2011 was a momentous year locally and, while deciding the top story was easy, in other years any of the top three would have been the top story, and as many as the top six or seven could have been.
What we did not know is that a group of students in tents would steal the headlines not only in Davis, but would capture the attention of the nation and the world.
It was a great year for the Vanguard. Readership in the fifth full year of the Vanguard was up an astounding 60%. We packed the Woodland Community and Senior Center with nearly 300 people to hear experts talk about wrongful convictions.
But as always, 2011 was about the news and the Vanguard was the place to discuss that news. Here are the top 6th to 10th stories from the year.
No.10 – Union Pacific Railroad Fence
Frankly, the first nine on this list were easy to come up with, but there could have been a number of No.10s. I chose the Union Pacific Railroad fence that now separates Olive Drive residents from downtown Davis.
From the start, the city was largely powerless to stop the building of this fence, and when they managed to cut off public money from the Capitol Corridor JPA, Union Pacific Railroad was not even willing to work with the city any more. Eventually, they not only built the 3800-foot-long fence from Richards Blvd to the Olive Drive exit from I-80, but it is an ugly fence that looks like it is from a demilitarized zone.
“The city continues to adamantly oppose UPRR’s decision to fence off the Olive Drive neighborhood from its historic access to the city and its historic ability to cross the tracks,” a city statement read. “Cutting off access at this time does not promote the process of determining a safe access to the Station and downtown Davis for the Olive Drive area nor does it promote safety for the Amtrak and freight trains that use this corridor.”
“It is unfortunate that UPRR, under current law, can move forward with no governmental approval or oversight that would look at the larger public safety and access issues before UPRR can commence building the proposed fence,” the city continued.
The city had hoped that Union Pacific would at least notify the city when it would build the fence, but that did not happen.
The fence was a fait accompli when a transient was killed trying to cross the tracks last summer.
Key article: Death on the Tracks Puts Focus on Need For Safe Crossing
No. 9 Redevelopment
This week marked the end of a tumultuous period on the issue of redevelopment. In what has been billed a significant victory for the Jerry Brown administration, the California Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the state could eliminate redevelopment agencies, thus paving the way for the state to divert money from local redevelopment agencies in an effort to balance the current budget.
The court would rule that the actions taken by the legislation represent “a proper exercise of the legislative power vested in the Legislature by the state Constitution.”
“That power,” the court went on, “includes the authority to create entities, such as redevelopment agencies, to carry out the state’s ends and the corollary power to dissolve those same entities when the Legislature deems it necessary and proper. Proposition 22, while it amended the state Constitution to impose new limits on the Legislature’s fiscal powers, neither explicitly nor implicitly rescinded the Legislature’s power to dissolve redevelopment agencies.”
On the other hand, the court ruled that AB 27, “the measure conditioning further redevelopment agency operations on additional payments by an agency’s community sponsors to state funds benefiting schools and special districts” was invalid, as it violated Proposition 22 which “expressly forbids the Legislature from requiring such payments.”
Key article: On Eliminating Redevelopment and Re-Thinking Spending Priorities
No.8 Assembly Bill 109 – Realignment
The genesis of AB 109 was both a means by which the state could comply with a court ruling to reduce prison population, while at the same time hope to find some budgetary savings.
As the Vanguard would write in January, “In what the San Jose Mercury News is calling ‘the most sweeping criminal justice overhaul in state history,’ Governor Jerry Brown is proposing the elimination of the youth prison system, along with an end to prison terms for thousands of convicts who are in prison for relatively minor crimes. Those individuals would be moved to county jails.”
“According to the Governor’s budget, such a move would save the state nearly half a million next year, $1.4 billion annually on an ongoing basis, while at the same time dealing with the critical prison overcrowding and prison reform issues.”
Everyone believes that AB 109, the prison realignment bill, will be a game changer, but as we have noted in previous articles and columns, no one knows just how it will play out.
Law enforcement has predictably come out against AB 109, but many seem to forget, this is not really a choice on the part of California, as the federal courts are mandating prison reduction.
Yolo County DA Jeff Reisig in October issued a statement, “Despite the fact that our state has benefited from some of the lowest crime rates in decades, these reforms were created and passed on the basis that California’s prison system has become drastically overcrowded over the years and a theory that a focus on rehabilitation instead of incarceration may prove to be more effective in reducing long term recidivism.”
He also notes that the state’s economy and budget woes play a factor in AB 109.
“The end result of this seismic shift in our criminal justice system is that tens of thousands of convicted felons statewide, who would have gone to state prison in the past for their crimes, will now stay in our local communities in county jails or alternative programs,” he writes.
Mr. Reisig continues, “The reality is that many local county jails, including ours in Yolo County, are already overcrowded at times with inmates awaiting trials and/or serving local sentences. While the new realignment laws will certainly help the state deal with its overcrowded state prisons, the counties will be more impacted than ever. Such local overcrowding will most certainly result in some early releases of those awaiting trial or serving sentences.”
Naturally, Public Defender Tracie Olson had a different take.
“We can no longer continue with business as usual,” she told the Vanguard. “I bristle when I hear folks talk about how the jail will have to accommodate 19-year sentences and what a burden that will be on the jail.”
“Well, maybe someone should stop and figure out whether a 19-year sentence on a non-violent, non-serious, and non-sex offense for a non-violent, non-serious, and non-sex offender is appropriate in the first place,” she said.
“In my opinion, the appropriate response to such an offender is to try to figure out why the offender keeps getting into trouble and to offer services to fix the offender’s underlying problems. It’s only then that we as a community can reasonably expect that the offender’s behavior will change,” she concluded.
This issue figures to ramp again, as the Board of Supervisors has a critical early meeting in January assessing a plan for jail expansion.
Key article: Yolo County’s Realignment Missing the Opportunity
No.7 City Hires Steve Pinkerton as New City Manager
Last year, one of the top stories was the resignation of City Manager Bill Emlen, who would take a position with Solano County.
This year, it fell upon the new council to hire a new city manager, something that they achieved just before their August break with the announcement that they had hired Steve Pinkerton, previously a city manager for the city of Manteca.
“I am delighted to announce the selection of Steve Pinkerton as the City of Davis’s next city manager,” said Mayor Joe Krovoza in a press release late that Tuesday night, following the meeting behind closed doors.
“Steve has a very broad skill set that will guarantee Davis thrives in these challenging times,” the Mayor added. “His experience in budget and organizational issues will serve us well, as will his expertise in planning, water, economic development and establishing partnerships with public and private entities. Steve’s references spoke of his exceptional integrity and his ability to unify divergent interests. He stood out in a field of exceptional candidates, and I know he gets – and is excited to work in – the uniqueness that is Davis, California.”
The Council’s news release read, “The contract is similar in structure to Bill Emlen’s, and its total compensation will, at most, represent a 3,500 [dollar] increase over Emlen’s last full year of 2009.”
Mayor Pro Tem Rochelle Swanson was quick to point out that, while the salary was an increase over Mr. Emlen’s salary and over Mr. Pinkerton’s current salary at the City of Manteca, the total compensation is structured in such a way that it represents only a $3500 increase over Bill Emlen’s last full year’s total compensation in 2009.
That turned out to be untrue. The real number is that the new City Manager will get $44,000 more than Bill Emlen, not $3500. His salary marks an increase of $29,300 over Bill Emlen’s salary of $148,700.
In the end, as we argued at the time, it may not be bad that Mr. Pinkerton is paid far more than Mr. Emlen if he ends up saving the city money, but at the same time, it will make it more difficult for the city to bargain with employees being asked to sacrifice at the same time their boss took a healthy salary increase.
Key article: Council Gets Numbers Wrong on City Manager Contract
No. 6 Council Vacancy/ Dan Wolk
In other years, this might have been the top story. It was a short and drawn-out process that the council settled on to select their replacement. The replacement was created by a controversy of its own. In 2008, Don Saylor was the top vote getter in the council elections and therefore set to become Mayor in July of 2010.
However, in the June 2010 elections, Mr. Saylor ran unopposed to replace Helen Thomson as a county supervisor. That led to a long and protracted debate, whereby many in the public asked for Mr. Saylor to step down in November and open the council seat up for election. He refused and resigned in January, creating a vacancy.
The council in early January decided on an intriguing public process where members would apply for the vacancy, there would be a candidate’s forum, and then on one long night the council in a public session would whittle the group down to a final two and appoint the new councilmember.
When Dan Wolk, the son of Senator Lois Wolk and a local Davis High graduate, applied for the vacancy he became the presumptive front runner. However, it was a strong and intriguing field, and in the end, the appointment process was more orderly than not.
While many took it as a foregone conclusion Dan Wolk would win, from our perspective this was always an open and competitive process.
Dan Wolk certainly did not take the vote for granted.
“This was such a strong group of applicants. I was very impressed and I really didn’t know how this was going to go,” Mr. Wolk told reporters after the vote. “I just tried to give it my best shot, to make my pitch so to speak, and hope that they would pick me and they did.”
“I did not think by any means I was going to get this, I really thought that there were some good applicants out there,” he continued.
Despite some confusion about voting process, the night went largely according to plan, with few hiccups.
Mr. Wolk would make his mark on the council, casting the deciding vote in a heated 3-2 budget battle, pushing for a one-year water rate hike, and then along with Rochelle Swanson crafting the December 6 water rate compromise.
Key article: In the end it is Dan Wolk Who is Chosen to Fill Council Vacancy
The rest of the top ten stories tomorrow.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
