Councilmember Don Saylor spends more city money than the rest of his colleagues combined
The Vanguard made a public records act request for the city to disclose all reimbursements to Davis City Councilmembers for 2004 until the present. The findings here are interesting, but please do not read too much into them.
Nevertheless, the findings here are more interesting than one might first think.
However, one councilmember spent more than the other four combined and nearly four times more than the next closest councilmember. That was Councilmember Don Saylor.
The vast majority of those expenditures are for attending league of California City Meetings. In fact, that is the majority of everyone’s expenditures.
However there are a few of Councilmember Saylor’s non-travel expenditures:
- In 2004, $378 for Reimbursement for Comcast Interviews
- In 2005, $100 for DHS Jazz Group Fee
- In 2005, $150 for Music for Oeste Manor
- In 2007, roughly $150 for three expenditures for T-Shirts with the City Logo
The other interesting finding was the spending of Councilmember Lamar Heystek. Remember Councilmember Heystek was elected in 2006, and so his figures are a two-year total and yet, he is just behind Mayor Asmundson with just over $1500 in expenditures.
If you look down his list, you see a number of payments for what appears to be his internet service–either DSL or later on, Comcast. I inquired at the city and they informed me that paying for internet is one of the few perks provided to city council members, however, only Lamar Heystek had taken advantage of that offer. And it makes sense given his personal financial situation.
I asked Councilmember Heystek about it on the record.
“Thanks for asking. I’m glad you’re looking into councilmembers’ expenses. The Internet is the main way I connect with City staff and constituents. I also use my personal cell phone (not my City-issued Blackberry); however, the City does not cover any of my telephone costs.”
The expenditures for internet run roughly at $42 per month for a total of about $900.
Again, we are talking about a total $10,406.92 so it is difficult to draw much in the way of conclusion other than perhaps one councilmember has traveled much more on public expense than the other four combined. I am not sure there is much to be concerned about (not everything we report on has to be a major scandal); however, I did find it interesting to look at.
The Vanguard has been reporting on public records this week relating to expenditures and fiscal policy, stay tuned to future installments.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
If you want a good shot at a real story, audit the City Attorney’s invoices. They are public records.
And compare those against estimates for using in-house counsel. The City General Counsel would be solely responsible to the City.
If you want a good shot at a real story, audit the City Attorney’s invoices. They are public records.
And compare those against estimates for using in-house counsel. The City General Counsel would be solely responsible to the City.
If you want a good shot at a real story, audit the City Attorney’s invoices. They are public records.
And compare those against estimates for using in-house counsel. The City General Counsel would be solely responsible to the City.
If you want a good shot at a real story, audit the City Attorney’s invoices. They are public records.
And compare those against estimates for using in-house counsel. The City General Counsel would be solely responsible to the City.
Regarding the “Reimbursement for Comcast Interviews”:
In 2004, the city was involved in high-stakes franchise negotiations with Comcast. Comcast was spreading largesse through the community, and was offering free cable “air” time — in the form of friendly interviews by Comcast PR staff — to area politicians.
Ethics (and possibly campaign finance law) would regard these friendly interviews as political contributions.
As far as I know, Saylor was the only one who accepted the contribution, and I believe he took some heat for it. Is it possible that he used city funds to reimburse Comcast so that he wouldn’t have to report the in-kind contribution? Hopefully, Council Member Saylor will clear this up and show us that this is not what happened.
Regarding the “Reimbursement for Comcast Interviews”:
In 2004, the city was involved in high-stakes franchise negotiations with Comcast. Comcast was spreading largesse through the community, and was offering free cable “air” time — in the form of friendly interviews by Comcast PR staff — to area politicians.
Ethics (and possibly campaign finance law) would regard these friendly interviews as political contributions.
As far as I know, Saylor was the only one who accepted the contribution, and I believe he took some heat for it. Is it possible that he used city funds to reimburse Comcast so that he wouldn’t have to report the in-kind contribution? Hopefully, Council Member Saylor will clear this up and show us that this is not what happened.
Regarding the “Reimbursement for Comcast Interviews”:
In 2004, the city was involved in high-stakes franchise negotiations with Comcast. Comcast was spreading largesse through the community, and was offering free cable “air” time — in the form of friendly interviews by Comcast PR staff — to area politicians.
Ethics (and possibly campaign finance law) would regard these friendly interviews as political contributions.
As far as I know, Saylor was the only one who accepted the contribution, and I believe he took some heat for it. Is it possible that he used city funds to reimburse Comcast so that he wouldn’t have to report the in-kind contribution? Hopefully, Council Member Saylor will clear this up and show us that this is not what happened.
Regarding the “Reimbursement for Comcast Interviews”:
In 2004, the city was involved in high-stakes franchise negotiations with Comcast. Comcast was spreading largesse through the community, and was offering free cable “air” time — in the form of friendly interviews by Comcast PR staff — to area politicians.
Ethics (and possibly campaign finance law) would regard these friendly interviews as political contributions.
As far as I know, Saylor was the only one who accepted the contribution, and I believe he took some heat for it. Is it possible that he used city funds to reimburse Comcast so that he wouldn’t have to report the in-kind contribution? Hopefully, Council Member Saylor will clear this up and show us that this is not what happened.
City Council members essentially become full time employees of the City. Much of the work is done by email and phone. There is travel to and from meetings in and out of town, official and “unofficial” (meeting with neighbors over a specific issue). The out of pocket costs can be substantial. The hours spent servicing the community are unpaid. Only attendance at city council meetings are paid.
You could look at the reimbursements as the small cost the City pays for these “employees” to run an office. A DSL internet connection for a City Council member so he can do City business in the evening after he gets home for work is reasonable. Reimbursement for trips to League meetings and other conferences to represent our city would be reasonable as well.
The Comcast interviews – that sounds fishy. I would need more information about that.
Nevertheless, $10,000 over 4 years for 5 people doesn’t seem out of line.
As an aside – Mike Harrington’s response just tries to divert attention to another issue and is unhelpful.
City Council members essentially become full time employees of the City. Much of the work is done by email and phone. There is travel to and from meetings in and out of town, official and “unofficial” (meeting with neighbors over a specific issue). The out of pocket costs can be substantial. The hours spent servicing the community are unpaid. Only attendance at city council meetings are paid.
You could look at the reimbursements as the small cost the City pays for these “employees” to run an office. A DSL internet connection for a City Council member so he can do City business in the evening after he gets home for work is reasonable. Reimbursement for trips to League meetings and other conferences to represent our city would be reasonable as well.
The Comcast interviews – that sounds fishy. I would need more information about that.
Nevertheless, $10,000 over 4 years for 5 people doesn’t seem out of line.
As an aside – Mike Harrington’s response just tries to divert attention to another issue and is unhelpful.
City Council members essentially become full time employees of the City. Much of the work is done by email and phone. There is travel to and from meetings in and out of town, official and “unofficial” (meeting with neighbors over a specific issue). The out of pocket costs can be substantial. The hours spent servicing the community are unpaid. Only attendance at city council meetings are paid.
You could look at the reimbursements as the small cost the City pays for these “employees” to run an office. A DSL internet connection for a City Council member so he can do City business in the evening after he gets home for work is reasonable. Reimbursement for trips to League meetings and other conferences to represent our city would be reasonable as well.
The Comcast interviews – that sounds fishy. I would need more information about that.
Nevertheless, $10,000 over 4 years for 5 people doesn’t seem out of line.
As an aside – Mike Harrington’s response just tries to divert attention to another issue and is unhelpful.
City Council members essentially become full time employees of the City. Much of the work is done by email and phone. There is travel to and from meetings in and out of town, official and “unofficial” (meeting with neighbors over a specific issue). The out of pocket costs can be substantial. The hours spent servicing the community are unpaid. Only attendance at city council meetings are paid.
You could look at the reimbursements as the small cost the City pays for these “employees” to run an office. A DSL internet connection for a City Council member so he can do City business in the evening after he gets home for work is reasonable. Reimbursement for trips to League meetings and other conferences to represent our city would be reasonable as well.
The Comcast interviews – that sounds fishy. I would need more information about that.
Nevertheless, $10,000 over 4 years for 5 people doesn’t seem out of line.
As an aside – Mike Harrington’s response just tries to divert attention to another issue and is unhelpful.
yawn
yawn
yawn
yawn
We’re talking an average of $500 per council member per year in reimbursable expenses.
I agree this is a yawn.
We’re talking an average of $500 per council member per year in reimbursable expenses.
I agree this is a yawn.
We’re talking an average of $500 per council member per year in reimbursable expenses.
I agree this is a yawn.
We’re talking an average of $500 per council member per year in reimbursable expenses.
I agree this is a yawn.
I guess my question is–do you want to know stuff like this only when it’s exciting? Or do you want know stuff, just to see what your public officials are doing with public money? I didn’t think it was completely boring, but I didn’t think it was mindblowing either–in fact I said as much.
I guess my question is–do you want to know stuff like this only when it’s exciting? Or do you want know stuff, just to see what your public officials are doing with public money? I didn’t think it was completely boring, but I didn’t think it was mindblowing either–in fact I said as much.
I guess my question is–do you want to know stuff like this only when it’s exciting? Or do you want know stuff, just to see what your public officials are doing with public money? I didn’t think it was completely boring, but I didn’t think it was mindblowing either–in fact I said as much.
I guess my question is–do you want to know stuff like this only when it’s exciting? Or do you want know stuff, just to see what your public officials are doing with public money? I didn’t think it was completely boring, but I didn’t think it was mindblowing either–in fact I said as much.
yawn, Only when its important. The mundane business of government isn’t interesting.
yawn, Only when its important. The mundane business of government isn’t interesting.
yawn, Only when its important. The mundane business of government isn’t interesting.
yawn, Only when its important. The mundane business of government isn’t interesting.
zzzzzzz
zzzzzzz
zzzzzzz
zzzzzzz
DPD:
Ignore the yawners. Though this is not exactly a scandal, I found it very interesting. I was not aware that the city (or actually we, the tax payers) remimbursed the council for things like travel and internet connections. Please continue to keep us informed on these money issues. This is our money being spent here, and I think we should care about it, no matter how small or innocent it appears.
I also agree with Mike Harrington. Please do look into the idea of using in-house councel vs contracting. Many years ago, we had an in-house attorney, and the city switched to contracting to save money. The idea was why pay an in-house person full-time when contracting case by case would be cheaper. However, it appears that the current contract is basically employing our city attorney as a full time staff person. The contract is very expensive. I would like to see the comparison.
By the way, couldn’t you have published the salaries of staff, at least those higher up? I would like to see what each one earns. I have heard that some earn more than faculty at the University.
DPD:
Ignore the yawners. Though this is not exactly a scandal, I found it very interesting. I was not aware that the city (or actually we, the tax payers) remimbursed the council for things like travel and internet connections. Please continue to keep us informed on these money issues. This is our money being spent here, and I think we should care about it, no matter how small or innocent it appears.
I also agree with Mike Harrington. Please do look into the idea of using in-house councel vs contracting. Many years ago, we had an in-house attorney, and the city switched to contracting to save money. The idea was why pay an in-house person full-time when contracting case by case would be cheaper. However, it appears that the current contract is basically employing our city attorney as a full time staff person. The contract is very expensive. I would like to see the comparison.
By the way, couldn’t you have published the salaries of staff, at least those higher up? I would like to see what each one earns. I have heard that some earn more than faculty at the University.
DPD:
Ignore the yawners. Though this is not exactly a scandal, I found it very interesting. I was not aware that the city (or actually we, the tax payers) remimbursed the council for things like travel and internet connections. Please continue to keep us informed on these money issues. This is our money being spent here, and I think we should care about it, no matter how small or innocent it appears.
I also agree with Mike Harrington. Please do look into the idea of using in-house councel vs contracting. Many years ago, we had an in-house attorney, and the city switched to contracting to save money. The idea was why pay an in-house person full-time when contracting case by case would be cheaper. However, it appears that the current contract is basically employing our city attorney as a full time staff person. The contract is very expensive. I would like to see the comparison.
By the way, couldn’t you have published the salaries of staff, at least those higher up? I would like to see what each one earns. I have heard that some earn more than faculty at the University.
DPD:
Ignore the yawners. Though this is not exactly a scandal, I found it very interesting. I was not aware that the city (or actually we, the tax payers) remimbursed the council for things like travel and internet connections. Please continue to keep us informed on these money issues. This is our money being spent here, and I think we should care about it, no matter how small or innocent it appears.
I also agree with Mike Harrington. Please do look into the idea of using in-house councel vs contracting. Many years ago, we had an in-house attorney, and the city switched to contracting to save money. The idea was why pay an in-house person full-time when contracting case by case would be cheaper. However, it appears that the current contract is basically employing our city attorney as a full time staff person. The contract is very expensive. I would like to see the comparison.
By the way, couldn’t you have published the salaries of staff, at least those higher up? I would like to see what each one earns. I have heard that some earn more than faculty at the University.
Even though the money is not big, I appreciate the story, too…. I was unaware, previously, of what council members were reimbursed for.
If nothing else, this story makes clear that we fortunately don’t have anyone on the council, now, who is getting something like $50,000 a year in reimbursements.
Even though the money is not big, I appreciate the story, too…. I was unaware, previously, of what council members were reimbursed for.
If nothing else, this story makes clear that we fortunately don’t have anyone on the council, now, who is getting something like $50,000 a year in reimbursements.
Even though the money is not big, I appreciate the story, too…. I was unaware, previously, of what council members were reimbursed for.
If nothing else, this story makes clear that we fortunately don’t have anyone on the council, now, who is getting something like $50,000 a year in reimbursements.
Even though the money is not big, I appreciate the story, too…. I was unaware, previously, of what council members were reimbursed for.
If nothing else, this story makes clear that we fortunately don’t have anyone on the council, now, who is getting something like $50,000 a year in reimbursements.
Meanwhile in important news the Davis Enterprise reported the cost for the sewage plant at $206 million and the surface water project at $160 million. The $160million will be shared with Woodland (and I imaginge by the University)so the $500 million number that Sue Greenwald threw out is probably off by $200 million or more. In the article Councilmember Greenwald claims her blow up was worth it because it got peoples attention. It does seem that by overstating the numbers she runs the risk of being the councilmember who cried wolf.
Meanwhile in important news the Davis Enterprise reported the cost for the sewage plant at $206 million and the surface water project at $160 million. The $160million will be shared with Woodland (and I imaginge by the University)so the $500 million number that Sue Greenwald threw out is probably off by $200 million or more. In the article Councilmember Greenwald claims her blow up was worth it because it got peoples attention. It does seem that by overstating the numbers she runs the risk of being the councilmember who cried wolf.
Meanwhile in important news the Davis Enterprise reported the cost for the sewage plant at $206 million and the surface water project at $160 million. The $160million will be shared with Woodland (and I imaginge by the University)so the $500 million number that Sue Greenwald threw out is probably off by $200 million or more. In the article Councilmember Greenwald claims her blow up was worth it because it got peoples attention. It does seem that by overstating the numbers she runs the risk of being the councilmember who cried wolf.
Meanwhile in important news the Davis Enterprise reported the cost for the sewage plant at $206 million and the surface water project at $160 million. The $160million will be shared with Woodland (and I imaginge by the University)so the $500 million number that Sue Greenwald threw out is probably off by $200 million or more. In the article Councilmember Greenwald claims her blow up was worth it because it got peoples attention. It does seem that by overstating the numbers she runs the risk of being the councilmember who cried wolf.
Death Valley Scottie said…
Meanwhile in important news the Davis Enterprise reported the cost for the sewage plant at $206 million and the surface water project at $160 million. The $160million will be shared with Woodland (and I imaginge by the University)so the $500 million number that Sue Greenwald threw out is probably off by $200 million or more. In the article Councilmember Greenwald claims her blow up was worth it because it got peoples attention. It does seem that by overstating the numbers she runs the risk of being the councilmember who cried wolf.
8/6/08 2:35 PM
Given that the Enterprise always gets things accurately, and that public works projects invariably come in at or below the anticipated budget (just look at the Mondavi Center), it would appear that Davis residents have nothing to worry about. The faster this gets approved, and the lesser oversight provided, the better.
–Richard Estes
Death Valley Scottie said…
Meanwhile in important news the Davis Enterprise reported the cost for the sewage plant at $206 million and the surface water project at $160 million. The $160million will be shared with Woodland (and I imaginge by the University)so the $500 million number that Sue Greenwald threw out is probably off by $200 million or more. In the article Councilmember Greenwald claims her blow up was worth it because it got peoples attention. It does seem that by overstating the numbers she runs the risk of being the councilmember who cried wolf.
8/6/08 2:35 PM
Given that the Enterprise always gets things accurately, and that public works projects invariably come in at or below the anticipated budget (just look at the Mondavi Center), it would appear that Davis residents have nothing to worry about. The faster this gets approved, and the lesser oversight provided, the better.
–Richard Estes
Death Valley Scottie said…
Meanwhile in important news the Davis Enterprise reported the cost for the sewage plant at $206 million and the surface water project at $160 million. The $160million will be shared with Woodland (and I imaginge by the University)so the $500 million number that Sue Greenwald threw out is probably off by $200 million or more. In the article Councilmember Greenwald claims her blow up was worth it because it got peoples attention. It does seem that by overstating the numbers she runs the risk of being the councilmember who cried wolf.
8/6/08 2:35 PM
Given that the Enterprise always gets things accurately, and that public works projects invariably come in at or below the anticipated budget (just look at the Mondavi Center), it would appear that Davis residents have nothing to worry about. The faster this gets approved, and the lesser oversight provided, the better.
–Richard Estes
Death Valley Scottie said…
Meanwhile in important news the Davis Enterprise reported the cost for the sewage plant at $206 million and the surface water project at $160 million. The $160million will be shared with Woodland (and I imaginge by the University)so the $500 million number that Sue Greenwald threw out is probably off by $200 million or more. In the article Councilmember Greenwald claims her blow up was worth it because it got peoples attention. It does seem that by overstating the numbers she runs the risk of being the councilmember who cried wolf.
8/6/08 2:35 PM
Given that the Enterprise always gets things accurately, and that public works projects invariably come in at or below the anticipated budget (just look at the Mondavi Center), it would appear that Davis residents have nothing to worry about. The faster this gets approved, and the lesser oversight provided, the better.
–Richard Estes
Anonymous said…
Ignore the yawners. Though this is not exactly a scandal, I found it very interesting. I was not aware that the city (or actually we, the tax payers) remimbursed the council for things like travel and internet connections. Please continue to keep us informed on these money issues. This is our money being spent here, and I think we should care about it, no matter how small or innocent it appears.
I agree; this is interesting in its own right. Also, the more “mundane” reports give context to the more exciting investigations.
Anonymous said…
Ignore the yawners. Though this is not exactly a scandal, I found it very interesting. I was not aware that the city (or actually we, the tax payers) remimbursed the council for things like travel and internet connections. Please continue to keep us informed on these money issues. This is our money being spent here, and I think we should care about it, no matter how small or innocent it appears.
I agree; this is interesting in its own right. Also, the more “mundane” reports give context to the more exciting investigations.
Anonymous said…
Ignore the yawners. Though this is not exactly a scandal, I found it very interesting. I was not aware that the city (or actually we, the tax payers) remimbursed the council for things like travel and internet connections. Please continue to keep us informed on these money issues. This is our money being spent here, and I think we should care about it, no matter how small or innocent it appears.
I agree; this is interesting in its own right. Also, the more “mundane” reports give context to the more exciting investigations.
Anonymous said…
Ignore the yawners. Though this is not exactly a scandal, I found it very interesting. I was not aware that the city (or actually we, the tax payers) remimbursed the council for things like travel and internet connections. Please continue to keep us informed on these money issues. This is our money being spent here, and I think we should care about it, no matter how small or innocent it appears.
I agree; this is interesting in its own right. Also, the more “mundane” reports give context to the more exciting investigations.
If there are any council members reading I would like to know, “when are you going to enforce the City Manager living in the City of Davis requirement?”
It might help to have someone that lives here so that they’re not just trying to bring more big box stores to town.
If there are any council members reading I would like to know, “when are you going to enforce the City Manager living in the City of Davis requirement?”
It might help to have someone that lives here so that they’re not just trying to bring more big box stores to town.
If there are any council members reading I would like to know, “when are you going to enforce the City Manager living in the City of Davis requirement?”
It might help to have someone that lives here so that they’re not just trying to bring more big box stores to town.
If there are any council members reading I would like to know, “when are you going to enforce the City Manager living in the City of Davis requirement?”
It might help to have someone that lives here so that they’re not just trying to bring more big box stores to town.
“If there are any council members reading I would like to know, “when are you going to enforce the City Manager living in the City of Davis requirement?”
Another example of the arrogance of this Council Majority that rivals Bush’s “signing statements” declaring that he does not have to follow law and statute. The Davis city statute stating that our city manager must reside in Davis is clear and unambiguous.
“If there are any council members reading I would like to know, “when are you going to enforce the City Manager living in the City of Davis requirement?”
Another example of the arrogance of this Council Majority that rivals Bush’s “signing statements” declaring that he does not have to follow law and statute. The Davis city statute stating that our city manager must reside in Davis is clear and unambiguous.
“If there are any council members reading I would like to know, “when are you going to enforce the City Manager living in the City of Davis requirement?”
Another example of the arrogance of this Council Majority that rivals Bush’s “signing statements” declaring that he does not have to follow law and statute. The Davis city statute stating that our city manager must reside in Davis is clear and unambiguous.
“If there are any council members reading I would like to know, “when are you going to enforce the City Manager living in the City of Davis requirement?”
Another example of the arrogance of this Council Majority that rivals Bush’s “signing statements” declaring that he does not have to follow law and statute. The Davis city statute stating that our city manager must reside in Davis is clear and unambiguous.
According to the report DPD printed yesterday Emlen doesn’t make enough to live in Davis. LOL
According to the report DPD printed yesterday Emlen doesn’t make enough to live in Davis. LOL
According to the report DPD printed yesterday Emlen doesn’t make enough to live in Davis. LOL
According to the report DPD printed yesterday Emlen doesn’t make enough to live in Davis. LOL
Richard,
$200 million is a big difference even for the boondoggle prone Bush years.
Richard,
$200 million is a big difference even for the boondoggle prone Bush years.
Richard,
$200 million is a big difference even for the boondoggle prone Bush years.
Richard,
$200 million is a big difference even for the boondoggle prone Bush years.
Want to hear a good one? A “senior” commission member was just told by a city staff liaison (with glee) the commissioner was off the commission bc commissioner was moving to just outside the city limits. How come Bill Emlen, the “city manager”, gets to violate the law by living outside the city limits, but a commissioner has the book thrown at them bc of a move to just outside the city limits? This is absolutely outrageous and hypocritical!
Anyone know of other commission members who have not technically lived within city limits, but still served/are serving on a commission? Someone indicated exceptions have been made in the past, but I need to know NAMES. Thanks for any assistance.
Want to hear a good one? A “senior” commission member was just told by a city staff liaison (with glee) the commissioner was off the commission bc commissioner was moving to just outside the city limits. How come Bill Emlen, the “city manager”, gets to violate the law by living outside the city limits, but a commissioner has the book thrown at them bc of a move to just outside the city limits? This is absolutely outrageous and hypocritical!
Anyone know of other commission members who have not technically lived within city limits, but still served/are serving on a commission? Someone indicated exceptions have been made in the past, but I need to know NAMES. Thanks for any assistance.
Want to hear a good one? A “senior” commission member was just told by a city staff liaison (with glee) the commissioner was off the commission bc commissioner was moving to just outside the city limits. How come Bill Emlen, the “city manager”, gets to violate the law by living outside the city limits, but a commissioner has the book thrown at them bc of a move to just outside the city limits? This is absolutely outrageous and hypocritical!
Anyone know of other commission members who have not technically lived within city limits, but still served/are serving on a commission? Someone indicated exceptions have been made in the past, but I need to know NAMES. Thanks for any assistance.
Want to hear a good one? A “senior” commission member was just told by a city staff liaison (with glee) the commissioner was off the commission bc commissioner was moving to just outside the city limits. How come Bill Emlen, the “city manager”, gets to violate the law by living outside the city limits, but a commissioner has the book thrown at them bc of a move to just outside the city limits? This is absolutely outrageous and hypocritical!
Anyone know of other commission members who have not technically lived within city limits, but still served/are serving on a commission? Someone indicated exceptions have been made in the past, but I need to know NAMES. Thanks for any assistance.
What a relief to get the individual expenditure break down. I would have lost my dinner if it was reported that Sir Don was charging for his self promoting coffee clatch’s.
What a relief to get the individual expenditure break down. I would have lost my dinner if it was reported that Sir Don was charging for his self promoting coffee clatch’s.
What a relief to get the individual expenditure break down. I would have lost my dinner if it was reported that Sir Don was charging for his self promoting coffee clatch’s.
What a relief to get the individual expenditure break down. I would have lost my dinner if it was reported that Sir Don was charging for his self promoting coffee clatch’s.
Oh my goodness! Someone moved out of town yet still wanted to exert influence on what happens in Davis but was told that they couldn’t do that. Can you believe it!???
Listen. The commissions are supposed to be citizen advisory commissions with representatives from the City of Davis community. If you move out of town, then you can’t be on a commission anymore, just as you can’t vote in City elections anymore.
The City Manager is a JOB. We hired him knowing that he lives out of town and I think that it would violate some sort of law to discriminate in employment based on where the person resides.
Aren’t there bigger issues out there?
Oh my goodness! Someone moved out of town yet still wanted to exert influence on what happens in Davis but was told that they couldn’t do that. Can you believe it!???
Listen. The commissions are supposed to be citizen advisory commissions with representatives from the City of Davis community. If you move out of town, then you can’t be on a commission anymore, just as you can’t vote in City elections anymore.
The City Manager is a JOB. We hired him knowing that he lives out of town and I think that it would violate some sort of law to discriminate in employment based on where the person resides.
Aren’t there bigger issues out there?
Oh my goodness! Someone moved out of town yet still wanted to exert influence on what happens in Davis but was told that they couldn’t do that. Can you believe it!???
Listen. The commissions are supposed to be citizen advisory commissions with representatives from the City of Davis community. If you move out of town, then you can’t be on a commission anymore, just as you can’t vote in City elections anymore.
The City Manager is a JOB. We hired him knowing that he lives out of town and I think that it would violate some sort of law to discriminate in employment based on where the person resides.
Aren’t there bigger issues out there?
Oh my goodness! Someone moved out of town yet still wanted to exert influence on what happens in Davis but was told that they couldn’t do that. Can you believe it!???
Listen. The commissions are supposed to be citizen advisory commissions with representatives from the City of Davis community. If you move out of town, then you can’t be on a commission anymore, just as you can’t vote in City elections anymore.
The City Manager is a JOB. We hired him knowing that he lives out of town and I think that it would violate some sort of law to discriminate in employment based on where the person resides.
Aren’t there bigger issues out there?
I agree with Mike Harrington, there are enough indications of spending City money on items of questionable value to the taxpayers. There should be an audit of the budget. The audit of the City Attorney should extend back over 5 or 10 years.
I agree with Mike Harrington, there are enough indications of spending City money on items of questionable value to the taxpayers. There should be an audit of the budget. The audit of the City Attorney should extend back over 5 or 10 years.
I agree with Mike Harrington, there are enough indications of spending City money on items of questionable value to the taxpayers. There should be an audit of the budget. The audit of the City Attorney should extend back over 5 or 10 years.
I agree with Mike Harrington, there are enough indications of spending City money on items of questionable value to the taxpayers. There should be an audit of the budget. The audit of the City Attorney should extend back over 5 or 10 years.
“The City Manager is a JOB. We hired him knowing that he lives out of town and I think that it would violate some sort of law to discriminate in employment based on where the person resides.”
The understanding was Emlen would move inside the city limits. It is not fair to look the other way for one person, but not another. We are talking technicality as well. The commissioner still has a Davis address, is just outside city limits technically. Bill Emlen lives in Vacaville for heaven’s sake!
“The City Manager is a JOB. We hired him knowing that he lives out of town and I think that it would violate some sort of law to discriminate in employment based on where the person resides.”
The understanding was Emlen would move inside the city limits. It is not fair to look the other way for one person, but not another. We are talking technicality as well. The commissioner still has a Davis address, is just outside city limits technically. Bill Emlen lives in Vacaville for heaven’s sake!
“The City Manager is a JOB. We hired him knowing that he lives out of town and I think that it would violate some sort of law to discriminate in employment based on where the person resides.”
The understanding was Emlen would move inside the city limits. It is not fair to look the other way for one person, but not another. We are talking technicality as well. The commissioner still has a Davis address, is just outside city limits technically. Bill Emlen lives in Vacaville for heaven’s sake!
“The City Manager is a JOB. We hired him knowing that he lives out of town and I think that it would violate some sort of law to discriminate in employment based on where the person resides.”
The understanding was Emlen would move inside the city limits. It is not fair to look the other way for one person, but not another. We are talking technicality as well. The commissioner still has a Davis address, is just outside city limits technically. Bill Emlen lives in Vacaville for heaven’s sake!