by Alan C. Miller and Danielle Fodor
We already ate the burritos.
Objectivity is Our Primary Goal (#cough#, #cough#, #hack#)
Arriving at Dos Pinos, we noticed a Robb Davis sign out front. At that moment we knew all hope of objectivity was out the window. In the parking lot we observed Robb Davis signs in many of the adjoining back porches, and on the walking paths there were so many one could name a new phobia for fear of Robb Davis signs falling upon them. By the pool another Robb Davis sign. At the door to the community room was, no . . . . . it was Robb Davis. Not the sign, the candidate. “Welcome to Dos Pinos.”
Have we made our point? This guide is not objective. How could it be? These four hours are sacred, and whatever goes down forms our sacred text. If you weren’t there . . . tough: no input for you!
Also, this one is incomplete. It ends like that scrawl on the cave wall in Monty Python and the Holy Grail. It didn’t end, it just sort of died out after four hours. “Look, if he were dying, he wouldn’t bother to carve ‘aaaargh’…he’d just say it.”
Let Us Set the Scene and our Distance from Responsibility
Just short of 20 Davis freaks in a shape roughly resembling a circle, in a tall room with a kitchen. Some people come and go, but a solid number stayed well over the three hours. Tortillas, lettuce, kale, tomatoes, beans, cheese, cilantro, olives, salsas, hot sauce, tea, orange soda. Orange soda?
We do our best to describe what went down. There is a lot of misinformation out there, and we contribute to that. In fact, all the candidates are fictitious and just happen to have the same names as actual candidates even if occasionally misspelled. So anything we say about these fictitious candidates is fictional and therefore does not need to be accurate. And we do not exist. Uncle can’t sue us if we say cheese.
County Superintendent of S’mores, or Schools
The Superintendent works with the Co. Board of Education to govern the school districts (Davis, Woodland, West Sac, etc.) at the county level. The county governs the districts as a whole as well as nonstandard education programs – stuff like Juvenile Hall, Tribal schools, special education, GED programs, etc. Our current Superintendent, Jorge Ayala, is retiring, after running unopposed for the last three terms (why bother, they all said). Two folks are running for his seat.
Jesse Ortiz currently sits on the Co. Board of Education, has been handpicked by Jorge as his successor; endorsed by the Woodland Daily Democrat and Yocha Dehe Wintun Nation Tribal Council (among others). Started out as a social worker and has worked in education admin for 10+ years. Focused on closing the achievement gap, with support for: Universal Preschool for All, and strengthening educational partnerships with local colleges and universities. We like his priorities — but he’s never taught school. Does that make him unqualified for the position?
Sam Neustadt—20 year Woodland resident, endorsed by the Davis Enterprise. Assistant superintendent for Solano County. Past teacher, with specialty in special education and administration (though the Deaf community in Davis has endorsed Ortiz — not sure why?). He works with foster youth and mental health organizations and is a fan of charter schools. Experience as schoolteacher, through various levels of admin of school system. Local planning area. Has worked a lot in special education, admin, worked in a variety of school districts. He has worked with the special education task force, volunteers with Foster Youth Coalition and with mental health organizations. While Ortiz is the establishment candidate (and P&P is notably anti-establishment), it did seem like he has the strongest coalition, and has his eyes on critical concerns of equity in our community.
STRAW POLL: Jesse – 13 votes, Sam – 1 vote, Undecided – 1
Judge Superior Jumped the Gun (Sing 4 times, once for each candidate)
All four running are attorneys. And no, they are not at the bottom of the ocean so it’s not a good start. We kid.
Janene Beronio – Been on the Yolo court for 34 years; appointed by judges (judge not, lest ye be appointed by judges). Her mind is open. The courthouse seems to like her, and it’s good to be liked by a building.
Fredrick Cohen – He’s a family law court lawyer. The local democratic machine has enhorsed him. (This is something like being endorsed, but involves a horse, somehow.) Once acted as a judge, which is different that acting like a judge, or judging.
Larenda Delaini – One among us said she was well prepared. She herself (not among us) spoke of the heroic work of her husband in the West Sacramento Police Department, who did not endorse her. One of those things that makes you go . . . . “Hmmmm.”
John P. Brennan – Once thought a criminal was criminal, until his work turned him on to reality; we were all glad we weren’t one of his early cases. Seemed soft spoken in public forum to one of our gang.
We then had a passionate discussion about why judges can’t endorse alternative forms of justice.
Our straw poll was made of a thin straw:
Janene Beronio – 2
Fredrick Cohen – 2
Larenda Delaini – 1
John P. Brennan – 0
There were a lot more people in the room. The were unable to judge.
Then a cell phone treated us to some jaunty rock & roll!
COUNTY CLERK RECORDER/RECORDER/ASSESSOR/DISSIDENT AGGRESSOR
Previously this was two offices! Two of the above! Mix and Match Tasks!
Assessor part was COMBINED due to “issues” – they were in trouble with Board of Supes for not being open on Friday (even though Board of Supes cut their budget so they couldn’t be); This used to be two jobs — now just one, thanks to the Board of Supervisors (oh, the efficiency of combining job titles — one person can do two jobs, right? I meant four jobs, no? heck, they do it at the university.). This person will be in charge of 1) Running local elections 2) Recording marriages, divorces, births and deaths 3) Recording changes to real estate 4) Assessing real estate for tax purposes. Basically, this is a glorified admin job, glorified because they are in charge of all aspects of our elections and tax records. You want a really good administrator.
Freddie Oakley – Everybody loves Freddie. That is, except for some people from her old church who dissed her, based on her bold issuance of “Certificates of Inequality” to same-sex couples who asked her to marry them, back in the old days. She’s an evangelical herself, got nothing against the church. Just her God is a tolerant one; maybe he eats crayfish, too. Freddie’s been our clerk/recorder for 15+ years, seems to be running the department in tip-top shape, with old-school but fail-safe election equipment, pushing civil rights from her desk job.
David Schwenger (Shwing!)– Hand picked by the previous assessor, he’s your pick if you think assessing is rocket science. Which maybe it is. What do we know? We’ve never assessed anything, ever, apart from the quality of chocolate ice cream. He has a fancy appraiser license and appraises a lot of ag. land. Argues that Freddie will need to get an appraisers license in 6 mo to be ready for the next tax roll, but we have no doubt she can do that. She will be learning 1 new job, he would be learning 3 new jobs.
Our Straw Poll revealed: Freddie – 17; David S. – 1; Undec. – 1 – wait! Nope, Undec – 0, changed to Oakley! Freddie takes the cake.
Robb Davis left early on; Rochelle Swanson came later on;
Measure O – oh
AKA the Fiscal Sanity Initiative. The city budget is long, the city budget is scary. Not bedtime reading, especially when you consider how much more money we have going out than coming in … This measure is an additional sales tax that would dump into the city’s general fund, to be used as the city council determines to fill the most gaping holes. Oh, those holes gape.
Pro — The people agree, this measure will not solve our long term fiscal problems. Essentially, this measure buys time — a bridge to a moment in the future when divine light illuminates the collective minds of the city council, and/or they receive stone tablets from the gods telling them how to create new revenue and cut salaries and pensions without incurring the ire of the unions. Barring stone tablets, it might come down to bickering and name-calling to reach consensus, but hey – We believe in the divine light, don’t you? So, in theory this measure prevents cuts to critical services (fire, police, parks) while the new council gets oriented and figures out what to do. We like critical services, don’t you?
Con – The argument is, punting this down the road solves nothing. We should deal with this now; we haven’t cut enough and time won’t make the choices easier.
Truth & Consequences: If the sales tax does not pass, cuts could be across the board, but much determined by contract limitations – including fire, police, etc. Considering public safety can’t easily be cut, the reality is parks & rec is the deepest cut, and we all fear losing folks like Martin Guerena and Bob Bowen, although one person spoke of the inflammatory article in the Enterprise about Bob Bowen –– oh my God we vote no and we lose Bob! Children wailing in the streets! There’s no guarantee how the money will be spent, but city staff is demoralized already about cuts to programs. As we cut, more work moves to contract employees, with heavy turnover and knowledge loss. The low-bid contract environment creates low and lower quality of service.
Straw poll: 18-yes; 1-no;
Measure P – Water Woes
Hopefully the rates, which are not the rates we thought they were, apparently, can be corrected; both sides claim they are “The Fairest Rates of Them All,” but who pays, and who looked in the mirror? Do we trust the Council to fix the rates?
Preamble (i.e. Conspiracy Theory #1): What is measure P really about? Is it about what it is written about? Is it about the rates? Or is it about 1 more shot at killing the water plan (aka the notorious Measure I)? The City Council recently voted 5-0 to revisit and revise the water rates, and according to Measure I they are already committed to reviewing and adjusting water rates every year. But what Council will that be with the July turnover? The basic question is, do we trust the council to do a good job, on their 2nd (and 3rd, and 4th) time around? Measure P sends a clear message: “We don’t trust the council to make a decision that is responsive to citizens’ concerns.” Just depends if that’s the message you want to send.
Ramble On . . . If you favor Measure P: you’re saying you don’t trust the City Council to fix water rates. Some said voting YES puts the City at massive fiscal risk by invalidating Measure I which could cause a cease and desist on the project and then Davis could owe Woodland, and some would also add the sky could fall to the list of “coulds.” ‘Twas pointed out the rates should have been raised long ago to start to pay for all this, and now every year we wait the higher the costs, pointed out one visiting political figure with initials RS.
And it was asked if anyone believed that no one “No Names but . . ” would sue … so ‘twas implied therefore that it would be dangerous to vote Yes. On the question of community opt out – we heard El Macero (The Mace) can’t opt out. In the interest of full disclosure, we also had a half-hour discussion on CBFR, though we’re not sure if it was the old CBFR or the new CBFR or the modified old CBFR we were talking about. To give you an idea the flavor of this half-hour, go back and read the comments section of every water article in the Davis Vanguard for the last year.
Pro Argument– There are flaws in the existing rate structure, such terrible flaws that they must be rescinded. The Council can’t be trusted to re-adjust the rates (this year, or possible ever) and be equitable. Viva la gente!
Con Argument – Since the City Council already voted to reconfigure the rate plan, looking at structure and equity, this is a “no confidence” vote that opens the door for expensive lawsuits against the city to stop the surface water plan (which we already approved via a vote of the people, must we remind you??). If those lawsuits were successful, and Davis pulls out of the plan, Woodland will have to re-design the system with a small capacity, and Davis will pay for all the change orders (on the redesign). Estimated $25-100 million. Essentially, at this point, if we back out of the water plan, we could pay the same amount in legal fees, re-design fees, increased borrowing rates (if we get downrated for credit) and get no water at all out of it (AKA same bill, no Evian)
Straw Poll Time! Yes- 1 (same jerk who voted against O); No – 16; Und- 1
And remember, with Measure P: Yes means no; no means yes; except not, sort of.
City Council – These People Rule! . . . . . . . . . . the city
Daniel Parrella – He’s new on scene, he’s 23, he grew up in Davis. His father is a professor at UCD. Daniel owns his own solar business. He went to UCSB and got to thinking Davis was a nice place after all. Leaving Davis made him appreciate the place. As a business owner, he has some fiscal conservatism. He’s either yes or no on P, different folks heard different strokes (leaning as a group towards No P – isn’t it great how we decide a candidate’s position for them?); he’s a fresh voice with the college-age crowd. The cons are his inexperience, with no commissions or such usual stair steps to Council.
John Munn – He’s a soil scientist; his mission is to keep the city budget balanced and to keep Davis affordable and keep costs down. He opposes O and supports P. No new taxes! He was on the school board and kept the budget in line – those present said he’s reasonable & measured. He’s Republican. His key issues are the fiscal situation, and the fiscal situation, and the fiscal situation.
Sheila Allen – On school board for multiple terms. She was a public health nurse, and believes in fostering partnerships. She is part of the healthy aging alliance. There is concern about the Nancy Peterson THING, perceived as conflict of interest as it relates to the misuse of power. She is much endorsed and well connected. She’s for O and against P.
Rochelle Swanson – She was in the room for awhile. Her husband owns Our House & The Graduate. She’s a telecommunications lawyer and often works from home. On the Council she’s the fire behind Economic Development, bringing in an innovation park and other business to Davis especially research based businesses, for the purpose of local jobs and City revenue. She’s for O and against P.
Robb Davis – He was around the room early on. He has a background in public health and has done such work internationally. He’s a bicycle advocate on the commission, works with the homeless community and community meals; helped establish a neighborhood court and restorative justice. He’s for O and against P. He believes he has strength in working in groups. He says he will gather community input from more citizens from a broad outreach to talk issues out. He was also on the Downtown Parking Task Force.
So we were all confused, but finally came to understand we vote for two and Wolk stays on the Council as mayor. IF he wins the Assembly seat, after six months the Council chooses his replacement, kinda like how he himself was chosen.
DISCUSSION ENSUED
Sheila Allen – One person liked that she opposes leaf blowers.
Munn – He seems to be really only concerned with financial stuff, is he a one trick pony?
Parrella – Everyone seemed impressed with him; he plans to walk every precinct. Everyone agreed he probably won’t win this time, but probably will next time, or the time after that. He’s the only candidate who rang several people’s bells. One person said they were “blown away” by Parella after talking to him, hopefully not by a leaf blower. He has a mind for policy.
Sheila – One was concerned of her talk to pay City employees more when the budget is balanced, because, like, when would this day come?
Rochelle – Everyone likes Rochelle. People would like to keep her on to keep the business park momentum going and to keep up the foundation on relationship building.
STRAW POLL
Munn – 0
Parella – 2
Davis -15 (unanimous for Robb!)
Allen – 0
Rochelle – 11
PROPOSITIONS
We asked if anyone knew anything about either of the propositions. #Dead uncomfortable silence#
Prop. 41 – It’s about vet housing & homelessness prevention and affordable housing for veterans. Who can say anything against veterans? Certainly not politicians . . . who voted 100% for it because: you can’t appear to hate veterans. This proposition redirects existing unspent funds: $600 million that didn’t get spent, so it needs to be re-allocated; Gary Wesley wrote the rebuttal, but he’s a professional rebutter, so this means tiny tiny. On person commented that the loans are unspent because the rate of return is too low since the housing crisis. It was placed on ballot by the legislature. One person said anytime something like this appears on the ballot via the legislature, it is just symptomatic of something the legislature did not itself want to pass and its better to just vote no and force the legislature to do its job.
Straw Poll! Yes – 9; No – 1; Undies – 4;
Prop. 42 – It’s about public record act compliance by local agencies and California local public records and the Brown Act. It’s about state taxpayers not paying for what local governments provide on their own. Or, it’s about trying to make an unfunded mandate by having local governments have to comply to state law but the state will not reimburse the locals. It is very expensive for small towns, but can/will the state pay? Important to have openness, but some cities are hurting, and one lawyer can come in and cost a city $100,000’s for purely political reasons such as the source material for the PAC mailings in the Assembly Race. Government must be open but it’s two-edged sword.
Triple Tie Straw Poll! Yes – 6; No – 6; Undec – 6
ASSEMBLY
Joe Krovoza showed up, so he got to make a statement. (Why didn’t Robb or Rochelle? Not sure, we guess it’s because they didn’t ask.) – Joe used to do water law, now he does transportation efficacy programs. His two daughters went off to college, so in 2009 he ran for Council. Somewhere the Black Bear sculpture in front of the diner influenced him. He did well and is now the longest running mayor in Davis history at 3.5 years. He says he has created an atmosphere of openness and respect in discussions and he doesn’t vote by sticking his finer in the air (hopefully not by sticking his finger anywhere else either). He spearheaded reorganization of labor contracts and normalizing health care liabilities and pension costs. He believes in and is proud of his work on the water project, work with the campus, Davis roots, the Innovation Task Force, working with campus on the enormous Nishi project. Why run for assembly – why? To bring policy issues of Davis forward – open space – Mace Curve . He raised a lot of money and is at a “legit” 750 donors, and is endorsed by five newspapers.
What’s a newspaper?
Group discussion after Krovoza bowed out of the room:
Some said Krovoza is hard-headed and a good decision maker.
Dan Wolk – well liked, everyone knows he has a future in politics regardless, some seemed to think this was not yet his time. Dan Wolk, being young, could benefit from being mayor, and like Parrella, maybe is not ready for prime time.
Proish Cons on Krovoza from one of our crowd – he’s got humor and is smooth, even slick; a bit too political, he has instinct and lust for power; he moves rapidly and is a consummate fund raiser. There were concerns about development, external relations and connections. Still, our critic was going to vote for Krovoza, thought Krovoza had “emotional intelligence,” and too much political money. Our critic found politics and money an “unholy alliance,” so perhaps the gripe is Krovoza is “too good” at real politics.
All getting donations; all beholden; at least Joe beholden to more greenish-ish interests.
An Enterprise piece compared and seemed to say that Dan Wolk was more politically motivated and Krovoza was better for the community; or something.
Bill Dodd – He’s a good guy who was attacked by mailers; we don’t know enough real stuff about him. Maybe this will be decided by candidate popularity in the towns they are from.
Nobody cared about the other two: Sorry Charlie; Sorry Dustin.
Straw Poll Time: Krovoza-9; Wolk – 0; Und-1
THE MEETING STARTS to BREAK DOWN
At four hours, minds froze and the sheep were calling. We hadn’t got much out of the city and county and into the State. Duty calls, but with no soldiers there is no war . . . or something. Janel, Andrew, Rakesh, Glenn, Neel, Tim, Bo, Akinyemi, Richard, Robert, Cindy, Joe, Luis, Alma, Edmund, Write-In, David, Amos, Gavin, Ron, Jena, Alan, George, Eric, Alex, Pete, Jeffrey, Roy, Dan, Leland (well, not Leland), Derek, David, Write-In, John, David, Ashley, Betty, Laura, Tammy, Write-In, Ellen, Greg, John, Write-In, Kamala, John, Jonathan, Ronald, Phil, David, Orly, Write-In, Nathalie, David, Ted, Write-In: OUR SINCERE APOLOGIES, we’ll get to you next time you run for office, promise. And if you’ve never heard most of these names before, join the rest of us . . . and if you’ve literally never heard of anyone with these first names ever . . . yeah, us too. It’s important to be paid a decent Orly wage, with marbles in your mouth.
But wait, a small spark of life and a rally on state office discussions, and delirium . . .
GUVNU
A spark of flame of fire erupted for just a moment, and a discussion of Guvna ensued. One person had worked with Brown calling him the “Plain Brown Wrapper” i.e. “what you see is what you get.” Said Brown has integrity and is courageous, that he stopped California having nuclear power plants up and down the coast. Also admitted he was talking about the “Old Brown,” that ironically is the “Young Brown,” as opposed to the “New Brown,” who is old.
Another participant said he wouldn’t vote for Brown if he was the last man on Earth, which makes no sense because if he was the last man on Earth there would be no one to vote for him, so the rant was modified to the last candidate on the ballot. Criticism was heaped about the costly high speed rail and delta water tunnel projects that had the state focused on unfunded, unproven and unbuildable projects that may not see the light of day for decades if ever, while ignoring less expensive solutions to both travel and water issues that could be implemented in the next few years.
The rant continued to skewer Tim Donnelly for making racist statements against his opponent Neil Kashkari, accusing NK of trying to bring Sharia Law to America. This was a blatant attempt to make stupid people think Kashkari, having dark skin and a non-Anglo name, was by implication Muslim and by implication a terrorist . . . or something as seen through the filter of stupid people logic, and we guess he thinks there are so many stupid people this tactic will get him elected? Totally brainless attempt as Kashkari is Hindu. And it is better to carry cash rather than those stupid debit cards.
The straw poll was pretty useless at this point since the group had basically broken down to two guys fighting with butter knives, another participant, and a couple of people cleaning up burrito fixin’s in the kitchen, but we imagine the straw poll would have been: Brown –4, Kashkari -1.
No one knew Jack Bauer about the other candidates running for GUV.
TREASURER
Ellen Brown: She started the Public Baking Institute; we immediately got hungry for scones.
Someone corrected us, it was the Public Banking Institute. She was apparently big in banking reform right after the financial crises in 2008. Is this a good thing, or a bad thing? No opinions, no straw poll.
CONTROLLER
#sleep# #awaken# . . . . . . move public AGENDA— #sleep# . . .
Superintendent of Public Education
One person in the room really wanted to talk about the Superintendent of Public Education. Yes they did . . . #whistle#
The knights arrived at the cave and found scrawled upon the wall:
“He who is valiant will find the Holy Grail in the Castle of Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaargh!”
Adjourn 10:01pm: another burrito was consumed.
Go forward with incomplete and irreverent information and vote!
CHEESE!
