Heystek Leaves a Legacy of Struggle for the Little Guy and Changing the Way We Do Business

I will admit it will be particularly difficult for me to say goodbye to the good Councilmember, because in a lot of ways is tenure is the Vanguard’s tenure.  The one thing the Vanguard never got to cover though was a Lamar Heystek campaign.  That was a difficult campaign that had to test the very core of a still-young man.  I still remember the look on his face when he described people literally slamming the door in his face because they did not agree with him.

Julie Saylor writes,

“Is it a brand-new sexist day in Davis? Stop reading Lamar Heystek’s campaign literature and read his own words in his weekly column in the UC Davis Aggie newspaper, www.californiaaggie.com (search: Lamar Heystek).

Two choice quotes are: “Women like to be treated like dirt. The worse you treat them, the more they want you” (Jan. 24, 2006). And, ” I’d enjoy a strategically placed hickey. Hell, I’d even settle for a cigarette burn near my groin. I’ll take anything that could be construed as evidence of having ‘been’ with a girl” (Jan. 31, 2006).

Read his columns completely. These quotes are not more palatable in context and the entire body of work is short on wit and long on references to virginity and feminine products.”

She continues, “Lamar is a lecturer in linguistics at UC Davis. He should have a good grasp of the meaning and power of language, so don’t let him spin his writing as “just kidding.” Would you want to be taught and evaluated by a teacher who thought it was acceptable to write this in the student newspaper? I certainly don’t want my son and daughter to think this is the behavior for a role model.”

“More important now for Davis voters, would you like a City Councilman who displays such lack of judgment and maturity? I have been bringing home the Tuesday edition of The Aggie for months, marveling each week that a council candidate is so foolish as to write this unacceptable misogynistic drivel week after week. But he does. And he does it even as he asks voters to elect him because of his commitment to social justice. This man running for council says “Trust me. We have shared values.” I don’t think so,” she writes.

So she concludes, “I recommend that Lamar Heystek get a decade or two distant from his Aggie column before anyone consider him a viable candidate for council. This is not a comment about chronological age. We need to choose candidates with the emotional maturity, balance, perspective and experience to serve our whole community.”

I guess the irony of this letter that if we had to think about the officeholder who embodies maturity, balance, and perspective, even within at times lack of experience to serve the whole community and represents its shared values it would be Lamar Heystek.  He was often the voice of calm on a sea that was at times all too tumultuous.  He was the conscience of the council, standing up for the little guys whether they were kids, low wage workers, neighbors, minorities or others.

Julie Saylor could not have been more wrong about Lamar Heystek, I have never heard him utter a single sexist thing in my four years of knowing him.  Instead he is a man who exemplifies what I think we all want to strive for.  It is worth noting that Julie Saylor has not written a single letter to the editor since that day.

“There’s just a number of questions about this,” Councilmember Don Saylor said. “To bring it up as a discussion is appropriate. To bring it up as a full-blown ordinance for a first reading, that’s not talking about policy, that’s talking about politics in a lead-up to an election.”

The context of the proposal was to assure that if Target passed that the workers there would be able to actually live in Davis by earning a living wage.

The Council Majority who urged Councilmember Heystek to bring the measure forward, also ridiculed him for bringing it forward.  Ultimately they assured assured then-Mayor Sue Greenwald and Councilmember Heystek that they would like to see a living wage ordinance— and in fact, Councilmember Stephen Souza said he and Saylor are hammering out a projected labor agreement between Target and two unions — but questioned the narrowness of Heystek’s proposal.

The project labor agreement was brought out at the last second before the Target election and we never heard anything about it afterwards.  Meanwhile Councilmember Heystek would eventually get a modified living wage ordinance approved, two years later, which assured that all contract laborers with the city received a living wage.  We never however got his original intent, which was a citywide living wage ordinance that assured anyone who lived in Davis would receive a living wage.

Mr. Dunning added, “wow, nobody knows the trouble he’s seen, overcoming his college education and teaching position at UC Davis to become one of the youngest City Council members in Davis city history … struggle? … Lamar? … heck, he’s not old enough to have even struggled with a razor …”

And exactly how would they know?  It turns out Mr. Heystek, who does not talk much about his background, does not come from privilege, in fact just the opposite.

Mr. Heystek grew up in very impoverished parts of Oakland, before his family moved to a very modest neighborhood in San Leandro. He and his twin brother (who has served 8 years as a Bay Area School Board member) used to have to run home from school because the neighborhood they lived in was so dangerous. It was common place to be beaten up or robbed and shootings were frequent. Lamar, his brother and older sister (who is a longtime Marine Corps veteran currently serving in Iraq) learned to protect themselves by running to and from school to avoid the violence of the streets.

Lamar Heystek’s mother suffers from a chronic and debilitating illness and was not able to help in the raising of the children. His father worked long hours at very modest jobs to support the children and care for his wife.

While attending San Leandro High School, Heystek went to work at a Safeway store beginning a 9 year career as a retail clerk in the grocery business. When he was admitted to UC Davis he transferred to the Market Place Safeway in Davis working full time to support himself and afford his schooling both as an undergraduate and a graduate student.

We do not hear about that Lamar Heystek, but we hear about Lamar Heystek who fights for youth as he took a job that worked with disadvantaged high school children.  Now you can imagine that a Councilmember in Davis has to work because unfortunately we do not compensate our elected officials nearly enough.  That means they either have to work a day job or they have to be independently wealthy or retired and receiving their enhanced state retirement package.

On May 5, 2009, the city staff recommended reuse alternatives “exist for the Third and B facility that may better take advantage of the facility’s downtown location and future economic development efforts in the area.”  They argued opportunities exist to enhance teen services and programming through an alternative model and “funding levels that could be accommodated at one or more alternate facilities within the community.”

The staff report recommended and council approved the idea that:

“the Third and B Building is ideally located and can be easily adapted for use the US Bicycling Hall of Fame headquarters and museum, rendering it the preferred option at this point, due to its potential to be a significant national, and even international destination that is uniquely fitting to the Davis’ reputation as the nation’s leading bicycle city and a commitment that furthers the city’s downtown and economic development goals.”

Councilmember Heystek in his comments argued that one of our goals is to provide programming for teens and target youths.  He went on to point out the focus on at-risk youths.

“Clearly the goal that is being promoted in the staff report that council is unanimously in support of is economic development,” he told the Council.  “But I don’t want the council to forget that there are other goals in our set of priorities that include serving youth.  This is the only set of our goals where we really talk about youth services.”

“Teens don’t pay,” he continued.  “If we juxtapose the teens with economic development, the teens are always going to lose because they’re not paying clients.  If we’re really serious about providing the teen programming in whatever fashion, we’ve got to allocate the financial resources to do that.”

Councilmember Heystek argued that one of the reasons that the teen programs have not been as successful as they could be, is that we continue to nickle and dime teen programming, failing to invest in their success as we do with other more successful programs.

“I think the elephant in the room is whether or not the city of Davis is going to take an existing drop-in facility and replace it with an existing drop-in facility.  We’re just kind of dancing around it…  I think that the drop-in component is crucial to a teen program,” he said.

For him this was not about the bicycling Hall of Fame.  This was about making a commitment to a permanent facility for a teen center.  “I haven’t focused on the bicycle Hall of Fame in my remarks because to me this isn’t about that, everyone is unanimous about bringing a bicycle Hall of Fame to Davis.  That is not the issue.  The issue is let’s say the bicycle Hall of Fame goes there, what is our plan for a permanent facility elsewhere,” he concluded.

“Davis Bridge  serves an unseen population,” Councilmember Lamar Heystek said in February of 2010.  “In Davis, we have very high-achieving schools. … But if you look at the broad statistics, you may not realize that there are also kids who are English learners, and are in a family that may be living at the poverty line, or slightly above it. Yet these families shop at the same supermarkets, walk the same streets, their children attend the same schools.

“It’s hard to realize that we have such families in Davis when you look at the overall test scores, the property values, and the emotional attainment of the community as a whole. But these people are neighbors of ours, and deserve our attention,” he continued.

The staff recommended against continuing funding.  “While it is regrettable that the City is unable to fund these proposals, there are some existing resources that can assist a few of these programs,” the staff report read.  “Specifically, staff has encouraged the Davis Bridge Educational Foundation to access the School STEPS Program that is being provided by the Yolo County Department of Education for the next two years. This program can assist with school supplies, transportation to and from school, and other resources for the most at-risk youth.”

That was before supporters of the program shocked the council by packing the room with mostly young Latino and Latina students.

Councilmember Heystek spoke of the commitment to a segment of the community that often goes unnoticed.  “It’s a pittance.  It’s the least we can do because we’re serving an invisible population,” said Councilmember Heystek stepping into a familiar fight for those who usually have no voice, but who were empowered on this evening due to his efforts to save the program.

“Statistics that we present in grant applications and when we demonstrate the success of this community, mask the existence of those who are on the lower end of the socio-economic scale.  It masks the existence of those who test scores don’t exceed state averages.  It masks their existence, they are among us,” he continued.

“They are our neighbors.  They are taxpayers.  They contribute to the vibrancy of this community.  If we don’t make a commitment tonight of at least $15,000 to this organization and to this community, I feel that in that respect I assume some responsibility for having failed this segment of our community.  If we don’t make a commitment tonight to this segment of the community, we have failed the whole community,” he continued.

The council directed staff to find the funding to support the Davis Bridge Program and Lamar Heystek had what unfortunately amounted to a rare victory in his four years on the council.

There are two key planks to the alternative budget as laid forth by Mr. Heystek.  First, the belief that the current 850,000 dollar reduction in salary compensation which represents perhaps a little over 3% of their total budget is insufficient.  Councilmember Heystek instead proposed a 5% reduction in total compensation for employees.

Second, $1.5 million in savings is wrapped up in the tier reductions, which are basically the cutting of programs and service to the public.  Mr. Heystek’s budget begins to address these cuts, removing some of them from the cut list.

The council’s response to Mr. Heystek’s proposal was mixed.  At first, it clearly caught most of them off-guard.  Councilmember Sue Greenwald spoke immediately afterwards and began pushing for deep cuts to pensions and other benefits as a means to address some of the concerns that Councilmember Heystek raised.  Mayor Pro Tem Saylor was initially caught off-guard, but eventually both he and the Mayor both expressed support for the current proposal by Mr. Navazio, although Mr. Saylor did express the belief for the first time that perhaps some of the benefits awarded during better times might be unaffordable and unsustainable.

However, the result of his efforts was to clearly move the council toward greater savings.  In the end, that was undermined by the inability for the city to reach reasonable agreements with the bargaining units.

The move by Councilmember Heystek succeeded in getting council to move off the city manager’s budget, but not by nearly enough.  At the time we recognized that much of how bad the budget would be would be determined by the results of employee negotiations.  Heystek succeeded in moving the targeted savings from $850,000 to $1.25 million, less than what he was calling for at $1.5 million, but still an improvement.  Unfortunately we have wound up closer to the original target.

Second, the budget was based on assumptions that revenues would grow modestly.  Councilmember Heystek argued that they needed to be slightly negative.  In the end, they put them at neutral and they ended up about neutral.

The other issue was that the city was largely balancing the budget based on cuts to vacant positions.  The result is that the city has lost a huge number of positions and then tried to shuffle roles to accommodate the uneven and often illogical position vacancies.  The result is that right now, the city has a lower number of employees than it’s had in the last decade and a half on an absolute basis.  That is producing a strain on city services that we have only begun to acknowledge.

The bottom line here is that when Councilmember Lamar Heystek took to the staffing table and introduced his own budget, it was a great moment in his career.  He changed the agenda drastically even though it was simply moving the numbers.  It was one of the highlights of his tenure and while he did not win per se, he certainly impacted policy.

I think the larger result of his efforts on the budget is that it changed the public’s perception of Davis’ fiscal issues.  Suddenly we have a new council coming in seemingly committed to the kinds of fiscal policies that Councilmember Heystek put forward and was defeated on time and again by a 3-2 vote with his one ally Councilmember Sue Greenwald joining in his dissent time and again.

Councilmember Heystek never got to be the in the majority, he never got to be Mayor, we never got to see him preside over a meeting, but if this is legacy, it is one that he can be quite proud of.

Tonight the City Council will honor Councilmember Lamar Heystek along with Mayor Ruth Asmundson for his service to the community, I hope members of the community will feel free to share their thoughts about him on this space as well.

—David M. Greenwald reporting