October 2009 - Page 3 of 3

Commentary: While Davis Sleeps…

By David GreenwaldOctober 8, 200943 comments

I have covered the Measure P election considerably over the last several weeks, but it is notable that while the articles tend to generate a lot of comments, the readership for the articles is not quite what one would expect.

Indeed, it is very notable that two consecutive days I ran other articles along side Measure P articles, for instance, along side the story about the lack of League debate, was an article on the shootings. The shooting article drew 28 comments compared to 51 for the Measure P article but in terms of readership, the shooting article drew a lot more. The same is true for the Sierra Club versus target, the Sierra club drew many more comments but the readership was the same.

Whitcombe To Buy Cannery Property?

By David GreenwaldOctober 7, 200968 comments

The Vanguard has learned from multiple reliable sources that John Whitcombe is in the process of purchasing the Cannery Property adjacent to his current property that is the site of the failed Covell Village project, defeated by the voters of Davis in 2005 by a 60-40 vote.

City staff could not immediately confirm the purchase, however, they did acknowledge that they had heard rumors to that effect. The Cannery Property has been vacant since the Hunt_Wesson plan shutdown in October of 1999. The property was purchased in 2004 by Lewis Planned Communities. Last December at the City Council Meeting, the Council had proposed a duel weight EIR looking at the developer’s mixed-use proposal for 600 homes and 11 acres of office space along with a separate proposal for a high tech business park for which the property which lies in the city and does not require a Measure J vote, is currently zoned.

Thinking About Ways To Save Public Universities

By David GreenwaldOctober 7, 20096 comments

A little over a week ago, the Chancellor and Vice Chancellor of UC Berkeley, Robert Birgeneau and Frank Yeary wrote an op-ed published on both coasts arguing for a new hybrid model as a means to save California’s public universities.

They wrote:

“The economic crisis has made this a countrywide phenomenon, with devastating cuts in some states, including California. Historically acclaimed public institutions are struggling to remain true to their mission as tuition rises and in-state students from middle- and low-income families are displaced by out-of-state students from higher socioeconomic brackets who pay steeper fees. While America is fortunate to have many great private universities, we do not need to add to the list by privatizing Berkeley, Illinois, Rutgers, etc. On the contrary, we need to keep our public research and teaching universities excellent and accessible to the vast majority of Americans.”

A Different View: Staring At the Abyss In Higher Education

By David GreenwaldOctober 6, 200926 comments

by Thomas Jue and Jerold Theis –

California has stamped out the Station Fire but not the crisis that threatens to engulf the University of California (UC) and destroy a premier higher education system. The UC Regents may have closed the $813 million dollar deficit by securing savings from service reduction ($325 million), furloughs ($203 million), student fee hikes ($203 million), and debt restructuring ($82 million), but they have only started their Sisyphean task, because the preoccupation with “the business” prevents them from extinguishing any fire.

Certainly, the housing market collapse and the ensuing recession have led the State to the brink of a $26 billion financial abyss. At the brink, legislators have fractiously cobbled a budget that meets a 2/3 majority approval and sustains initiative designated expenditures. The budget reduces by 25% the 2008 allocation ($3.3 billion), which represents 17% of the total $19 billion budget. Student fees ($1.6 billion), medical center activity ($6.1 billion), and research grants ($2.7 billion) comprise the other major revenues.

Commentary: In Defense of the College Democrats

By David GreenwaldOctober 6, 200936 comments

A lot of stuff goes on during campaigns, much of it is regrettable and not good for the process. So I am not at all surprised by the fact that the the College Democrats being paid to canvass has become an issue. I’ve seen it discussed on this blog and of course it was printed in the Davis Enterprise by a certain columnist who I no longer read but somehow cannot avoid.

So let me tell you a story about the College Democrats. For all the people who disparage our youth, this is a group that we should admire regardless of the side of the aisle we are on. I have gotten to know a lot of the College Democrats and consider a number of them to be personal friends. They are dedicated, hard working, and very active in building their club and their cause. Moreover, I have entrusted two of them to be sitting board members for the Vanguard.

Wildhorse Ranch Does Not Pencil Out Fiscally

By David GreenwaldOctober 6, 200950 comments

by Sue Greenwald –

I voted against the Wildhorse Ranch project for two simple reasons: The project had not been sufficiently considerate of its neighbors, and more than 2,000 units of housing are already approved but remained unbuilt in Davis and at UC Davis’ West Village.

A building boom is already in the works, poised to begin as soon as banks start to lend again and the housing market picks up. I believe we have enough approved housing without Wildhorse Ranch.

Target Gets a Promo Piece As It is Set To Open on Wednesday

By David GreenwaldOctober 5, 200921 comments

Did anyone catch the promo piece on the opening of Target in Sunday’s Davis Enterprise? The Target store of course was passed on the ballot by the narrowest of margin back in November of 2006. At times, it has looked like the store might not come, but this year they pushed forward to be able to open in October.

No mention in the Enterprise in this article that this was built on a Superfund site that from what we discovered in December of 2008 is still active.

Sierra Club Endorses Measure P

By David GreenwaldOctober 5, 200992 comments

by Pam Nieberg and Carolyn Hinshaw –

On November 3, the voters of Davis will have the opportunity to approve one of the most energy-efficient residential projects in Davis history.

The Sierra Club is not known for its support of housing developments, but we are urging you to vote yes on Measure P, the Wildhorse Ranch project, on November 3.

Are Recent Shootings A Sign of Things To Come or an Aberration

By David GreenwaldOctober 4, 200928 comments

Early this past week, Davis Police Officers responded to a request to provide emergency back up for a Yolo County Sheriff’s Deputy responding to a situation on Hanover Drive. A Sheriff’s deputy was at an apartment complex on Hanover Drive enforcing an eviction order on a resident in the complex.

According to reports from Davis Police, the deputy made contact with the resident at the front door of the apartment. The deputy was confronted by the resident who was wielding a knife and the deputy shot the resident.

No League Debate, Now What?

By David GreenwaldOctober 4, 200951 comments

A letter to the Enterprise indicates that the Davis League of Women Voters have canceled the debate on Measure P. They cite a policy to select “speakers to represent a balanced forum on ballot initiatives/ measures.” Further they suggest that they were not “able to come to agree with the No on Measure P campaign group.” Therefore, they decided there will be no League of Women Voters-sponsored debate on the matter.

John Moses, President and Jean Canary, Vice President and Moderator for the League of Women Voters conclude in their letter published in the Davis Enterprise:

Fudging on Crime Statistics: No One Questioned The High Crime Statistics

By David GreenwaldOctober 3, 200923 comments

In February of 2007, the Sacramento Bee ran a story on reporting of sexual assaults, lauding UC Davis which at one point in time was criticized for underreporting sexual assaults, and then was “leading the way” in the reporting of crime.

Wrote the Bee on February 16, 2007:

Why Council Majority Opposed a Senior Housing Survey

By David GreenwaldOctober 2, 200919 comments

The term astroturfing is the act of creating a small organization and making it appear to represent something popular for the purpose of promoting a particular cause. It is a practice that is used by wealthy backers in order to create the impression that instead of a professional paid campaign backing a policy, there is actually a mass grassroots movement.

In the case of CHA (Choices for Healthy Aging) the plot is especially thick because it represents an effort at agenda setting. Agenda setting is a term most common used in measure the effects of mass-news coverage, which argues that increased coverage and prominence by media sources increases the perception of the importance of the issue. In this case, the astroturf campaign has been able to create an agenda for senior housing that was largely off the radar prior to the waging of the campaign. The purpose hear is to create the perception of a mass movement for senior housing in order to push the latest proposal at Covell Village onto the agenda and eventually onto a Measure J ballot.

Councilmember Greenwald Forced From Liaison Position on Budget and Finance

By David GreenwaldOctober 1, 2009124 comments

At the Davis City Council Meeting two weeks ago, Bill Ritter issued a complaint about the conduct of Councilmember Sue Greenwald at a Finance and Budget Commission (FBC) Meeting the night before. Until this past Tuesday evening Councilmember Greenwald served as liaison to the Commission. The complaint was referred to the subcommittee on commissions which is comprised of Mayor Ruth Asmundson and Councilmember Stephen Souza.

On Tuesday the subcommittee came back with their findings. The council has a Procedures Manual for Council Members. The fifth chapter defines the “Role of Commission Liaison” which reads as follows:

Tuesday Night’s City Council Meeting

By Elaine Roberts MusserOctober 1, 20096 comments

By Elaine Roberts Musser –

I found Tuesday night’s City Council meeting difficult to watch and participate in, on so many levels. My main purpose in going was to support city staff’s well thought out recommendation to expend funding for a senior housing survey. In looking back at what happened, it is difficult not to be perplexed. I am still scratching my head. Let me explain.

The City Council majority ultimately chose to approve Don Saylor’s motion. He flatly opposed a $20,000 senior housing survey that would have been statistically significant. Instead the Council majority punted, by choosing to wait and see if a grant for $7,500 is approved. If so, it will be the anemic amount spent on a mini-survey of dubious statistical significance – facilitated through Facebook, Twitter, or other alternative methods than a simple telephone survey. The fact that many seniors don’t even own computers apparently didn’t occur to the City Council majority.

Month: October 2009