CHA’s Failed Attempt to Take Over Senior Citizens Commission

covell_village-600

Tuesday night became another quiet failure in the efforts by CHA to gain traction for their proposed Senior Housing Project at the former Covell Village site.  This time they used the commission re-appointment process to attempt to stack the Senior Citizens Commission with a majority of people supportive of, or outright members of CHA.

CHA stands for Choices for Healthy Aging.  It is an astroturf group that has tried to create the impression of a grassroots movement supporting senior housing, but is in actuality a thinly-veiled attempt by the Covell Village developers to put an 800-unit senior housing project on the fast track for development.

However, at least to date, the effort has been one notch above an abysmal failure, with Tuesday night quietly marking yet another quiet defeat.  They had their four candidates for the Senior Citizens Commission all lined up, which would have given CHA majority control.

They put on a full-court press, we have learned from reliable accounts, with Bill Streng lobbying councilmembers very hard to seat the CHA-favored candidates.

The outcome however, was short of victory.  Jan Bridge did manage to get reappointed and is one of the leaders of CHA, and Mary Jo Bryan, who has good credentials in her own right, did get on the commission.  However, so did current Chair Elaine Roberts Musser and current member Tansey Thomas.

Mayor Don Saylor was the only member of the Council not to vote to reappoint Ms. Roberts Musser and Ms. Thomas.

So while CHA does have their representation on the commission, it falls well short of any kind of majority.

This is just the latest in a string of setbacks for CHA and their cause.

You may recall, for instance, their rather transparent candidates forum, in which they really squandered a chance to be more than just a group of people fronting for a specific development.

Instead, they let Jon Li steal the show arguing, “Tonight is about building political pressure to force the next Davis City Council to waste another few years and a Measure J vote on Covell Village.  Covell Village is SPONSORING this event.”

He later said, “Last night we had a forum that was supposed to be about seniors, but it was run by Covell Village.  So the answer to every question was Covell Village.”

And in fact, he was absolutely correct.  The group attempted to fish for council candidates to support their project, but they largely got no takers.

Jon Li finally said, “The problem I have with the series of questions, which I think is apparent to all of you, is you started with an answer and then you ask us a bunch of questions where the answer that you want to hear is given.” 

How many different ways can you ask the same question?  The irony is that while CHA was only interested in senior housing developments, the attendees of the forum actually asked a number of better questions than CHA.

What could have been a showcase to show that CHA is a senior-citizens action committee, turned into a high-pressure timeshare-selling seminar, attempting to get to the council candidates to pledge support for their project before they left.  The best questions that night came from the audience members, who had a much broader viewpoint.

This was not the only setback for CHA, however.  They had pushed for a committee to meet to discuss senior housing opportunities, it was readily apparent they had majority council support for it, and yet the committee idea fell apart almost immediately.

The city pushed for some sort of senior survey to determine types of housing options that senior were interested in, but the council majority, fearing that it would not support their conclusions, nixed that idea.

Meanwhile, the Senior Citizens Commission and Social Services Commissions developed housing guidelines that were adopted by council, that again lean away from the Covell Village age-restricted large-unit model.

Add to that the fact that it does not appear likely that a Measure R vote will be successful any time in the next five to ten years, and the idea proposed by CHA is on life support.

Tuesday night was low key, but it marks yet another failure in the efforts of CHA to get any real foothold.  Yes, they were able to get the senior housing issue on the radar of the city, but they have not been able to control or direct the direction of discussion.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

Author

  • David Greenwald

    Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

    View all posts

Categories:

Land Use/Open Space

10 comments

  1. What has our City Council accomplished this fall? Zipcars, reverse angle parking, now this. Saylor is turning out to be the failure many of us expected him to be. Soon it will be time for an assessment of his mayorship. It won’t be pretty.

  2. Very nice article, dmg 🙂 And many thanks to Sue Greenwald, Joe Krovoza, Rochelle Swanson and Steve Souza for reappointing Tansey and myself to the Davis Senior Citizens Commission. We serve at your pleasure, and deeply appreciate the confirmation of your confidence in our abilities to carry out the mission of the Davis Senior Citizens Commission. The elderly in Davis will remember this vote at election time.

    A greater irony is what I pointed out during Public Comment the night of the commission appointments: Tansey and I as Senior Citizens Commissioners brought into the city of Davis $25,000 in grant money, and will bring another $25,000 in grant money this year. Yet Mayor Don Saylor was the only City Council member who did not vote for either one of us. An old adage comes to mind – “No good deed goes unpunished.”

    It is my understanding that the “merger” issue is still on the table for consideration by the City Council. My hope is the Fearsome Foursome (Greenwald, Krovoza, Swanson, Souza) recognize the “merger” issue as a poor Saylor idea at best, and more likely a nightmare that will result in horrendous community “blow back” that will never be in the best interest of Davisites. Many opportunities for public participation that commissions provide would be lost, as well as the huge benefits that commissions bring – including bringing in $$$ to the city. $50,000 in these tough economic times is nothing to sneeze at!

  3. rusty49: “Elaine, I’m curious as to why you think Saylor didn’t vote for you?”

    To quote from dmg: “However, at least to date, the effort has been one notch above an abysmal failure, with Tuesday night quietly marking yet another quiet defeat. They had their four candidates for the Senior Citizens Commission all lined up, which would have given CHA majority control. They put on a full-court press, we have learned from reliable accounts, with Bill Streng lobbying councilmembers very hard to seat the CHA-favored candidates.”

    Don Saylor’s voting record speaks for itself. Fortunately his voting views were an extreme minority of one.

  4. Don Shor: “Who were the other candidates?”

    I urged Steve Weinbaum and Elizabeth Yeh to apply for the vacancy on our commission that was left because Commissioner Marianna Henwood decided to retire (she will be greatly missed). Both Steve and Elizabeth have outstanding credentials to serve on our commission.

    The other three applicants were Mary Jo Bryan, Fred Costello, Kathleen Hickey.

    Three current commissioners were up for reappointment: Tansey Thomas, Jan Bridge, and myself.

  5. I believe that the Senior Citizens Commission should be disbanded until the City also has a Youth Commission. To be fair, the Bicycle Museum should be moved over to the Senior Center next year and senior activities should be dispersed to nursing homes, retirement communities, community centers, etc.

    (With Jan Bridge and Mary Jo Bryan on the Senior Citizens Commission, senior housing will continue to be placed on the agenda and will be the focus of this commission.)

  6. RK: “I believe that the Senior Citizens Commission should be disbanded until the City also has a Youth Commission. To be fair, the Bicycle Museum should be moved over to the Senior Center next year and senior activities should be dispersed to nursing homes, retirement communities, community centers, etc.”

    I assume you are saying this tongue in cheek? Many of us are strongly supportive of a Youth Commission, and are not happy that the Bicycle Museum usurped the Teen Center.

    RK: “(With Jan Bridge and Mary Jo Bryan on the Senior Citizens Commission, senior housing will continue to be placed on the agenda and will be the focus of this commission.)”

    Not going to happen. Our commission promulgated the Senior Housing Guidelines, approved by the City Council, that emphasizes “aging in place” as the preference of seniors rather than developing new senior housing. Our commission’s focus will now be to assist the Social Services Commission to gain City Council approval of an updated Universal Design Policy/Ordinance that will promote aging in place.

Leave a Comment