As I reflect on the past eight years of service to the community that raised me, I am filled with an overwhelming sense of gratitude. A journey that began in the familiar halls of the very elementary school my children now attend—where I first stood for election as a student council representative—now approaches the end, or at least the closing of a chapter.
Twice, the voters of Davis have entrusted me with the profound responsibility of representing them. It is a duty I have cherished since the moment I took the oath of office—and indeed long before. Growing up, I admired civic leaders like Maynard Skinner and Lois Wolk, who held the office of mayor when my passion for public service first stirred. To have followed in their footsteps, to have served as mayor, and to have walked alongside such remarkable individuals on the City Council humbles me deeply.
My gratitude extends not only to the voters but to my City Council colleagues, whose commitment to consensus, collegiality, and community has been a constant source of inspiration. In a world where political and personal ambitions too often eclipse collaboration, every member of the Davis City Council with whom I’ve served has stood as a testament to integrity. They are stewards of the public trust, driven by their belief in what is best for our community. Their consistent humanity—whether in public sessions or behind closed doors—has always been guided by a fierce love for this town. I am fortunate to have worked alongside them.
Their names are Robb Davis, Rochelle Swanson, Lucas Frerichs, Brett Lee, Gloria Partida, Dan Carson, Josh Chapman, Bapu Vaitla, and Donna Neville. To each of them, I offer my deepest thanks for their wisdom, their compassion, and for teaching me so much about leadership.
We are also blessed by the exceptional professionalism of our city staff, whose dedication sustains the very heartbeat of Davis. From the firefighters and police officers who protect us, to the public works and parks crews who maintain our shared spaces, to the tireless work happening in city hall—I am in awe of their devotion. I am especially grateful to Mike Webb, our City Manager, whose honesty, leadership, and steadfast commitment to our town have been nothing short of exemplary. Nearly his entire career has been dedicated to serving our community, and it has been an honor to work alongside him.
To the thousands of fellow community members with whom I’ve collaborated on projects large and small, I thank you. Each interaction, every shared effort, has enriched me in ways words cannot fully capture. It has been a privilege to serve, to learn from you, and to give my very best to the responsibilities entrusted to me.
There is much I will miss about this chapter of my life. But there are also parts I won’t. The late-night meetings, the hundreds of pages of weekend reading, and, most painfully, the time lost with my family—these are the inevitable sacrifices of public office, but they do not come easily. And yet, it is the personal attacks, the vitriol, and the pervasive negativity that have crept into our political discourse that I will miss the least.
Since 2016, the year I was first elected, there has been a marked shift in the tone and tenor of political communication. While the reasons for this shift are many, its consequences are undeniable. What was once regarded as unacceptable—outlandish rhetoric, personal accusations, unchecked hyperbole—has now gained a troubling foothold. It pulses through our political landscape, sowing division where there should be collaboration, and fostering distrust where unity should prevail. In our inboxes, across social media, in public forums—what I call “community poison” spreads with alarming ease.
In 2024, Measure Q serves as the latest platform for this vitriol. It echoes patterns we’ve seen before. Two years ago, it was a deeply troubling, race-baiting campaign against my colleague Gloria Partida, the first Latina to serve on the Davis City Council, led by some of the same voices now driving opposition to Measure Q. Prior to that, other issues served as the backdrop for the same maelstrom of hyperbole and conspiracy. Regardless of the topic, the common elements remain: accusations replacing alternative ideas, dehumanization of fellow community members, and calculated attempts to sow doubt, distrust, and confusion.
Reasonable people can—and should—disagree on Measure Q. It’s a sales tax proposal, so it carries an economic cost. Alongside the Downtown Business Association, the Democratic Party, and others, I have concluded that the benefits to our community outweigh this cost. But it is entirely reasonable for others to reach a different conclusion, either for themselves, their families, or what they believe to be best for our community as a whole.
What is unreasonable, however, is to once again take our community down the dark path of overblown rhetoric, accusation, and conspiracy theory. It is beneath us, and it is a sad reflection of our times that this tactic has overtaken our discourse. We must demand better of ourselves and of our community. We must reject the politics of division and hold ourselves to a higher standard.
There is, however, reason for hope. The antidote to community poison is as simple as it is profound: the demand for ideas. We must not let rhetoric supplant reason or allow accusations to stand in for alternatives. If someone asks you to support an idea, ask them in turn what its benefits will be. If someone asks you to oppose something, ask them what their alternative solutions are. And if you’re told not to trust someone, ask whom you should trust instead.
By doing so, we may slowly begin to restore our civic discourse to the place it belongs—one marked by respect, reason, and a shared commitment to the common good. It is through the steady pursuit of thoughtful dialogue and meaningful exchange that we can rebuild trust, heal divisions, and remind ourselves that, even in disagreement, we are bound by the same community spirit. The path forward may not always be easy, but it is the only path worthy of Davis and of the future we wish to create.
As this chapter closes, I find myself filled with optimism for our future. Davis is resilient. Our community is defined not by its worst impulses but by its best—by those who labor with integrity, who debate with respect, and who envision a brighter tomorrow. To this community, which has given me so much, I offer my deepest gratitude. And as I move forward from elected office, I carry with me an unshakable belief that, together, we can build a future worthy of our highest aspirations.
I agree with Will’s diagnosis of political cynicism and
Distrust in community with city hall and its decisions—- that manifests itself in black and white hyperbolic rhetoric. Q tax vote is just latest skirmish. Disc 1&2 were other examples.
But his frame here is council and city management are victims, not participants—not designers of the city decision making processes that are causing distrust. Are there not processes that might resulting in brokering compromises among stakeholders?
Will’s frame sadly offers no way forward except more conflict.
BTW, when I was on the Utilities and Natural Resources Commissions, if I came up with a solution where I could get buy in from both Elaine and Alan, I knew it was a winner…
I hope can shift from blame, to a searching for a way to end this self destructive dance.
Probably have to wait until after Q is resolved.
I agree with Alan’s assessment. Until we can be reflective about our roles in the current discourse and acknowledge the legitimacy of the other side’s concerns, we can’t hope to resolve these conflicts.
Will is generally good at being empathetic and looking for middle ground solutions. I hope he takes the issues raised by the opposition to heart. (The question about the status of the audit is but one of several.)
I think Will’s overlooking that the opposition is offering an alternative path, unlike most “no on taxes” opposition who live in a delusional world where government can simply do something for less, or even just do less. But it requires the Council to demand more of its staff in rigor and transparency, and even a change in mindset of the Council towards public participation. The frustration of many has been growing for the last decade, even among past Councilmembers.
He’s also missing that the opposition is made up of both the “usual suspects” and others who have been supportive of tax proposals in the past. Elaine Musser Roberts is hardly a wild firebrand and I could not imagine here allied with Alan Pryor. Andrew Newman, who posted on Nextdoor about his opposition, similarly falls into this category. Rather that focus on the few who have been nettlesome for the Council for some time, he should look at who else is vocal in this coalition. There’s a message there.
Frankly, no other council member has hurled more insults from the dais and done more to contribute to a decline in civility in Davis politics in recent times. He is not alone in causing the rise in incivility, but his missive here is a bad joke. One might point to Dan Carson’s ill advised and FAILED lawsuit against his own constituents, but Arnold actively supported Dan’s efforts. No Arnold really is a stand out and often lead the wolf pack in attacks against Davis residents. Please someone get Will a mirror or a highlight real of all of the times he was a complete d*ck to public commenters during a council meeting.