I have recently learned that, without my knowledge or permission, I have been put on an endorsement list for Yes on Measure V (Village Farms). How did this happen? I have actively opposed Measure V (Village Farms) from the beginning because of its many problems even though I am a teacher in Davis concerned about school closures.
(Editor’s note: The information provided to the Vanguard suggests that she might have inadvertently checked the endorsement box, see the image in the comments).
I have spoken in opposition to the Village Farms project due to its many impacts at multiple city and school board meetings, the local Sierra Club group, and to the Davis Teacher’s Association. I have even helped table at the NO booth at the Farmer’s Market, and donated to the No campaign. So, how could my name have possibly been put on an endorsement list? How many other “endorsers” are also unknowingly on this Yes on Measure V list as well?
I have many concerns about Village Farms. The timeframe for housing won’t help enrollment in time because of delays to fill in the huge floodplain. Enrollment would likely be lower than stated because the housing would be too expensive for young families with kids and the lack of missing middle housing or guaranteed affordable housing is inconsistent with our housing needs. The developers have spent over $784,000, framing the project with enticing ads and exaggerated or vague promises that don’t match the actual plan we are voting on, which is described in the Baseline Project Features in our Voter Information Guide. While the developers have donated about $500,000 to schools, isn’t it a serious conflict of interest for the district to now say they’ll close a school if we don’t vote for the developer’s project? And manipulative to pressure voters this way?
The Davisite article of May 8 shows a lack of transparency by the School District that has yet to be explained. (https://davisite.org/2026/05/08/lack-of-transparency-in-the-relationship-between-djusd-and-village-farms-developer/) The promise of a conservation easement to protect the vernal pool’s endangered species is not in the Baseline Project Features. I have great concerns about the carcinogenic PFAS (“forever chemicals”) leaking to Village Farms from the adjacent old Davis landfill/burn dump and sewage treatment plant. I have many more concerns, as well.
We don’t need Measure V because:
-The district has multiple options, including reprioritizing funds, which it has not discussed adequately.
-We can vote for the Willowgrove housing development of 1,250 housing units in November. With more detailed plans already in place for design, sustainability, and affordability, it promises to be shovel ready if approved without the Village Farms problems.
-In addition, over 1,400 housing units are also being built or approved awaiting permitting.
-If we vote no on V, the developer can resubmit an improved plan quickly by incorporating existing work. (A plan below Channel A avoids the current problems while still providing about 900 housing units.)
Regardless of how long the developer families have lived in Davis or how much they’ve donated, I don’t feel that it’s ethical for us to support this process, or a project that risks the health of families (PFAS chemicals) and environmental protections while failing to address affordability. We have much better alternatives to support our schools. Please join me in voting NO on V.
Rena Nayyar is a Davis resident.
Disclaimer: Opinions are those of the writer and do not reflect those of The Vanguard or its Editorial Staff. The Vanguard does not endorse political candidates and is committed to publishing all public opinions and maintaining an open forum subject to guidelines related to decency and tone, not content.
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.
I called the Yes campaign about this and they have a sign-in form at their events where Rena clearly and undeniably checked the “Endorse” box by her sign-in name – perhaps by accident. But I saw her at that event myself. The Yes campaign stated they will revove her name from the list and apologized for any misunderstanding.
This was sent to me, clearly she filled it out, but clearly that wasn’t her intent.
Is that her signature?
Have they sent you one for the erroneous listing of Jim Provenza?
That’s an even stranger story
This is a statement just received from Jim Provenza: “I have received calls from Davis residents stating that they have seen my name and/or photo on a communication endorsing Measure V. This is to clarify that I have not endorsed Measure V. I was never approached by the YES on V campaign and never gave my permission to be listed as an endorser.”
If the developers build below Channel A at the same density as Willowgrove is proposing, Village Farms can still deliver close to 1800 home. This is consistent with the Environmentally Preferred Alternative #4 that was set aside by the City Council.
Seems like endorsements should be verified prior to electronic or printed publication.
Donna Provenza has now posted on Nextdoor that her husband, former County Supervisor Jim Provenza was listed as a supporter when he does not support the project and never was approached about doing so:
Donna Provenza
Carmelo
Well I can unequivocally tell you Alan Pryor that my husband, former County Supervisor Jim Provenza, did not ever endorse Measure V. Imagine our surprise when someone informed us his name appeared on your list of endorsers. He has never been approached in any way about his views on Village Farms. In fact we actively oppose it. It’s pretty bad when you place someone’s name on your endorser list without their approval.
Two mistakes, one with an endorsement card, does not represent a pattern, but does warrant an apology.