
In the coming election, it is a foregone conclusion that issues like water, the budget and the environment will be front and center. Development is omnipresent, though somewhat diminished, since the days of Measure J votes and dwindling non-Measure J land parcels. But perhaps a sleeper issue is economic development.
In recent years we have seen a much stronger and more serious push toward economic development as Davis realizes that the days of relying on auto sales are numbered. Davis approved big-box development in the form of Target, and likely will not revisit that issue. The city is using its remaining RDA funding to build a Hotel-Conference center where Caffé Italia currently resides, hoping to bring in precious tax money from that.
But the next frontier is clearly university spin-offs. The university, under the leadership of Linda Katehi, when she is not battling for her career with the pepper-spray debacle, is pushing to increase its profile – and bring in over $1 billion in money for research and development that can be spun into precious native and indigenous history.
What we are seeing is a push from the business community. In part, it is embodied in new Davis Chamber of Commerce Executive Director Kemble Pope, who perhaps brazenly and perhaps with good justification laid down the proverbial gauntlet last week when he called for the ouster of the city’s economic development team.
Wrote Mr. Pope: “Let’s plan now for the loss of Redevelopment Agency funding. Failure to plan really is planning to fail. Please ask for help from the community now to make the necessary budget adjustments so that we can minimize services lost.”
He then added, “To that end, consider dissolving the City’s entire Economic Development department and eliminate all staff positions related to the department. Set a date certain in the month of March and these organizations will come back here and present a succession plan to take over those responsibilities.”
To us this was a call to action, suggesting that the economic development folks had been too cautious and not aggressive enough in moving forward a plan.
I stand by my comments that most everyone supports economic development in this city.
However, leaders in the business community are increasingly getting frustrated and impatient by the lack of quick movement on these issues.
This is embodied within the comments by Davis Downtown Business Association Co-President Michael Bisch, who challenged my comments on Sunday where I said, “Everyone supports, I think, business development. We support the idea of high-tech spinoffs from the university and figuring out better ways to capture the valuable point-of-sales tax revenue.”
Mr. Bisch quickly responded, “To put it bluntly, this comment is divorced from reality. There are any number of loud voices in the community that do not share this view.”
He added, “There are many more voices in the community, even on the council, who share the view, but work at cross purposes or do not act to further the objective at all.”
“I mentioned at the economic presentations this past Tuesday that it will be extremely difficult to effectively engage in economic development without addressing 3 aspects of our local political culture: 1) Community Sustainability (environmental, social, and economic) 2) Intolerance of creativity and innovation 3) Barriers and constraints to fostering a robust local economy.”
The problem here, I think, is not that some people support economic development and others do not. The problem that Mr. Bisch is actually citing is that there is no agreed-upon path toward getting to where we want to go. There is no consensus on what the future vision should be.
I would say, as I said before, “I agree that we generally need to figure out ways to expand our business community.”
But Mr. Bisch would respond: “Such ways are figured out on a daily basis; unfortunately, they generally are met with a hail of criticism ‘NO’ crowd and apathy and flip flopping by the council.”
This is the problem, I think, in that Mr. Bisch believes that as the business community sits around talking mainly to themselves and comes up with visions and proposals as to how they see things, going forward, that they have not taken into account that there is a broader community that has conflicting values.
Put simply, there are those who support business but oppose any expansion of the city into the periphery. This is the issue involved in the re-zoning of ConAgra without testing in some measurable way whether the citizens would support, through a Measure J vote, some sort of peripheral business park.
There are those who wish to bolster the downtown, but are reluctant to see the downtown expanded upward.
The bottom line is that the impatience on the part of the business community, while understandable, needs to reflect more recognition that they may not have the support of the masses of people who vote for councilmembers. And so if they get frustrated that the city is not moving fast enough, they need to understand why the city is not moving fast enough.
In the past I have proposed to Mr. Bisch and others a form of dialogue on these pages to enable the business community and the political community and other folks in this city to exchange ideas and visions.
I do not see consensus yet. What I see is a lot of hard work by those in the city and those in the business community to come up with a vision, but little outreach into the world of the soccer moms and softball dads. Little outreach into the environmental community that remains strong.
That is not to say that I do not share the frustration of many with the effectiveness of city staff on a whole host of issues, including many that I laid out last week. But to really move forward requires a much more shared vision than I think is in existence now. It requires patience and more hard work.
I see a lot of frustration in the words of people like Michael Bisch and Kemble Pope. I understand where that comes from. I am less certain that in the long run it will serve them well.
The bottom line is that to do what you think needs to be done will take the city councilmembers and the public to buy into it. Try to see what will happen when you attempt a Measure J vote and you will see what you are really up against.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
David, I commend you on generally quoting me in context above. I’d like to correct/clarify 3 items that may lead to misunderstanding.
1) I do not support peripheral development, save for Nishi/Solano/Gatway. I’m a strong advocate for densification to ease pressure for peripheral growth and to foster a sustainable community. I think I’ve been pretty consistent in this matter over my 4 years in Davis.
3)Those that battle over ConAgra, I not being one of them, are not battling over whether to develop it. They are battling over how to develop it. Every protagonist I’m aware of has conceded that it should be developed. My only comments on the record pertaining to ConAgra have been to correct faulty statements regarding demand and absoprtion for housing and commercial space and the impact on fostering a sustainable community. I have also applauded Don Shor’s notion that if housing is to be built on site, it would ideally be high-density housing for ownership and rental to meet the existing, let alone, future high demand for such product.
3)”…lack of quick movement”? 4 years into a recession/faltering recovery, significant city service cuts with many more on the way, the schools getting hammered, the time for quick movement has long since come and gone. Now it’s all about playing catch-up. Hello?
DT Businessman (aka Michael Bisch, Davis Commercial Properties, DDBA Co-Prez)
As to the article above generally, let’s be clear here. We can call it the Kemble initiative for reference purposes, but the call to action is broad based across the business community. I for one look forward to reviewing a detailed proposal. I have in no way ever advocated for a city staffer to be fired. On the other hand, the council would be foolish to not examine every viable option, every serious proposal. Not knowing the details of the proposal, how can any open minded person reject it out of hand?
DT Businessman (aka Michael Bisch, Davis Commercial Properties, DDBA Co-Prez)
What happened with the Economic Development Commission and how would Kemble’s proposal junction any different than this?
“3)Those that battle over ConAgra, I not being one of them, are not battling over whether to develop it. They are battling over how to develop it.”
Actually there was just discussion about Brett Lee being opposed to developing Con Agra as a centerpiece of his campaign.
David said: “I agree that we generally need to figure out ways to expand our business community.”
But then you oppose everything that doesn’t meet with your narrow view of perfection. Funny you use the word expand because you oppose expansion through support of J and R. This town is all locked up and that has worked for a decade or more but the unintended consequences of no growth politics are coming home to roost first with a decline in enrollment through the failure to have an adequate housing program and the loss of housing that should have been built here being built in Woodland. Next to suffer will be infrastructure as the costs of water and parks strain those who can’t afford them coupled with those unwilling to pay. Then you will see businesses that would start up here going to Dixon, Woodland, West Sac, Vacaville (think Genentech) or Sacramento. At some point Davis must realize that the costs of no growth are no longer worth the benefits.
The cruise ship Davis has run aground and is taking on water. The lookout had called out a warning, the State had fouled the rudder and propellers, but the ship’s officers were too busy glad-handing with the passengers up on deck to take corrective action. 4 officers have now abandoned ship, 1 new officer has been helicoptered on board, the remaining officers realize there’s a serious problem, but the passengers scarcely noticed the deck chairs lurch as the ship ran up on the reef. The officers are intermittently fighting among themselves, glad-handing with the passengers on deck, calling may day, or studying the charts to set a course not realizing they can’t sail anywhere since the propellers and rudder are fouled and they’re taking on water. Some of the crew are taking effective action, but quite a few are off-duty and asleep in their bunks, or recreating. Meanwhile, no one has noticed that at least half the bilge pumps are not even functioning, which is why the ship is still taking on water. What needs to happen is for the officers to get their act together, immediately order the repair of the bilge pumps no matter what it takes, seal the hull, send divers overboard to clear the rudder and the propellers, get off the reef, and set a new course to reach their destination.
It reminds me quite a bit of the Deepwater Horizon where the platform is on fire, the superstructure is being shredded by explosions, the captain and some of the crew are in a lifeboat with the throttle wide open, wondering why they’re not making any headway, all the while the lifeboat is still tethered to the platform.
DT Businessman (aka Michael Bisch, Davis Commercial Properties, DDBA Co-Prez)
[quote]I do not see consensus yet. What I see is a lot of hard work by those in the city and those in the business community to come up with a vision, but little outreach into the world of the soccer moms and softball dads. Little outreach into the environmental community that remains strong.[/quote]
I think the Economic Development Roundtable, and the subsequent Economic Development Strategy [b][i]were an attempt at outreach[/i][/b] to the general community. Unfortunately some of the statements made by the business community were somewhat negative, which was not a propitious beginning, and IMO should have been left to a more appropriate time/venue. However, any negativity that occurred was far out-shadowed by the positive vision statements made by representatives from UCD/Roots/Yolo County Visitors Bureau. (Bravo to BEDC for this event!) However, some reactions/statements from one City Council member in particular were also counter-productive, and show what an uphill climb the business community has in furthering economic development.
In consequence, I would make the following suggestions to the business community:
1) Bring together representative members of UCD, DSIDE, DDBA, Chamber of Commerce, BEDC, and other members of the business community, and perhaps other interested members of the public (call it the Economic Development Strategy Committee (EDSC)), and hammer out a consensus strategy for business and economic development. This would have the advantage of creating a groundswell of support from various segments of the community. Come up with what I would call a “starter strategy” of small achievable goals to begin with.
2) Then approach the City Council for what I would call a “check-in”, and force a vote on the “starter strategy”, so that all can agree on at least a few easily achievable items that will set the stage for bigger and better things to come.
3) If the City Council cannot get its act together and agree to some sort of “starter strategy”, then the EDSC needs to work together on its own to further economic development working behind the scenes to further its goals.
The idea is to create a groundswell of support, so that naysayers are essentially left in the dust, as unreasonable/obstructionist. I have gone through various sorts of obstructionism to get things off the ground (Triad, Senior Housing Guidelines, Carlton Plaza Davis, to name a few). Sometimes one has to resort to going through side windows or through the back door, if the front door is locked and barred from entry…
Just a suggestion…
Great hyperbole DT Businessman, and I agree with your views on development and densification .
I agree with Mr. Toad & DT Businessman. The residents of the City of Davis and all of its liberalness has gotten the City painted into a corner. UC Davis had been the driver of prosperity in Davis, but with state cuts to education and the state of the economy in general, this economic force is no longer able to keep up with damage done by such constraints such as Measures J & R. Too many people want a simple and painless solution, because they have had the luxury of receiving it in the past. Davis needs to wake up before it is too late.
I should also comment that I found David’s comments about Chancellor Katehi a tad ironic. He appears in his words to be supportive of what she is attempting to do as an economic driver for Davis. Yet he also seems to support her ouster as Chancellor due to the pepper spraying incident. I think that Chancellor Katehi was one of the few bright lights of hope for Davis’ future and was deeply saddened by the fact that she has taken so much heat for what occured. (We’ll wait to see what the Reynoso report says, but I think she did not make any major mistakes, and certainly not one that should lead to her dismisal.) However, there appear to be significant numbers that want to see her go, and that would be a travesty for UC Davis, the city and the region. I truly believe she is a visionary with the right vision and the ability to get a good amount of what she seeks to accomplish done. She’s not perfect, and certainly is not a crisis communications specialist (and appears to either not have received good advice during the crisis, or not taken it), but I believe she is Davis’ best hope for its future of economic development.
[quote]but the unintended consequences of no growth politics are coming home to roost first with [b]a decline in enrollment[/b] through the failure to have an adequate housing program and the loss of housing that should have been built [/quote]First, I am neither “pro-growth”, nor “anti-growth”. That being said, I do NOT believe that ‘stable’ nor ‘increasing’ enrollment of school-age children is a “goal”. If the existing residents have more children, enrollment will rise, even absent new development. If significant new development, aimed at aging seniors, is approved, that doesn’t necessarily translate to increased enrollment. I see no need to ‘grow’ in order to preserve job opportunities for teachers, administrators, planners or any other public employee. Ironically, most of recent cuts in the City workforce has come from maintenance/operational sectors, as opposed to planning, etc. The infrastructure we have is not declining, even absent new development.
I thought his dependent clause about Katahi out of sync and behind the curve. I think she lost the battle but survived the war. The turning point was when she was asked about resigning and she pointed out she had raised $770 million for the university. Still I agree its a tell in this story, The real story is when she said enough is enough about constraints to growth while threatening to proceed with her plans to create spin offs in other communities. Yes, enough is enough.
[quote]He appears in his words to be supportive of what she is attempting to do as an economic driver for Davis. Yet he also seems to support her ouster as Chancellor due to the pepper spraying incident.[/quote]
I spotted this too, which neglects to mention the questionable/illegal role students played in the debacle…
“The infrastructure we have is not declining, even absent new development.” This is what I mean by the passengers not having noticed that the ship has run aground and is taking on water. David has reported at length on the deferred road maintenance. David has also reported at length on the need for significant water infrastructure upgrades, either well and/or surface water infrastructure. These are but two of many infrastructure challenges we are confronted with and are having extreme difficulty addressing.
The ship doesn’t have to go down. It can definitely be saved, we have the skills and resources. But it requires effective, determined action.
DT Businessman (aka Michael Bisch, Davis Commercial Properties, DDBA Co-Prez)
[quote]But then you oppose everything that doesn’t meet with your narrow view of perfection. [/quote]
Another astute observation…
R. Kelly ([url]http://www.lasentinel.net/UserFiles/File/010512/R_ Kelly.jpg[/url]): [i]”What happened with the (Business &) Economic Development Commission and how would Kemble’s proposal junction any different than this?”[/i]
See this ([url]http://cityofdavis.org/meetings/business/2_27_2012_Combined_Packet.pdf[/url]), beginning on page 4.
Rich, So I see they have a plan. How would Kemble’s proposal function different than this? Why can’t Kemble bring his resources to bolster these activities? Why can’t Kemble work with what’s already there, rather than just focus on firing a couple of staff and having a private group assume responsibility?
To me, his proposal is not well thought out. I think he blames the staff for doing the work they are directed to do by the City Council or for working on projects brought to them (and paid for) by developers and landowners.
I also think that Kemble doesn’t really know what the staff are required to deal with on a daily basis.
The term “economic development” means lots of different things to different people. For many cities in the last decade it meant more retail (read big box) and in some cases more housing. Retail does bring in sales taxes and has to be part of the mix but most people in Davis (myself included) also want to keep our downtown.
Economic development departments also tend to become captured by Chamber of Commerce types. I’m all for more business in Davis but only if it meets community standards. I don’t want us to be like Elk Grove or even Roseville–not that ther is anything wrong with it.
[i]”I do not support peripheral development, save for Nishi/Solano/Gatway. I’m a strong advocate for densification to ease pressure for peripheral growth and to foster a sustainable community. I think I’ve been pretty consistent in this matter over my 4 years in Davis.”[/i]
Michael, is the the common position of the DDBA? Densification means taller structures. I’m not sure how this works for expanding retail as retail generally occupies street-level floor space. What is the vision here?
[quote]”I stand by my comments that most everyone supports economic development in this city. However, leaders in the business community are increasingly getting frustrated and impatient by the lack of quick movement on these issues.[/quote]I haven’t seen any evidence that this has been true for 10 years so so. Unless you count people [u]saying[/u] “I like apple pie” as being in [u]support[/u] of something.
What do you consider “quick movement”? Other than Target, the city staff and city council have been fiddling around for a decade with a series of failed “affordable housing” projects, a ZipCar program that duplicated UCD’s, kicking out the city’s youth for a never-open bicycle storage, moving Mishka’s into a nicer building for some reason, the Hanlees $1-million loan giveaway, various “sidewalk improvements,” etc.
Apparently, we figured the Davis Auto Mall would support our municipal government and our cute downtown forever. What has our city government done in the past 10 year to [u]support[/u] economic development?
It’s difficult to talk about “quick movement” when it’s hard to credit much movement at all.
Densification in Downtown means going up and less sunlight at street level. The parking structure is a good example; cut down the trees and put up a big heat island that blocks light from the street. How do you densify downtown while maintaining its ambiance. Look at the new house on B across from the park. A failed attempt at victorian revival. Why? Its too tall so it loses its stylistic charm.
Densifying downtown while maintaining its cultural vibrancy is an oxymoron. A better plan is to give up on trying to keep Davis locked into artificial borders that have no geographic basis, keep downtown what it is and build on the periphery.
I agree with Dr. Wu that “economic development” means different things to different people.
I support high-tech and related University economic development in order to help with new job creation, which is our nation’s number one problem and also to help shore up support for our state University system. The reality is that the legislature will be more sympathetic to University funding if we can show that it is creating jobs.
That said, it probably will not help the city’s budget significantly, and we should not over-promise in that department. Economic development will not be likely to bring significant new net revenue to the city unless we impose a city income tax, and that is not likely. So we should be honest about that.
To my thinking, the Nishi is the best site for high-tech development if we can obtain funding for an underpass under the railroad tracks so that auto traffic can exit out the under-used UC Davis I-80 exit.
After talking to some folks at the University yesterday, I am much more optimistic about this.
I also support requiring that somewhat more land at the Hunt-Wesson site be required to maintain its existing neighborhood-compatible high tech/non-profit/community use zoning.
Between the Nishi and the Hunt-Wesson, we should have enough high-tech and non-profit land available for awhile.
Again, I oppose significant densification in the commercial core, in order to preserve the character of downtown and due to parking issues. I think that parking should be available for our ground-floor retail, restaurant, arts and entertainment customers. The Nishi should be able to provide a lot of customers for our downtown if the University and the city restrict restaurant uses in the Nishi/Mondavi/Solano Park area.
Hopefully the PG&E property will be available at some point in the future.
The Nishi property is 40 acres. The PG&E property is 27 acres. Both are easy walking distance to downtown. The entire commercial core looks to be only about 25 acres (I should get staff to measure it accurately). So we have a huge amount of room to develop on the underused land adjacent to the downtown without having to destroy the character of downtown. (I am not opposed to a few taller buildings, particularly on G Street by the tracks, but I think we should be very selective).