By David M. Greenwald
Executive Editor
One of my enduring frustrations in recent years has been the anti-student mentality that emerges during land use disputes. If you live in a college town, and enjoy the benefits of living in that college town, you have to understand that students are part of that town.
I was reading a piece on Substack by Darrell Owens and he made some interesting points.
“The University of California bears partial responsibility from an administrative perspective. The UC has used precious public dollars on adding more administrative positions rather than more faculty for the classes,” he writes.
But Owens also notes that a huge part of the problem falls on the state. He notes, “California’s population growth continued massively these last five decades and people have demanded that UC expand enrollment. Yet California built 23 prisons since the 1960s and only 1 new UC and 3 new California State Universities (CSU).”
In fact, California’s population has pretty much doubled since 1970.
Owens also points out “the group who so far is successfully obstructing UC Berkeley’s enrollment is not called ‘Build More Classrooms and Housing.’ They’re called Save Berkeley Neighborhoods because their issue is that student growth is annoying to affluent homeowners who chose to buy their houses right beside a college campus.”
He also points out that the plaintiffs themselves are UC alumni (just as many of the opponents of student housing in Davis have been).
Owens notes: “It’s not just Berkeley either, the hatred for students is in Santa Cruz, Davis, Irvine, and Riverside. It’s very common to hear at City Council meetings students spoken of like they’re not true residents.
“Guess what, students pay sales taxes, they pay rent which pays property taxes, they are registered to vote here and they sleep here so they are residents — whether you like it or not.”
Owens explains, “The homeowner groups are increasingly aware of the apparent perception that they’re just merely just NIMBYs who are selfish. So they obfuscate by noting that the housing shortage (which is decades old at this point) is amplified by an ever growing influx of students without sufficient dorms. But the very same plaintiffs of this lawsuit against UC Berkeley fought against UC Berkeley housing projects and against upzoning for more housing.”
Owens is spot on that this is not limited to Berkeley either, and we certainly see this a lot in places like Davis. In fact, I flashed back to the debate over University Commons. While I believe that overall the impact on the neighborhood will be a lot less than most people feared at the time, I can see legitimate concerns about height and density of the proposed project, even with the council taking clear steps to mitigate some of it.
Still, what concerned me in July 2020 was the depth of the anti-student sentiments expressed by many people. After all, if across the street from the university is not the place for student housing, not sure where it is—even if you want to quibble over size and scale of the project (which again is legitimate).
It is not just me points out this concern. Molly Mermin created a video and submitted a guest piece in the Vanguard as well.
Guest Commentary: Troubling Anti-Student Rhetoric in University Commons Debate
“If built, University Commons would help decrease traffic in the city, not increase it. Additionally, the University Mall is badly in need of redevelopment, with many of the storefronts empty even before the current recession. A mixed-use development would revitalize the retail portion of the mall, while providing housing where it is needed most,” Mermin wrote.
She continued, “Many residents of Davis from all stripes seemed to recognize this at the City Council meeting. Students, business owners, renters, homeowners, and neighbors all spoke in favor of the project. I was encouraged to see that comments were 2:1 in favor of the project, but saddened by the reasons a few were against it.”
But on the downside, she said: “Virulent anti-student rhetoric was spewed by far too many in what I thought was a welcoming college town. Commenters repeatedly echoed the misguided sentiments of the planning commission—that this project is for the students and not the community.
“I find it extremely offensive to suggest that students are not part of the community. We live, work, vote, and spend our money here. However, that did not stop commenters from saying the project was “too supportive of students,” or that they did not want to be turned into “a giant dormitory.””
Mermin noted, “One commenter even said that ‘we are inundated in this area with student housing, you’re turning our area into a student ghetto.’”
As Mermin points out, “I think that one should expect to live near students if one lives near campus. Yet, this project isn’t even encroaching on a single-family-housing neighborhood—it is literally surrounded on three of the four sides by apartments and dorms, with the other side being a Rite Aid.”
I have made this point a number of times, people want the benefits of living in a college town—small town, affluent, well-educated, high engagement, but then want to shunt the students to the campus and keep them out of mind and out of sight.
And in fairness, it’s not just Davis. I remember when I was a student at Cal Poly, having grown up in San Luis Obispo, and my friends would say it’s amazing how anti-student this community is when we are the ones brining in money and jobs.
Nothing in modern society empowers and lifts people out of poverty and into the middle class more than a college degree. We live in a community with a world class university, most of us, myself included, would not be here were it not for the university—and yet, we either intentionally or unintentionally treat the next generation of leaders as though they were an annoyance.
“…they are registered to vote here and they sleep here so they are residents — whether you like it or not.”
Not those who increasingly live on campus. They don’t get to vote in the city or on Measure J votes.
I always had a joke, when I was teaching, about how nice schools are when the students aren’t there.
Should they be able to vote when they don’t live in the city?
I don’t know the solution but it does create an asymmetry that the last one in proverbially if not literally locks the door
The solution to what? UC Davis is still accepting more students and the campus and the city are creating more student housing.
A solution to all the hurt feelings over the “anti-student rhetoric”.
Apparently “You Live in a College Town” is anti-townie rhetoric for: suck it up and endure the burden of students living in your town. It’s like we have unicorns in town that are environmentally protected.
The last student in locks the door?
I have a question David, is there a point where a university is “literally” full to the brim?
Or should universities always except more students every year despite overflowing capacity?
In general no because universities have expansion capacity. That’s why they create satellite campuses.
Satellite campus, such as UC Merced.
Would it be so terrible if freshman and sophomore years were taught at UC Merced, and specialty students going into ag, medicine, vet, etc. that UC Davis specializes in began in junior year? We are always being being wagged about ‘fear of change’ and ‘adapting to the times’. How about the UC model itself adapts?
Who gets to decide? The people running the system, the people attending classes, or some self-appointed neighbors who have sued?
First of all, UC Merced isn’t a community college. Second, the major programs there aren’t equivalent to anything in ag/plant sciences at UCD. My major program began immediately in freshman year when we made choices about which specialization within biology we would follow.
Why would any aspiring student in the field of ag or plant sciences, for which UC Davis is world-renowned, even consider wasting two years in Merced?
You’re right – that’s what community colleges are for.
To fulfill the requirements required for ANY college degree.
By the way, how many students attend (say UC Davis) for fields that are offered at other universities, as well? (For example, a law or political science degree?)
Which degrees are offered (for example, at UC Merced) which are “duplicated” at other impacted UCs? Not to mention CSU’s? And, how many students are we talking about, who are enrolled in a program (at a particular UC) which is actually offered at multiple universities?
In other words, how many students are attending a particular UC, who don’t actually need to attend THAT UC, let alone for the entire 4 year period?
And if you ALSO include those who could be attending a community college for the first couple of years, how much would that reduce enrollment at so-called “desirable” UCs?
Note that UCD isn’t even considered one of the “three most desirable” UCs in the first place.
Keith and Keith
If you don’t like living in a college town, you’re more than welcome to leave. UCD is why Davis is the attractive place that you want to live for many reasons. If you want to see what a town looks like without UCD, look at Dixon. You’re more than welcome to move to Dixon if you’re not willing to bear the responsibilities that come with the privilege of living here.
As for excluding students from voting in City elections, are you suggesting poll taxes and grandfather clauses? Are you proposing segregation to protect the townies’ privileges? Most of us who own homes and vote here already have our university degrees (disproportionately from a UC). Are we to deny younger citizens the ability to enjoy the economic benefits of a similar educational opportunity?
I’ve written before about the unwritten social compact that we have in this community with the rest of the state. I won’t repeat them here. Our society runs on many unwritten agreements, (although many of late have decided that if it isn’t written down (or even if it is but not enforced) that they can just go about and do what they please without considering impacts on others). Long time residents of Davis (of which I’ve recently achieved) have acknowledged that responsibility. Recognize what you’ve gained here and acknowledge what your role needs to be in perpetuating that.
Where the f**K did I say or even infer that? I hate it when other commenters try to put words in someone else’s mouth. Students or anyone else for that matter not living in the city are not allowed to vote in city elections, it’s the law. UC Davis happens to be outside of city jurisdiction. Should people that live in Woodland or Dixon be allowed to vote in Davis elections? I think not.
Richard, same goes for you. I’ve heard you complain in the past about some policies and issues in Davis, if you don’t like maybe you might quit your complaining and move. People have the right to discuss issues and policies no matter where they live, it doesn’t mean they don’t like living there nor does it mean they have to accept every policy as a prerequisite to living there.
Thanks for sparing us.
Thanks daddy, I’ll try to fall in line. LOL
I think they do like living in a college town, and they are also welcome to stay.
This argument is startlingly similar to the classic conservative argument used when liberals complain about America and they say, “Well why don’t you live somewhere else better then?”. I’m surprised you’d steal a conservative national argument, reverse and localize it.
I thought you said they didn’t like living here.
Oh the horror. Now look away.
The responsibilities? . . . such as accepting any crap project that increases the number of rooms? That’s not one of the responsibilities of living here.
I don’t see that anyone said we should exclude students from voting, much less adding to the burden to vote – where did that idea come from? The fact that those living on campus can’t vote is just a technicality because UCD isn’t part of the City.
The same would be true of non-students living on campus. In fact, didn’t someone say they found a way to allow Aggie Villa residents to vote in City elections? Can that same exception be allowed for students? Either way, I’m in favor of students voting in the City, and I’m in favor of Davis annexing UCD and putting their duplicative fire and police departments out of business, students right to vote, and taxes collected by the City.
So roll over and lie on your back and expose your belly, UCD!
Might as well just copy-and-paste the same comment I made the other day (regarding the same, repeated topic):↓
Ron Oertel February 21, 2022 at 10:10 am
Interesting article in CalMatters regarding this issue.
It always comes down to money for these institutions, doesn’t it? (Reminds me of how DJUSD “poaches” students from other communities, so that they don’t have to right-size.) In any case, one might ask if towns like Davis and Berkeley “owe” their respective universities housing for non-resident students in particular, when the universities themselves are collecting full tuition. And in the case of Davis, the university isn’t even part of the town in the first place.
Here’s where will increasingly-occur, due to costs alone:
https://calmatters.org/education/higher-education/2022/02/uc-berkeley-admissions-cuts-prioritize-californians/
ReplyReport comment ↓
Ron Oertel February 21, 2022 at 7:07 pm
It’s for the children, of course.
Also reminds me that DiSC will save the world. Who wouldn’t want that?
Try to tell HCD that student housing is part of the city’s “fair share” RHNA requirement.
Oh – and college enrollment overall is dropping like a rock in California and across the nation.
It’s really unfortunate that David continues to try to drive a wedge between people, on so many issues.
Funny…
People choose to live in Arizona/New Mexico and complain about the heat… a choice they made…
My Dad grew up in State College, PA (home of Penn State)… they literally lived across the street from campus… the State College equivalent of Russell Blvd (College Ave)…
I chose to come back to Davis after attending UCD… no regrets…
For those who have problems with the “Town and Gown” things, you have choices, like you had when you moved here… living in Davis was our choice… not regretted… to use an old mis-quote, “love it or leave it…” … but I have little tolerance for B1tc4Ing about it…
Davisville was a minor stop on the railway before University Farm… UCD and the City are tied at the hip, and have been for over 100 years… if you don’t like that, feel very free to “move on”…
Wow, what is with the YIMBYs today, a second person telling people to move somewhere else, and then below, a quote from the article cited that tells NIMBYs to go home. As I pointed out, a classic conservative tactic when Liberals complain about America — y’know, ‘Love it or leave it’. So strange, so blatant. So progressives are telling liberals to get out of Berkeley and Davis so that more progressives can move in? What a very strange, strange world this has become. I’m staying to watch the shoving begin.
I hadn’t noticed. But the wagging mommy finger of the Davis Vanguard is here to remind me.
The ‘anti-student’ mentality, eh?
Sorry, incapable of understanding. I’m too stupid because I got my degree at You See Dayveeess.
Cheap, cheap, rhetorical trick, DG, and you should be ashamed using it once again. The Motte & Bailey fallacy. Here’s how you did it:
A) College Students need housing and we are short on housing.
B) Developer Proposes a Large Development that has student Housing.
C) Residents express concern or opposition about the development.
D) THEREFORE, these residents are anti-student.
The fact these residents may have an issue with this particular development is deemed irrelevant; instead they are deemed ‘anti-student’ and their concerns dismissed.
Nice try, but I went to UC Davis. Cheap trick. Stop it.
Alan M
If opponents were selective in their opposition and offered feasible alternatives, your point might be valid, but as in Berkeley, the opposition has been uniform, including responses of “just build it somewhere else.” You have been someone unique in your periodic support of projects, but that is not the rule. The number of other commentors here who are not as discerning shows that difference.
Thank you. The fact that my southern view, once sky, is now a five-story, student-oriented apartment complex, is proof that I am as awesome as you claim.
I find students (and blogs) complaining about ‘anti-student sentiments’ just as tiring as residents complaining about too many students. The fact is, most people, I find, especially if they aren’t online where the worst of all of us comes out, are reasonable. It’s just that the extremists are the loudest, and some #ahem!# feel the need to latch on to the extremists as examples of the opposition to show how unreasonable the opposition is. Happens nationally, happens locally.
From the article that David referenced:
They are home. Berkeley is their home.
You’d think that the housing crisis people would be happy about efforts which would mitigate it. But apparently not.
Is that what they argue? Diversity is now measured in terms of geography (e.g., residency in a different country)?
And here I thought it was because they pay 3 times as much as a resident student. Silly me.
Well, good thing that the governments in those other countries such as China are completely-friendly toward the U.S. (and their own citizens), in regard to the students that UC is educating for them. 🙂
Five comment rule is in effect on this article.
I have never heard anyone express the idea that they don’t like the students or they don’t like having them in town. The most common complaint is about party noise and seasonally about the excesses of Picnic Day. There are complaints about the University and its handling of student housing but not about the students themselves who are simply trying to live in Davis somewhere. And there are definitely some snooty peeps in Berkeley just like here in Davis, but they aren’t a majority. Our city council (who have never shown they are political martyrs) approved University Commons because they understood the snoots aren’t a majority. David, are you just stirring up the trolls for entertainment value?
Hmmm . . . mark the calendar. 02-22-2022: 6:15pm-6:55pm. AM agrees fully with DH comment.
Yes… it is/was called “annexation”… Aggie Villa(ge) is within City limits. Aggie Villa was the moniker of the old quonset buildings (and Greyhound depot, and early beginnings of Davis Waste), and was not part of the City. Davis Commons and Aggie Village were annexed to the City.
Yep, and (as you know) there are students living in UC-owned property off Russell Blvd who also vote in city elections.
Those properties were within the City long before UC acquired them. They were never ‘de-annexed’.
BTW, there is a parcel of land on the UCD campus, that is actually within the City… but non-res…
NW corner of First and A…