Ballot Arguments over Village Farms Reveal Deep Divide in Davis over Housing, Growth and Risk

DAVIS, Calif. — The official ballot arguments and rebuttals for Measure V, which would approve the proposed Village Farms Davis development, have now been released, offering voters a detailed preview of one of the most consequential land-use debates the city has faced in decades and revealing the deep divide within the community over housing, growth and environmental risk.

At stake is whether Davis voters will approve the construction of approximately 1,800 housing units on roughly 498 acres on the northern edge of the city in a development known as Village Farms Davis. With a projected 15-year buildout, the proposal would represent the largest residential development ever approved in Davis if voters allow it to proceed.

Supporters frame the project as a long-overdue response to the city’s chronic housing shortage and its ripple effects across the local economy, schools and workforce. 

Opponents warn that the development would bring significant environmental and infrastructure impacts while failing to address the affordability crisis it claims to solve.

The ballot argument supporting Measure V begins by situating the project within Davis’ decades-long pattern of constrained housing growth.

 “It’s been over a generation without family housing approved by voters in Davis,” the argument states. “The consequences are real: young families, teachers and local workers can’t afford to live here, declining enrollment threatens our schools, small businesses struggle, and tens of thousands commute here daily, adding traffic and emissions.”

That framing reflects a central argument made by many housing advocates in Davis in recent years: that strict growth limits and voter approval requirements for peripheral development have contributed to high housing costs and demographic stagnation.

Supporters say Village Farms represents an attempt to address those structural pressures while maintaining Davis’ environmental planning traditions. 

According to the ballot statement, “Measure V approves Village Farms Davis — diverse homes for every income level on a site prioritized for decades.”

Proponents emphasize that the project includes a mix of housing types, including smaller homes and attached units that they argue will help address what planners often call the “missing middle” of the housing market. 

The ballot argument notes, “Seventy percent of market rate homes are attached or on small lots, providing much needed ‘missing-middle’ housing.”

Supporters also highlight the project’s affordable housing component. 

The ballot argument says the development “guarantees a dedication of 16 acres of land and $6 million toward affordable housing, the largest contribution in Davis history.” 

It adds, “Twenty percent of homes are permanently affordable for income-limited households, exceeding city requirements.”

For some supporters, the housing proposal is also closely tied to the future of local schools. Declining enrollment in the Davis Joint Unified School District has forced administrators and the community to confront the possibility of school closures in recent years.

The ballot argument states that “DJUSD estimates Village Farms Davis will attract young families with 1,100+ new students to help enrollment.”

Supporters also point to the project’s open space and environmental design features as evidence that the development aligns with Davis’ long-standing sustainability ethos. According to the ballot argument, “Over half of Village Farms Davis is open space, habitat, agriculture, greenbelts, parks and trails.”

The proposal would include “a central park, needed sports fields, and a permanently conserved 47-acre natural habitat with a permanently funded endowment,” according to the ballot statement.

Supporters further describe the development as a climate-forward community designed to minimize emissions and energy use. The ballot argument says Village Farms would be “a 100% all-electric, solar-powered sustainable community developed by local families with deep Davis roots.”

Opponents, however, present a starkly different picture of the project. 

Their ballot argument against Measure V describes Village Farms as “the largest residential project ever proposed in Davis with many serious impacts.”

Traffic impacts are among the most frequently cited concerns. The ballot argument opposing the measure states that the development would generate “over 15,000 car trips DAILY near Covell Boulevard and Pole Line Road.”

For critics, that figure illustrates the broader problem of approving large peripheral housing developments that rely heavily on automobile travel.

Opponents also argue that the project would do little to solve the city’s affordability crisis because the majority of homes would still be priced well above what many local workers can afford. The ballot argument states that “80% of the project is market rate housing costing $740,000 – $1,300,000 which is not affordable to most local workers and families with young kids.”

The ballot statement also questions the structure of the affordable housing component. According to the argument against Measure V, “Developer isn’t responsible for building the affordable housing, except potentially 100 affordable units (Phase 3).”

Environmental concerns also feature prominently in the opposition’s case. Critics argue that the project site sits near facilities that could pose contamination risks.

The ballot argument warns of “toxics including carcinogenic PFAS ‘forever chemicals’ leaking to Village Farms from the adjacent unlined Old Davis Landfill and Sewage Treatment Plant.”

Opponents also point to flood risks associated with the site. According to the ballot argument, the development area includes a “200-acre floodplain with serious flooding potential.”

Critics further highlight the scale of engineering required to prepare the site for development. The ballot statement says the project would involve moving “ONE MILLION cubic yards (100,000 truckloads) of soil.”

Supporters responded to many of these criticisms in their rebuttal to the argument against Measure V. In that rebuttal, they emphasize the extensive environmental review conducted for the project.

According to the rebuttal, the development’s environmental impact report is “a 5,000+ page analysis that was fully vetted and unanimously certified.”

Supporters also dispute claims about flood risk, arguing that the project has been engineered to meet stringent safety standards. The rebuttal states that Village Farms is “engineered to California’s most rigorous 200-year flood protection standards, more flood-resilient than almost anywhere in Davis.”

The rebuttal also addresses contamination concerns. According to supporters, regulators determined there is “no risk” to future residents.

Supporters further argue that the project’s housing mix will make ownership more attainable for younger families and moderate-income households. The rebuttal notes that “over 70% of market-rate homes will be townhomes, half-plexes, and smaller homes.”

Opponents’ rebuttal to the argument in favor returns to the question of affordability. Their statement argues that the projected home prices mean “most local workers and families with young children CANNOT AFFORD” the housing.

Opponents also argue that the city is not under immediate pressure to approve the project. Their rebuttal states that “Davis has a certified Housing Element until 2030. There is no rush to approve Village Farms now.”

Taken together, the ballot materials illustrate the long-standing tension in Davis politics between two competing priorities: preserving the city’s environmental character and infrastructure limits, and expanding housing supply to accommodate population growth and economic demand.

For supporters of Village Farms, the central risk lies in continuing a pattern of limited housing construction that has pushed younger residents and workers out of the city while straining local schools and businesses.

For opponents, the risk lies in approving a development of unprecedented scale that could introduce environmental hazards, traffic congestion and long-term infrastructure costs without addressing the underlying affordability problem.

As the campaign over Measure V moves forward in the months ahead, Davis voters will ultimately be asked to decide which of those risks they consider greater — the consequences of continued housing scarcity or the impacts associated with approving one of the largest residential developments ever proposed in the city.

Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook.  Subscribe the Vanguard News letters.  To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue.  Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.

Categories:

Tags: