From Jeff Simons of Watermelon Music:
As a successful downtown retailer and active participant in the Davis Downtown, I hope to give you another perspective on the organization’s upcoming renewal.
If the goal of the DDBA’s marketing and promotional campaigns has been to get people downtown, there should be no question about whether or not they’ve been a success. Events like the Art About, the Holiday Tree Lighting Ceremony, the Treat Trail/Dia de los Muertos, and Fall Welcome bring more people downtown than downtown can handle. The fact that the existing infrastructure has difficulty handling the enormous public response to these events is not the fault of the Davis Downtown.
I believe that any downtown property or business owner benefits from a lively, active and vibrant downtown. Watermelon Music operated stores here and in downtown Woodland, and I will take the chronic traffic, parking difficulties and gatherings of “loiterers and panhandlers” here over the vacant storefronts and vast empty lots of Main Street any day. I believe that the ongoing efforts of the Davis Downtown are at least partially responsible for the difference between our two downtowns.
Meetings are held on consistent days and open to the public. Staff members are available to help and answer questions most times during the week despite having their own downtown businesses to run. Accounting for the group is handled professionally and all income and expenses are transparent and available for review. I am glad to have Davis Downtown working on behalf of me and other downtown businesses.
From Chuck Roe:
I just read a letter from several property owners and business owners requesting that you deny our annual DBID renewal.
It is always good to hear ideas and concerns from folks in the downtown community although some of their assertions are incorrect and suggestions short sighted.
The original DDBA was created by those in the downtown who wanted a united voice and realized a need for a unique vision that was distinct from the economic development vision of the City, the Chamber of Commerce or the region. The vision and efforts of the organization have been very successful and the downtown has evolved and prospered with the help of the assessment district. The downtown would not be the great place we have now without the DDBA and we need Davis Downtown to lead us as we continue to evolve.
I don’t need to summarize the work of Davis Downtown because I know you are aware of the good it brings. Certainly the signers to the letter have benefited by this work also. The assertion that they get no benefit seems mean spirited and not well thought out.
The idea of additional private security for the downtown in the evenings is justified. I find it disingenuous that the landlords of some of the restaurant/night clubs that may need to provide additional private security believe we should form a new district to fund this cost.
The letter’s idea of new leadership downtown has merit. Luckily we have a vehicle for that with Davis Downtown. There is a clear process leading to membership on the Board of Directors and various committees. There is always a need for additional leadership on this volunteer Board.
The idea of throwing out the old district and forming a new one seems unrealistic.
The mission of Davis Downtown is more than promoting a safe and clean downtown. We need this more holistic approach that can help guide, promote, lobby for and organize our downtown. This was true when the DDBA was formed and remains true.
I understand that forming a new district is much more difficult than when the original was formed. The City attorney could shed light on the issues. In any case the BID renewal should continue until any new district is created since passage of a new district is far from assured.
The City Council has begun the work of changing the late night downtown culture. Denying the DBID for Davis Downtown would only add confusion and loss of focus toward these ends.
Many of the ideas for the new assessment district sound similar to the P Bid idea floated by City Manager Pinkerton and rejected by some of the same folks now advocating to deny the DBID. Now they want to begin the contentious and difficult process of forming a new district. I don’t get it.
We have downtown issues that need all of our attention. Davis Downtown is set up to help in this effort and has been very successful in helping create our current successful downtown. We not only have problems but we also have much to celebrate with a downtown that is envied by the entire region. Let’s keep the good in place and approve the DBID renewal.
Jeff Simons: “Meetings are held on consistent days and open to the public.”
Chuck Roe: “I don’t get it.”
DDBA meetings may be on consistent days and open to the public, but it appears some members feel as if their concerns are not being heard or that the leadership is non responsive. It would seem to me the DDBA would be wise to find out what those concerns are and try and address them.
“but it appears some members feel as if their concerns are not being heard or that the leadership is non responsive”
i think you’re misreading what is happening. five or six people out of 720 signed that letter. this is about politics, not about process.
And how do you know this? That it is about politics and not process? Not what I have heard…
i don’t “know” it, it’s my opinion based on my knowledge of the situation and the people involved. i think the people involved want to be more in control rather than objecting to some sort of unfair process.
Not what I have heard.
Downtown Davis? No one goes there anymore. It’s too crowded.
Your point is stuck in an endless loop of no meaning.
Better to say that the downtown is crowded with young people that spend money and it keeps away the old people that don’t spend money.
And higher rents from our low supply of retail locations result in fewer types of businesses that the old folks like.
Actually, he was quoting Yogi Berra.
Yogi Berra quoted about Davis? Cool! I did not know that.
#groan#
No. Quoting involves putting the statement in quotes (double quotes as above) and citing the source. What he was doing was stealing from Yogi Berra in the hopes of sounding witty. He failed.
Mr. West, what I did was paraphrase. What you did is be a dick about it; in that lies true failure. I do give you much credit for doing it a real name; in that lies true character.
Mr. Miller:
I was responding to Don’s misstatement, not your original comment, but it matters not whether you are quoting or paraphrasing, you still must cite your source or you are guilty of plagiarism.
My snarky comment regarding your wit was not necessary, and for that I apologize.
Glad we got this all sorted out. The estate of Yogi Berra will not be suing Alan Miller for plagiarism, we know that he (Berra, not Alan Miller) was referring to a restaurant somewhere else and not in Davis, and we have learned once again that jokes aren’t nearly as funny once you have to explain them.
🙂
It’s hard to get a good conversation going on this site, everyone talks too much.
Michelle, I do believe you get the “Vanguard Comment of the Year” award for that one! Thanks for making my day.
Totally. The DDBA dues are de minimus (to the businesses that signed the letter), and the DDBA programs are largely inconsequential.
The real problem is that the organization has been politicized and is controlled by individuals that have used it as a power base for their own agendas. As a consequence, it has been a constant source of irritation to some business owners.
Get rid of the President, limit Board Members to a single term, eliminate the Downtown Visioning Committee, and depoliticize the organization. Do these things and maybe the DDBA can heal itself. Sadly, I think the letter from Anderson, Reubner, Youmans, Chen, Yackzan, Maggiora, and Taormino has the right approach – take it behind the barn and shoot it.
It’s only political if it’s not your agenda.
Did Yogi say that too?
Miller said it.
(paraphrasing himself)
I’m not convinced that the formation of the Improvement District was a good idea in the first place, but I know with certainty that it would not have been approved without the explicit support of the lead author of yesterday’s letter. The same is true for the Association and the bylaws under which it operates, neither would have been approved without the support of the largest downtown retailer. What has happened here is that the organization has evolved with the times such that the agenda now reflects the needs of the many and is no longer reflective of the demands of the one. From my perspective that means the organization has finally grown up and is worthy of respect.
Process could play a part in all this, from what I have heard. Process and politics tend to be inextricably intertwined.
I think the DDBA in general, and the busy downtown, add a lot of value to downtown real estate. Be careful of too many changes too fast.
This concerns me if this is the real end-goal.
A quick calculation for perspective’s sake:
7 members of 720 members = .97% of membership. Most organizations would only dream of such a statistic of disagreement.
What we don’t know is if the 7 are just the tip of the iceberg…
That’s a good point Anon. I wouldn’t take any significant action w/o finding out the answer to that question first.