surface people would argue that she has no chance. But if you run the numbers from the last council race in the district she only trailed Saylor by about 300 votes or a 53.5 to 47.5 percent margin. Factor in that she did not walk a single precinct in the district and she would figure to have a fighting chance.
One person who appears to be out of consideration is Former Davis Mayor Ken Wagstaff.
In the meantime, Don Saylor has been busy securing support for a run for the seat. Matt Rexroad reports on his blog that Don Saylor already has the support of the entire Woodland, Winters, and West Sacramento City Councils along with Senator Lois Wolk, Supervisors Helen Thomson, Mike McGowan, Sheriff Ed Prieto, and District Attorney Jeff Reisig.
Not listed as endorsers was Supervisor Jim Provenza who attended last night’s event and was introduced by Don Saylor. As was County Clerk Freddie Oakley. Appearing on stage as well were former County Supervisor Betsy Marchand, Former Sacramento Mayor Heather Fargo, West Sacramento Mayor Christopher Cabaldon, retiring Public Defender Barry Melton, Mayor Ruth Asmundson and Councilmember Stephen Souza, Former Mayors Jerry Adler and Mike Corbett, and School Board Member Gina Daleiden. Former Secretary of Public Instruction Delaine Eastin was the master of ceremonies.
That sounds formidable, but realize that virtually the same coalition of people supported West Sacramento Mayor Christopher Cabaldon in his race for Assembly and we know how that ended up.
The second Supervisorial District, where I live and let me dispel any notions, is not going to be won based on endorsements, it will be won based on hard work and walking and talking to the people. We shall see if anyone is willing to step up to the plate and oppose the Mayor Pro Tem.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Jim Provenza was in the crowd. I asked him why he wasn’t on the stage? He told me “That would be an endorsement.” He never said if he would or would not endorse only that “Its still early.”
Thanks for the update.
If it will be won by hard work, nobody works harder than Don. Certainly not Sue. Of course all of the elected that were there got where they are through hard work and don’t think for a minute they are going to stop their support for Don at attending one rally. To run against Don is to run against almost the entire political establishment of Yolo County not just the democrats but a broad spectrum with everyone from Lois Wolk to Freddie Oakley, from Matt Rexroad to Chris Cabaldon.
What you fail to write about is why does Don garner the support of so many? I have some ideas:
Constituent services, Don is the best at getting things done for people. His years in government give him an understanding of how government works. He is always available turning out at everything and supporting every cause he can. Don earned the support of the people who turned out by helping others. He won me over even though we only agree most of the time and disagree vigorously on some issues. As he said to me once, “In politics you don’t get everything you want.” At least I know he will listen and help when he can.
His calm demeanor, something he has been criticized for on this blog, is an asset. People don’t want to deal with a crazy person when dealing with elected officials.
His support of traditional Democratic values including public sector workers, teachers, cops and firefighters, as well as job creation. Lots of rank and file votes there and although there are those that want to beat up on these groups who often post on this blog, Don enters with a solid history of supporting these groups.
I agree with Kilroy tho I am no fan of Don. He is everywhere and certainly does his homework. Why not Wagstaff?
In case anyone cares to see a map of District 2, you can see it here ([url]http://www.yolocounty.org/Index.aspx?page=1181[/url]). In Davis, it is bounded on the north by Covell, on the east by L Street and on the South by I-80. All of west and central Davis are in District 2. My estimation is that about 30-35% of Davis residents are in District 2, with the rest in District 4 (Provenza).
If Don Saylor attracts a strong opponent, I hope it is someone who will run (at least) on these two issues: 1. Responsible labor contracts with county employees and prudent budgeting. Absolutely no one is hurt more these days than the poor of our county who are losing health care and other necessary welfare provisions. Had the Board of Supervisors not approved huge raises for the sheriffs. bailiffs and jail workers (over the last 10 years), we would have been in much better shape to suffer this downturn. But instead, supervisors Oakley, Wolk, Thomson, Yamada and the rest approved massive increases in salaries, benefits and retirement plans, and now the poor are paying the price. (Did you know, for example, that we give supervisors who don’t take the county health insurance plan about $20,000 a year extra in cash?!); and 2. Ethics. It would be nice to see someone run against Saylor who will not take money from people who do business with the county — such as labor groups and contractors — and then turn around and award those donors huge deals which harm the interests of the poor.
The county supervisors control growth at the Davis borders. Developers are howling at the gates between Davis and the causeway and the entire northwest area adjacent to Davis, as well as about every other inch of land in the Davis planning area. The whole “Yolo County political establishment” supports Don Saylor because all of those cuddly, friendly partisan politicians we know and love rely on developer and other special interest money to fund their campaigns. Saylor is part of the club; in fact he is the leader of the pack when it comes to carrying water for the special interests.
If Saylor is elected supervisor, no one will work harder or more effectively to open the Davis planning area to massive development.
He should not be allowed to run unopposed.
“That sounds formidable, but realize that virtually the same coalition of people supported West Sacramento Mayor Christopher Cabaldon in his race for Assembly and we know how that ended up.
The second Supervisorial District, where I live and let me dispell any notions, is not going to be won based on endorsements, it will be won based on hard work and walking and talking to the people. We shall see if anyone is willing to step up to the plate and oppose the Mayor Pro Tem.”
I agree with Kilroy. I don’t think any other elected official has been more accessible than Don. I may not agree with many of Don’s positions, but I find it very meaningful that I know that he will listen to my views. Few things are as frustrating in community discussion and activism as trying to communicate with your elected representative and not being sure that you’ve been heard or acknowledged.
I don’t think there’s that kind of comparison between Saylor and Cabaldon. Saylor has the long list of endorsements plus seemingly significant voter support from all his constituent service work.
I would agree with those who want this to be a real race and not a coronation. I hadn’t thought about the City Council appointment angle (if Don is elected). Now that’ll make for some very interesting political conversations in Davis in the months ahead!
[quote]Saylor has the long list of endorsements plus seemingly significant voter support from all his constituent service work. [/quote]That is a good point. Don works long hours as a city councilman. He’s anything but lazy. Most times when I visit City Hall, he is there, working. The one time I visited him at his office hours — at Peet’s at The Marketplace — I mentioned that a fountain along the North Davis greenbelt, one designed for dogs, was no longer working. Less than two weeks later, Don got back to me (I didn’t expect him to) and said public works had fixed the fountain. It has worked perfectly ever since.
For dog walkers, the one I am talking about is by this statue ([url]http://daviswiki.org/Covell_Greenbelt_Dog_Sculptures?sendfile=true&file=sprinkler dog.JPG[/url]).
[img]http://daviswiki.org/Covell_Greenbelt_Dog_Sculptures?sendfile=true&file=sprinkler dog.JPG[/img]
Just like Saylor to put his political, big business aspirations before the interests of the people of Davis. Run for Davis Council/Mayor- popularity contest and then run away to effect his pro-growth/developer financed and backed agenda. Big surprise again…..not at all.
I’ve had similar experiences with Don. In fact, when I first met him (informally), we expressed concern about some safety issues related to our daughter biking to school. He followed up on those concerns by referring us to safety training courses for her at the Davis PD. Ever since then, he has always been responsive to any communications with him. He also consistently acknowledges our kids if we run into him at the farmer’s market or anywhere else in Davis. I’ve found him to be a sincere, concerned person, who is always pleasant to deal with. I’ve gotten decidely colder treatment from other members of the council, except perhaps Souza. While I don’t always agree with Don on policy matters, and don’t have a stake in his political aspirations (to whatever extent they exist), it is easy for me to see why he has a lot of voter support in Davis.
Don Saylor does work hard and takes his job on the Council seriously, he is also a pleasant person that can be talked about, even on issues that you disagree with him.
He can take on some issues that seek of pubilicty, such as the smokeshop issue and also tends to not commit to an issue for a vote until the last possible moment.
With all that being said, it does not seem that the 2nd Distict race should be a coronation, and I do not beleive that it will be.
There does seem to be a bit of the “all things to all people” syndrome in Don Saylor’s political career.
It is also of interest to note the many people interested in government in, or working in or arond government in our community, I just do not see this being an uncontested race.
Also, it should be noted the Mariko Yamada was not there nor listed as a supporter and in the Enterprise Jim Provenza did day he is not endorsing in the race.
Is it true that Don Saylor has endorsed Matt Rexroad, an affable, intelligent, though, extrmely partisan Republican for re-election?
“Just like Saylor to put his political, big business aspirations before the interests of the people of Davis. Run for Davis Council/Mayor- popularity contest and then run away to effect his pro-growth/developer financed and backed agenda. “
Honestly I haven’t followed Yolo County Supervisor meetings and activities all that much. Does Helen Thompson also have these policies? To what extent do you think Don would be different from Helen Thompson?
“Also, it should be noted the Mariko Yamada was not there nor listed as a supporter and in the Enterprise Jim Provenza did day he is not endorsing in the race.”
What was quoted in today’s Enterprise:
[quote]If elected, Saylor would join Jim Provenza, the East Davis supervisor who won the District 4 seat a year ago. Provenza watched Saylor’s campaign kickoff, but said he’s not endorsing any candidates since he’ll work with whomever is elected, either in the June 2010 primary or in the November 2010 runoff if necessary.[/quote]
Campaign Watcher:
Here’s a current list of Rexroad’s endorsements:
[url]http://www.rexroad.com/Endorsements2010/tabid/132/Default.aspx[/url]
Don is very hard working, does a lot of charity fundraiser work, and serves his constituents well. Opposition to this seat will likely come in one of two forms; either an anti-Don person who doesn’t like him and purports to be more ‘progressive’, a token Republican-backed candidate like that woman who’s name I forget who ran against Provenza, or both.
But a moderate candidate won’t come forward, because Don fills that category.
You mean Cathy Kennedy? Presumably if she was able to run against Provenza, then she doesn’t live in District 2.
[url]http://daviswiki.org/Cathy_Kennedy[/url]
I won’t vote for Don, because I’m not sure which one of his faces is running for Supervisor.
Had the *pleasure* of talking with Don personally on a local issue. I agree he “listened” very well and agreed with many of my concerns and points. At the council meeting he turned his tune and did the exact opposite of what we discussed. I wasn’t surprised but very disappointed. Which ever way the wind is blowing seems to work for him. In my opinion, he doesn’t have Davis’ best interest in mind, only his best interest in mind. The upside of him winning is that he won’t be our mayor!
My experience w Don has NOT been good. He has often offered assistance, but then not followed through even once. I guess I am not within his sphere of favored influence.
Don also conveniently tries to quell public comment he does not agree with, by pronouncing it “uncivil”. Not a civil thing to do – and hypocritical.
As much as I would like to get rid of Don on our City Council by promoting him to County Council, as we did w Dave Rosenburg, I would hate to have Don suddenly be in favor of development on the Davis periphery. I just don’t trust Don. Don will do whatever is in Don’s best interest.
The decision that has to be made is where will Saylor do the least damage? On the Davis City Council, or on the County Bd of Sups?
I’m not saying Cathy Kennedy would run again, just that he Repuglicans would put forth a sacrificial candidate…
I’m not necessarily against Don’s candidacy and do agree with the many who believe he’s a great provider of constituent services. I would just hope that 2nd District voters get a real and credible choice between Don and another candidate. Frankly, I don’t know that local Reeps are organized (or motivated) enough to put a “sacrificial lamb” forward, either. Finally, the raft of local endorsements don’t amount to a hill of beans to most voters (who would probably have a hard time pulling Don out of a lineup!). Don’s vaunted ability to wear out shoe leather on behalf of the people of Davis is what will ultimately sway people’s decisions and not the endorsements of Betsy, Delaine, and the others. All that said, this should be an important election for Davis and the County. Local government finances are in tatters, significant land use and water policy decisions are numerous, and the social services network is in critical condition. If those issues aren’t fodder for the 2010 elections, I don’t know what is.
Don is about Don first and foremost. If he thinks it will help him to help you, he is very capable. if he doesn’t he will turn on you in an instant and stab you in the back. Many people who thought Don was on their side came away disappointed.
Well, “progressives,” who are you going to run against Don Saylor? Ken (who has had more than his fill of local politics)or Sue (who has never walked an entire precinct, even to state her views or deliver literature?)
Like it or not, Don Saylor will destroy any so-called “progressive” opponent in the June, 2010 primary election. So, let’s face it, Don will be elected overwhelminghly to replace Helen.
And, although I disagree with Don on MANY issues, I think it’s much more productive to communicate with him than alienate him & belittle his beliefs (even though most are different from mine).
I will tell you one thing: he is the hardest-working, most-accessible council person I have ever known in my 34 years of living in Davis.
And, so, “progressives,” you will be wasting your time, energy & money by trying to defeat Don’s run as a Yolo supervisor. That energy would be much better spent trying to find a way to a appoint a “progressive” to replace him on the CC.
Who does Rick Entrikin speak for? Not for anyone I know.
This is about policy. Don Saylor is running for assembly or higher, and he is among the most ruthless of politicians. He will not be influenced by appeasement. If elected, Don will deliver the city to special interests that can fund his climb up the political ladder. This includes the developers, who are focused on the Davis planning area because more money is to be made by developing around Davis, by the firefighters’ union, and just about any other special interest that will deliver money and votes. It would be a crime to allow him to run unopposed.
“If elected, Don will deliver the city to special interests that can fund his climb up the political ladder. This includes the developers, who are focused on the Davis planning area because more money is to be made by developing around Davis, by the firefighters’ union, and just about any other special interest that will deliver money and votes. It would be a crime to allow him to run unopposed.”
So who is going to oppose Don? Can you suggest a good candidate? I’m all ears/eyes! I can’t stand Saylor, so would be open to any ideas…
Rick Entrikin has a point. Saylor would replace Helen Thomson, that is a flat out toss up in terms of policy. Saylor does position himself to run for Assembly, but he would have to face someone like Provenza. I’ll take that match up.
In the meantime, getting Saylor off the council and putting a moderate in his place would be a huge plus for us. If we don’t have a true person to oppose him like a Ken Wagstaff, I’m inclined to put my energy into council which I consider far far far more important than Supervisor.
Other than personal animosity towards Saylor, I don’t see any reason to particularly fear him becoming a Supervisor from a poicy standpoint or to fear him even becoming an Assemblyman–again from a policy standpoint.
There most certainly is a reason to “fear becoming a Supervisor from a policy standpoint”.
The city’s redevelopment agency pass-through agreement loses its power every year, since less money is passed through every year. Shortly, it will be worth it to the county to forgo the pass-through money and approve massive development on our borders. And, IMHO, Saylor will be more effective, determined and ruthless than Helen Thomson when it comes to handing over the Davis planning area to developers.
[quote]Shortly, it will be worth it to the county to forgo the pass-through money and approve massive development on our borders. [/quote] I have a suggestion which will assuage your fears: How about the so-called pregressives in Davis put together a Measure J-type initiative which would go before all of the voters in Yolo County. This initiative would have two components, each of which controls the conversion of ag land into urbanized uses: first, for all land in Yolo County which is one mile or more outside of the city limits of Winters, Davis, Woodland or West Sacramento and is zone A-1 or A-2 (agriculture), the Board of Supervisors would not be permitted to change that zoning without a majority vote of the residents of Yolo County; and second, for all county land located less than a mile from one of the incorporated cities, the proximate city (or its citizens) would have the right to veto any change in zoning away from Ag made by the Board of Supervisors.
The effect of this initiative would be that no longer would there be good reason to fear the urbanization of distant farmland in Yolo County by a rogue Board of Supervisors; and for lands near the urban centers, the cities would control any peripheral growth, again mollifying any fear of a rogue action taken by the county.
(I proposed this idea in a column about 3-4 years ago, and other than Helen Thomsom telling me she did not like it one bit, I never heard a word from the Davis “progressives.” I’ve since thought that they really don’t want to solve this problem. They’d rather just complain about it.)
In response to a massive development proposal in Solano County — a new city called Manzanita, proposed next to Winters in the late 1970’s — Solano County voters approved the Orderly Growth Initiative in 1984. It was renewed in 1994; modified slightly, it was approved again by the voters in 2008 through 2028. It is a very detailed plan which essentially limits growth in Solano County to the existing cities and gives specific protection to farmland, open space, and watersheds. It strictly limits the ability of the county board of supervisors to allow any kind of development in agricultural or open space areas.
A forward-thinking candidate for County Board of Supervisors could introduce such a measure for the voters of Yolo County, to allay any concerns about unbridled development on the periphery of existing cities.
Manzanita, by the way, was lauded for the ecologically sensitive, Village Homes-like principles used in the design. Mike Corbett was involved in the plan. But voter passage of the Orderly Growth Initiative blocked the project. Then the same general area was considered as a site for the superconducting supercollider, but that project went to Texas (and then lost funding) and the area is still farmland today.
A similar measure in Napa County protects land within a designated Ag Reserve, requiring that county voters approve any zoning change. Voters there passed Measure P last fall, extending that for fifty years.
With the governor’s veto of all remaining funding for the Williamson Act, protection of farmland takes on some urgency. Yolo County has a disproportionate amount of land in Williamson Act, compared to other counties.
All candidates for county supervisor should be asked how they believe the counties can protect farmland from development in the absence of state funding. Specifically: would the candidate support renewal of all Williamson Act contracts, even if the county had to continue to forgo the “subvention payments” (from the state) that reimburse the county for the difference in valuation of land that is within the contract?
i don’t think cabaldon is a good analogue to saylor. cabaldon was a stranger to most of the district, and was using those endorsements as a crutch and substitute for doing the legwork. don, regardless of how one feels about his politics, is a well known politician in the 2nd district, and has done the legwork in every one of his prior runs. everybody knows him, except perhaps students who have recently moved into the district.
i would love to see a contested race, if only because i detest not having a choice on the ballot, and a fair airing of policy positions. anyone wanting to beat saylor out, however, is going to have to be similarly well known in the district, is my guess. don had a whole lot of blue signs up in west davis last time around.
“And, IMHO, Saylor will be more effective, determined and ruthless than Helen Thomson when it comes to handing over the Davis planning area to developers.”
Some questions:
Are there examples where Saylor has done serious damage to Davis in taking a pro-developer stance?
There are 5 votes on the County Board of Supervisor, including Jim Provenza. What three vote coalition do you think would allow unchecked development along Davis’ borders? Do you think Provenza is pro-developer? I think I remember reading of votes where Chamberlain had more of a stance of preserving ag lands. Don’t know about Rexroad or McGowan.
This is why I don’t think there is much cause for concern. First, Thomson has about the same record as Saylor. Second, Provenza, Rexroad, and Chamberlain are generally not going to vote to impose growth on Davis. Saylor has publicly stated that he think the city not the county ought to be the governing body to impose growth on Davis. Thomson was never on the council and therefore does not have that perspective that Saylor does.
[quote]would the candidate support renewal of all Williamson Act contracts, even if the county had to continue to forgo the “subvention payments” (from the state) that reimburse the county for the difference in valuation of land that is within the contract? [/quote]Don Shor, given the budget problems for Yolo County, I would strongly oppose the county putting up its own cash to make sure farmers* don’t have to pay full valuation property taxes. What a waste of money, especially when farms zoned for agriculture cannot be urbanized without a change in zoning approved by the county.
*It’s worth noting that not all of the land owners who get this Williamson Act money — or savings, if you will — are really farmers. They are landowners, who in many cases lease their land to farmers who grow the crops on rented land.
While I don’t know if this is a technically legal option, I would think the best solution at this point would be to make sure that the Yolo County Assessor assesses the value of farm land in Yolo County as farm land and not as potential housing land, even if it might potentially become housing or industrial or commercial. If farmland is assessed for its potential in a non-ag use, even though it is zoned for agriculture and is used for agriculture, it may be the case that the higher property taxes will make farming unprofitable for some. Thus, it is crucial that it is assessed for its actual use (if that is legal).
I agree with Don Shor. The Williamson Act funding issue is THE issue for Yolo County, and beyond really. With the real estate bubble burst, perhaps some of the pressure has been alleviated- but the pressure will build again.
What to do when you’ve got Class 1 soils in a highly populated and growing area? If you want to protect those soils for feeding people, you have to provide financial incentives to keep those soils in production. Drive down 113 sometime past Dixon and headed towards Livermore. See orchard after orchard ripped up and houses growing in their place. Brentwood, and other “towns” just popping up on world class soils.
I for one like the idea of farmland being put in Trusts and “guaranteed” to be farmed for at least 10 years, which I believe to be one of the parts of being a Williamson Act farm. Sure, there are going to be cheaters- there always are. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater. We need this Act, lets fight for its funding.
[quote]We need this Act, lets fight for its funding.[/quote]I hope you mean fight for its funding [i]from the state.[/i] Yolo County is beyond broke. It cannot afford to subsidize its wealthy landowners without state funds. Yolo County is having trouble making payroll. They have laid off many employees, including a bunch of sheriff’s deputies; they have cut off funds for public health and health care for the indigent. The county will be even further hurt by the passage of the state budget, which robs Yolo County of its share of property taxes.
According to an article in the Sacramento Bee, Yolo County has about 64% of its land in Williamson Act contracts, somewhere around 450,000 acres. I have seen a map that shows which is prime and which is non-prime ag land. The state reimbursed at the rate of $8 per acre of prime land close to cities, $5 per acre of prime elsewhere, and $1 per acre of non-prime land. In the 2009 budget that was about 2% of Yolo County’s general fund budget. I don’t think there are any strings attached to Williamson Act funds, so they go directly into the general fund.
It is complicated for a county to decide to non-renew. There is a continued protection for the property owner for a few years, and any increase in revenues to the county comes gradually as property is changed to urban uses (if the county allows that), or sells at higher prices to people moving from urban areas.
I have no feelings one way or the other about saving ag land. I am totally ignorant on the subject. Here is what I want to know. Do we really have a dearth of ag land, so that we must preserve it at all costs? Or is there plenty out there, but it would be nice to keep things the same? Are there any statistics indicating how much ag land is available, how much we need to produce food, how much ag land has been reduced by development over the last say 20 years? Convince me we need to save ag land. I’m a city person, so this issue just doesn’t resonate w me.
When the Farm Bureau comes out against the 2/3 rule for passing the budget and raising taxes I’ll be for restoring Williamson Act funding. In the meantime they can’t have it both ways wanting subsidies but no taxes.