Frerichs Passes Wolk As Top Fundraiser in 2012

Frerichs-Lucas-665

Frerichs and Wolk Return Money From Those Involved in Attack Mailer

If money means anything, Lucas Frerichs has moved into a surprising lead over everyone’s favorite to finish first overall, Dan Wolk.  We also see the emergence of the Firefighters Local 3494, as well as the impact of the mailer on the race.

Mr. Frerich’s massive 87-page disclosure shows that he has now raised $31,608, which is tops in this year’s field, but is nothing compared to what was raised by a number of candidates in 2006 and 2008.

Dan Wolk’s original disclosure was missing about $1900 in contributions, inadvertently omitted from the filing.  With those numbers now in, Dan Wolk, who had been leading in money, sits at $28,856.

Perhaps the biggest surprise has to be the flagging candidacy of Stephen Souza, who has only brought in about $12,000 in total this campaign.  This last term, as Mr. Frerichs surged with $20,000, Mr. Souza only brought in $4000.

Brett Lee had a respectable showing with $19,231.98.  However, that figure includes $12,500 of his own money.

Sue Greenwald is at $13,475 with $8000 of her own money in this year and she has $3673.62 cash on hand.

Mr. Souza who raised over $4000 from the firefighters both in 2004 and 2008, has not received any money from them this time, despite receiving their only endorsement.

However, both Mr. Frerichs and Mr. Souza utilized the firefighters’ printing press.  With Mr. Souza spending $3699.38 on the Firefighters Print and Design in Sacramento, and Mr. Frerichs spending less than $200 on printing.

Mr. Frerichs received contributions from IBEW, the Plumbers and Pipefitters, and the Sacramento Building Trades Council – all of which his filings show were returned.

He told the Vanguard, “The contributions came in long before the mailer, but as soon as that mailer showed up, I sent it back.”

Likewise, the Dan Wolk campaign received $100 from James Burchill.  The campaign informed the Vanguard that he attended a private announcement party in August 2011.  However, at that time he had declined to endorse.

Dan Wolk informed the Vanguard that that check will be returned.

This election campaign marks the return of the Firefighters Union.  The Vanguard could find no evidence of even individual contributions to any of the candidates, even to Stephen Souza who said he was endorsed.

Their PAC has only made one expenditure,  a $3000 contribution to the parks tax.  The parks tax, of course, will cost each parcel $49 annually to fund around $1.36 million or a quarter of the costs of parks.

Last week the city manager warned that its failure would result in “a permanent reduction in the quality of the parks that we have in the community.”

He added: “You won’t have parks mowed every week … you’re not going to see any more edging along the sidewalks in any of our parks or around the play areas, you won’t have the dollars for fertilizer, you won’t have the dollars to check our shrubs every year to see if we need to prune those, you’re going to see less water on our grass, it’s not going to be the Davis green that you’re used to. It’s going to be somewhere south of green in the future.”

And likely the impact will spill further over to other departments.

The firefighters report a total of $15,278 in contributions with $14,232 still in the bank.  Are they planning to launch a last second mailer?  Stay tuned.

What is interesting is that both the Chamber and Firefighters have loaded up with more than $14,000 in contributions, and thus far both of their major splashes have been on the parks tax.

The only opposition to the parks tax is our old friend Thomas Randall, who filed paperwork but to date has not spent money, only listing a free website.

Ann Waid of the City Clerk’s office reports that, to date, the Yes on Measure D Committee has not filed, though they may have mailed theirs in.

Brief Commentary

We will have more thorough comments later.  However, given the surge by Lucas Frerichs, at least in money, we believe he has a strong chance at second place and might actually threaten Dan Wolk for first, though, at least at this point, we think Dan Wolk is a safe bet to finish first.

Brett Lee has the finances to make a run at third, though, at this point, we believe Sue Greenwald will be reelected.  We believe that Stephen Souza is on the outside looking in and perhaps even fading.

This is merely speculation at this point, based on observations, reports from the field and, of course now, the money.

—David M. Greenwald reporting

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

97 Comments

  1. nprice

    I’m glad to know that these candidates returned the donations of those involved in the attack mailer, but, in principle, would have no problem in accepting such contributions in the first place.

  2. JustSaying

    “Mr. Frerichs received contributions from IBEW, the Plumbers and Pipefitters, and the Sacramento Building Trades Council – all of which his filings show were returned. He told the Vanguard, ‘The contributions came in long before the mailer, but as soon as that mailer showed up, I sent it back’.”

    Good form, Lucas. Did anyone else list contributions from unions? Or returns?

  3. David Suder

    [quote]Good form, Lucas. Did anyone else list contributions from unions? Or returns? [/quote]It would have been [i]better[/i] form if he had returned the union contributions ASAP on principle, [i]before[/i] they stunk up the room so badly that Lucas had to distance himself.

    Geez, given all that the city faces in the upcoming years, I would have thought all candidates would return union donations immediately.

  4. psdavis

    David Suder is a Sue Greenwald surrogate – hence the attack on Lucas Frerichs who appears to have displaced Sue from the #2 slot (and made her vulnerable to a challenge from Brett and/or Steve).

    Michael Harrington sums it up nicely – “It is really hard to raise that much money in small checks.” This is a noteworthy accomplishment for Lucas.

    I personally have a problem with candidates self-funding their campaigns.

    Sue is at about $5,500 and Brett is at about $6,700 without the large personal donations – which account for more than half of Sue’s war chest and almost two thirds of Brett’s.

    Did any of the other three candidates self-fund?

  5. Siegel

    “I personally have a problem with candidates self-funding their campaigns.”

    I believe this is an intellectually dishonest position or at least a convenient one for you. The real point is that you happen to not favor the two candidates that self-funded and so you have conveniently used that as a point of departure.

  6. Siegel

    It becomes an interesting tension because support of big business – whether through the chamber or development is also an acting that behaves like conservatives. I find it humorous that Mr. Toad (the Wet Sprocket – couldn’t resist) calls Sue a conservative despite the fact that he is the one supporting the big business and developers.

  7. medwoman

    “calls Sue a conservative despite the fact that he is the one supporting the big business and developers.”

    I am glad to see that I am not the only one who noticed this seeming incongruity.

  8. Matt Williams

    Toad can defend himself . . . and no doubt will; however, I wouldn’t say that he is supporting developers directly. He is, and consistently has, supported breaking the “artificial” supply/demand curve for housing that he perceives exists in Davis. Developers are byproduct beneficiaries of his long-standing and vociferous campaign for significant additions to the Davis housing supply so that housing prices will come down and be affordable for young families in Davis. So I see no incongruity at all.

    Those of you who know my posts here know I actively disagree with Toad on this issue. He and I have butted heads many, many times over whether the housing supply/demand curve in Davis is artificial.

  9. JustSaying

    [quote]“Geez, given all that the city faces in the upcoming years, I would have thought all candidates would return union donations immediately.”[/quote]Agree or not, which candidates received any union donations? Which returned some or all of them?

  10. Mr.Toad

    Sue has been against housing development that would provide jobs and increase supply protecting the existing home owners and landlords, a class of which she is a member, at the expense of less well off families. Sue has opposed both the wastewater treatment plant and the surface water project both of which would have provided jobs. She has long argued that people who work in the public sector in Davis should earn less. She did so early in her tenure on the council before the local economy collapsed. Sue opposed prop 56 in 2004 that would have lowered the bar for raising taxes to 55%. It was when she told me she was against prop 56 that I began to have doubts about her. The funny thing is that she considered herself progressive. I once asked my neighbor what are Davis Progressives for?

    He responded without hesitation “Property values.” My neighbor sold out and moved away buying two houses with the money he cashed out of his little Davis house. I miss that guy he was never one to shy away from reality.

    These are not traditional Democratic values. Of all the candidates running Sue is the most conservative. I said it before and I stand by it.

  11. psdavis

    “Perhaps the biggest surprise has to be the flagging candidacy of Stephen Souza who has only brought about $12,000 in total this campaign.” DG

    If Stephen didn’t self-fund his campaign, $12,000 would put him solidly in third place ahead of the $6,700 raised by Brett and the $5,500 raised by Sue.

  12. DT Businessman

    “It becomes an interesting tension because support of big business – whether through the chamber or development is also an acting that behaves like conservatives.” -Brian

    Given we don’t have much in the way of coal mines, oil refineries, steel mills, or Fortune 500 companies in Davis, this quote appears to be smearing hard working, small, locally grown businesses. medwoman, you reference Brian’s quote in a seemingly positive light. Do you share Brian’s apparent hostility toward the local small business community?

    -Michael Bisch (Big Business Owner)

  13. hpierce

    If anyone doubts that the Council supports certain developers, by ‘metering’ new construction (and artificially raising ‘values’), consider this… three significant projects have been approved over the last 3 years or so that are in, or about be be, producing homes. Just saw in the Enterprise that the homes in Willowbank Park are being offered in excess of 300K PER SQ FT>

  14. DT Businessman

    Being the thrust of David’s article is the fundraising success, or lack thereof, of each of the candidates, psdavis’ observation is spot on. The ranking of the candidates is Frerichs, Wolk, Souza, Brett, and Sue. We shall see whether fundraising success translated into election success.

    -Michael Bisch

  15. Matt Williams

    hpierce said . . .

    [i]”If anyone doubts that the Council supports certain developers, by ‘metering’ new construction (and artificially raising ‘values’), consider this… three significant projects have been approved over the last 3 years or so that are in, or about be be, producing homes. Just saw in the Enterprise that the homes in Willowbank Park are being offered in excess of $300/SF.”[/i]

    Hortense, they are not only being offered, but are also selling very, very quickly.

    Lot 1: $807,000 (2404 sq. ft.)
    Lot 2: $770,000 (2496 sq. ft.)
    Lot 3: $770,000 (2504 sq. ft.)
    Lot 4: $750,000 (2504 sq. ft.)
    Lot 5: $690,000 (2285 sq. ft.)
    Lot 6: $650,000 (2040 sq. ft.)

    With that said, I can’t agree with you that “Council supports certain developers.” I think that statement is incorrect on two counts.

    1) it is the market rather than Council that supports the supply/demand curve, and it does that much more as a result of the regional nature of Davis’ housing demand, rather than as a result of local housing supply restrictions.

    2) your expression “certain developers” has connotations that Willowbank Park does a very direct job of refuting. The underlying property that Willowbank Park is being built on was until just recently owned by the Mormon Church, which intended to build a Tabernacle on it. When the church’s plans changed there was a very active competitive bidding process amongst a number of development groups, and Brix and Mortar was fortunate enough to be the successful bidder. If my information is correct, they bid a sufficiently high enough price for the land that the annual carrying costs for not building on it would have been too high to not carry out an aggressive build out plan. That was a calculated risk on Brix and mortar’s part, and given the rate at which they have built the houses and sold them when built, it looks like it was a good risk on their part. So again the market rather than Council was at work. This time not the housing supply/demand market, but rather the developer market for buildable properties.

  16. Matt Williams

    Fair enough psdavis. Prices go up (to over $300/square foot in hpierce’s example) when too much demand is chasing too little supply. That is what we have in the Davis housing market, and it has absolutely nothing to do with Council. Mr. Toad and others have argued long and hard that the major reason for the high housing prices problem in Davis is too little supply. I argue that too little supply is not the major reason, but rather is that because of UC Davis alumni (and lots of other quality of life factors) the demand for Davis housing is regional (some would say statewide). Having substantial regional demand for a local supply of housing means that you are always going to have a situation of elevated prices because too much demand is chasing too little supply. As long as the lion’s share of UCD students leave Davis with the dream of one day coming back to Davis to live, the demand is always going to outstrip the supply.

    Regarding who got to develop Willowbank Park, it wasn’t a Council decision, but rather a decision made by the Mormon Church and the various bidders for the property. The Church had the supply of developable land. Council did not.

  17. Jim Frame

    The situation Matt describes is the reason that development of more Mace Ranch/Wildhorse-style subdivisions isn’t going to solve the housing affordability problem for internally-generated growth. There are too many Sacramento and Bay Area refugee-wannabes (retired and otherwise) around who are willing to pay a premium to live in Davis.

    Recognition of this is one of the primary motivators behind a slow-growth policy: since rapid growth won’t fix the affordability problem and will certainly bring undesirable impacts (e.g., more traffic, air quality degradation, loss of open space, incomplete city service cost mitigation), we’re better off expanding slowly so the impacts are more easily absorbed.

    .

  18. TimR

    [quote]Regarding who got to develop Willowbank Park, it wasn’t a Council decision, [/quote]
    But it was a council decision on what type of development occurred on this parcel. It was a 3-2 vote by Asmundson, Saylor,Souza that rezoned this parcel along with the former Community Development Department that allowed Brix & Mortar ( Principal Dave Taormino of Caldwell Banker ) to develop this parcel in the developer’s best interest rather than in the community’s best interest.

  19. Matt Williams

    TimR said . . .

    “But it was a council decision on what type of development occurred on this parcel. It was a 3-2 vote by Asmundson, Saylor,Souza that rezoned this parcel along with the former Community Development Department that allowed Brix & Mortar ( Principal Dave Taormino of Caldwell Banker ) to develop this parcel in the developer’s best interest rather than in the community’s best interest.”

    Tim, I was one of the people who lobbied long and hard for a denser implementation on the Willowbank park parcel. I used The Oaks at El macero as a model of what could be done throughout the parcel. The argument against such a plan was that insurance companies have raised their rates for product liability for contractors in “shared wall” construction so high that the addition to the price for building ownership units in that configuration is significant. I did not verify that claim, but given that it is so easy to verify, I didn’t feel that the developer would be putting forward an argument that would question their integrity/honesty. So I simply accepted it.

    In the end, the developer did agree to, and Council did approve a plan in which all the units on the North side of the property will be shared wall units (condominiums). So Council didn’t cave to the developer. They met the developer half way.

    With all the above said, what zoning designation would you have approved if you were on the Asmundson, Saylor, Souza Council? How would that have changed what was built on Willowbank Park?

    For those who don’t know Council approved amending the South Davis Specific Plan land use designation of the parcel, APN #069-490-35, from Public/Semi-public to Residential Cluster Homes.

  20. psdavis

    Matt: While I generally agree with the broader premise that the Davis market is significantly influenced by regional and UCD-related demand, the idea that the Council can do nothing to affect the average price per square foot is a little simplistic.

    For example. By not building an adequate amount of new family-friendly housing stock on land inside the city limits (which the Council controls), the school census is dropping and we are forced to import students from outside districts to keep the system solvent. This is obviously unsustainable.

    If the Council allows this to continue, the perceived quality of the DJUSD will start to erode (there is some evidence that this is already happening) and this, in turn, will create downward pressure on property values in Davis.

  21. Don Shor

    [i]the school census is dropping and we are forced to import students from outside districts to keep the system solvent. This is obviously unsustainable. [/i]

    They built two schools too many. They’ll probably need to close one of them, or otherwise reconfigure the school district to make better use of existing facilities. Building houses in order to fill the schools is a very unsound basis for urban planning.

    [i]there is some evidence that this is already happening
    [/i]
    Please provide your evidence that DJUSD quality is eroding.

    This all sounds like part of the drumbeat for peripheral housing development.

  22. Matt Williams

    psdavis, the key to your statement, which sounds good on its surface, is the term “family-friendly.” How do you (loosely) define “family-friendly”?

    I agree with you that the school census is dropping, but I personally feel that that situation is due to a myriad of factors . . . birth rate declines in Davis’ demographic groups . . . long term residence tenures in existing Davis houses (or as Jim Kidd said, “We aren’t recycling our housing stock.”) . . . high quality of life amenities that support higher hosing costs on a like-for-like basis . . . more “professional” residents and two career households than many other like sized cities . . . higher average age of home buyers (which means their children are more likely to have completed all or most of their Elementary School education prior to arriving in Davis.

    All of the above factors, and many more mean that the declining school census is a phenomenon that is going to be very hard to either arrest or reverse. Which brings me to two questions . . . 1) why does a school district of 5% fewer students mean reduced educational quality? and 2) what negatives are there associated with “importing” students?

  23. wdf1

    psdavis: [i]…the perceived quality of the DJUSD will start to erode (there is some evidence that this is already happening)…[/i]

    I, too, would be curious to know the evidence you refer to.

  24. Mr.Toad

    “2) what negatives are there associated with “importing” students?”

    How about more passenger miles traveled, more air pollution and a larger carbon footprint. By allowing people to keep our schools afloat through inter-district transfer if they work in Davis we are causing the worst kind of development, what I call de-facto leapfrog development. If Davis had built more homes they would cost less and the differential between Davis and nearby communities would be smaller as it has been historically. With a smaller differential more of these people would live in Davis closer to our schools and travel fewer miles by car.

  25. Don Shor

    [i]1) why does a school district of 5% fewer students mean reduced educational quality? and 2) what negatives are there associated with “importing” students?[/i]
    1. It doesn’t.
    2. There aren’t any.*
    DJUSD enrollment is stabilizing after years of growth in the 90’s, followed by slow declines for the last couple of years. We have had more problems in the past due to over-enrollment than we will ever have from under-enrollment.

    * Interesting note from an article last year:
    From the Enterprise: “Torlucci pointed out another interesting trend he found when analyzing the data: many of the new interdistrict transfer students during the past two years come from families that once lived in Davis, but have since moved to another nearby community — most typically Woodland. In other words, many of the “new” interdistrict transfer students during the past two years already have been attending Davis schools for some time.”

  26. wdf1

    psdavis: [i]…the school census is dropping and we are forced to import students from outside districts to keep the system solvent. This is obviously unsustainable.[/i]

    I understand that state law permits parents who work in Davis but live elsewhere the opportunity to enroll their kids in Davis schools. Davis teachers are one of the largest group to take advantage of this, and I don’t fault that policy. It is one of the few perks to offer in a profession that is guaranteed not to make one a millionaire.

    Charter schools also are by law open to outside residents on a space available basis. Davis has one charter school — Da Vinci Academy (7-12). That is a more recent development (charter school status in DJUSD).

  27. Matt Williams

    Toad, if the two of us start on that topic, it will need to be at a bar. I’ll need a tall stiff drink to tide me through the inevitable battles that will ensue.

    [i]”It has to ensue, it has ensue . . .”
    [/i]

  28. Matt Williams

    Don Shor said . . .
    [i]
    “DJUSD enrollment is stabilizing after years of growth in the 90’s, followed by slow declines for the last couple of years. We have had more problems in the past due to over-enrollment than we will ever have from under-enrollment.

    * Interesting note from an article last year:
    From the Enterprise: “Torlucci pointed out another interesting trend he found when analyzing the data: many of the new interdistrict transfer students during the past two years come from families that once lived in Davis, but have since moved to another nearby community — most typically Woodland. In other words, many of the “new” interdistrict transfer students during the past two years already have been attending Davis schools for some time.”[/i]

    The bottom-line of Don’s interesting note is that there probably aren’t any additional commuting miles associated with the imported students. They simply ride with their parents as they go to work in the morning and come home from work in the evening.

  29. E Roberts Musser

    [quote]The situation Matt describes is the reason that development of more Mace Ranch/Wildhorse-style subdivisions isn’t going to solve the housing affordability problem for internally-generated growth. There are too many Sacramento and Bay Area refugee-wannabes (retired and otherwise) around who are willing to pay a premium to live in Davis.

    Recognition of this is one of the primary motivators behind a slow-growth policy: since rapid growth won’t fix the affordability problem and will certainly bring undesirable impacts (e.g., more traffic, air quality degradation, loss of open space, incomplete city service cost mitigation), we’re better off expanding slowly so the impacts are more easily absorbed. [/quote]

    Well said!

  30. wdf1

    FWIW, one measure of development efficiency is population density. Last Sunday Jeff Hudson wrote an article ([url]http://www.davisenterprise.com/features/sunday-best/illuminating-the-nature-of-the-community-of-davis-by-the-census-numbers/[/url]) in the Enterprise on the demographics of Davis based on the latest census info. This was one of the graphics published, showing Davis to be the 6th most densely populated urban area in the nation. It definitely surprised me:

    [img]http://davisenterprise.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/20UrbanChartW.jpg[/img]

    [url]http://www.davisenterprise.com/features/sunday-best/illuminating-the-nature-of-the-community-of-davis-by-the-census-numbers/[/url]

  31. E Roberts Musser

    [quote] This was one of the graphics published, showing Davis to be the 6th most densely populated urban area in the nation. It definitely surprised me: [/quote]

    As an East Coast person, didn’t surprise me…

  32. psdavis

    Matt: Family friendly (to me) = tot lots and parks, bike paths, yards, small enough to afford but big enough to hold some kids, family-targeted marketing, etc.

  33. psdavis

    “The bottom-line of Don’s interesting note is that there probably aren’t any additional commuting miles associated with the imported students. They simply ride with their parents as they go to work in the morning and come home from work in the evening.”

    Matt: That’s complete BS.

  34. Mr.Toad

    You all suffer from the same problem. You fail to look at the big picture.

    If I live in Woodland because its so much cheaper and I drive to work and the kids to school in Davis its more miles than if I live in Davis.

    Davis is dense according to the census but if you count all the people who commute in because its so much cheaper to live in the next town over it changes the calculations a great deal.

    If you asked the people who moved out of town but left their kids enrolled in Davis schools why? The obvious answer is its so much more affordable. If we made housing more affordable by building more houses we would have less read and write flight from the neighboring communities.

    Jim Frame said “Recognition of this is one of the primary motivators behind a slow-growth policy: since rapid growth won’t fix the affordability problem and will certainly bring undesirable impacts (e.g., more traffic, air quality degradation, loss of open space, incomplete city service cost mitigation), we’re better off expanding slowly so the impacts are more easily absorbed.”

    The problem JF is that we have had almost no growth compared to the rest of California. The notion that you can’t build your way to affordability through rapid expansion is too absurd. If you dropped a million homes out of the sky on Davis it would certainly address affordability. I’m not suggesting we do that but it does drive a stake right through the heart of that argument.

    Additionally JF if we had proper planning so that it was affordable for those who want to live in Davis to live here it would reduce total traveled miles and improve air quality by providing housing for those who currently commute from other towns.

    The bad news is that Davis has about 40% of its mortgaged homes upside down according to a recent report from Zillow. This is an impediment to trying to address the price differential for Davis housing through additional construction. Sadly our past policies have exacerbated our current problems. The big question is will Davis reward the narrow and misguided views of the leaders responsible for policies that have retarded growth to the point where the children who grew up here and other great family people can’t afford to live here. Still the greatest shame is that many of the arguments against construction are really rationalizations that mask the greatest concerns of Davis residents, maintaining the current value of their home at the expense of all other concerns.

  35. psdavis

    “They built two schools too many. They’ll probably need to close one of them, or otherwise reconfigure the school district to make better use of existing facilities. Building houses in order to fill the schools is a very unsound basis for urban planning.” Don Shor

    Your casual suggestion (and this is not the first time you’ve done it) that we just close a school is really offensive to me. This type of thing has devastating consequences to large numbers of people in the community, and also creates a huge amount of controversy.

  36. Don Shor

    psdavis: “Matt: That’s complete BS.”

    No, it’s not. It was precisely what my children were doing when they were ID students, as were the children of many of those we got to know when the district tried to throw us out in the 1990’s. We were parents who worked in Davis but lived nearby. Or who had lived here and moved nearby. Or lived just outside the district and for whom Woodland/Dixon/Davis were about equidistant traveling.

    I’m curious why you would say “that’s complete BS” when you appear to know absolutely nothing about the topic. If you have some actual experience, knowledge, or statistics to shed on a topic that I am very, very well acquainted with, I’d be interested. Otherwise, your accusation to Matt is inappropriate and unfounded.

    psdavis: [i]Problems at MME for starters[/i]
    That is caused by insufficient housing? Interesting. Totally counterintuitive to the demographics involved. Perhaps you can explain your reasoning.

    Mr Toad: [i]”If we made housing more affordable by building more houses…”[/i]
    As we have all pointed out dozens and dozens of times to you, Davis would have to build thousands of homes to overcome the price differential. What I think we all agree is that Davis needs more apartments.

  37. Don Shor

    psdavis: “[i]Your casual suggestion (and this is not the first time you’ve done it) that we just close a school is really offensive to me.”[/i]
    So the city should build more houses because DJUSD can’t project enrollment figures well? Good luck achieving the right balance. And I guess you didn’t absorb this part: “.[b]..or otherwise reconfigure the school district to make better use of existing facilities.”[/b]
    I was a strong opponent on this blog of the decision to close Valley Oak (my kids went there). I strongly supported the charter proposal that the school board rejected. DJUSD configurations and facilities decisions should NOT drive housing planning.
    Unfortunately, Rochelle and Dan have both indicated that they are accepting your rationale about providing housing growth to accommodate specific demographic groups. That is poor urban planning. But since there are not peripheral proposals before the city that I’m aware of, it largely means that ConAgra will get built much as it is currently proposed. Especially if Lucas is elected and/or Stephen is re-elected. So it’s a moot point.

  38. Don Shor

    psdavis: [i]Don: So you are now an advocate of downsizing the school district now that you’ve gotten what you want out of it?[/i]
    Do you have children in the district? Why are you so concerned about this? I post under my own name, and for an anonymous poster to cast aspersions on my motives is a little galling.
    Here are the enrollment trends:
    [img]http://davismerchants.org/vanguard/DJUSDenrollment.png[/img]
    We are gradually trending back to the enrollment we had a decade ago. The trend toward the upper grades creates facilities issues. But so do the configurations caused by magnet programs. The facilities problems are very solvable. Building more houses to solve them is a very unwieldy way to accomplish anything.

  39. Don Shor

    psdavis: [i]Don: I don’t get you. You own a local business that would benefit from more housing and you live near Dixon.[/i]
    I don’t get you. You hide behind a pseudonym.

  40. wdf1

    psdavis: [i]Erosion issue – Problems at MME for starters[/i]

    The quality of instruction at MME has not degraded. The demographic makeup of the student population has shifted, and the measurable standards of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) have also increased. If a school receiving Title I funding (eligibility depends on having a ccertain minimum level of low income students) cannot keep up with the yearly increasing test standards, then the legislation pretty much deems the school a failure for those students. By 2014, NCLB mandates 100% of Title I students are proficient or above in math and English.

    MME has a large low income population because that’s where city planners chose to build more lower income housing. The lower income demographics include larger numbers of English language learners. If you are a non-low income student at MME, then in fact the measured test scores of this subgroup at MME are higher than for that subgroup at any other elementary school. This fact was point out at the meeting described in the link, although it was not reported in the story.

    South Davis parents sound off on schools ([url]http://www.davisenterprise.com/local-news/south-davis-parents-sound-off-on-schools/[/url])

  41. Matt Williams

    psdavis said . . .

    “Family friendly (to me) = tot lots and parks, bike paths, yards, small enough to afford but big enough to hold some kids, family-targeted marketing, etc.”

    Small enough to afford . . . an interesting turn of phrase.

  42. Matt Williams

    psdavis said . . .

    [i]”Your casual suggestion (and this is not the first time you’ve done it) that we just close a school is really offensive to me. This type of thing has devastating consequences to large numbers of people in the community, and also creates a huge amount of controversy.”[/i]

    . . . but it is the fiscally responsible thing to do. One of the Junior High School buildings has every appearance of Tom Hanks’ “Money Pit.” The wisest decision may be to close it rather than sink millions of dollars into it.

  43. Matt Williams

    Don Shor said . . .

    [i]”As we have all pointed out dozens and dozens of times to you, Davis would have to build thousands of homes to overcome the price differential. [b]What I think we all agree is that Davis needs more apartments.[/b]”[/i]

    Bingo!!! psdavis, are apartments family-friendly?

  44. Jim Frame

    [quote]I’m not suggesting we [drop a million homes out of the sky on Davis] but it does drive a stake right through the heart of that argument. [/quote]

    Only if you live in the world of the absurd. Implicit in the whole discussion of housing policy is a desire to plan a city in which people actually want to live. That’s the audience I was addressing; sorry if I overshot the mark.

    .

  45. Mr.Toad

    “As we have all pointed out dozens and dozens of times to you, Davis would have to build thousands of homes to overcome the price differential.

    How do you know how many it would take? Anyway, at 5 or ten units/ acre you are only talking about a few hundred acres per 1000. As I have pointed out extending Davis one mile in every direction (exempting the natural boundaries) would provide thousands of acres. West Village the peripheral sprawl that opposition to peripheral sprawl brought us is designed for how many thousands of people? I don’t have a problem with building apartments or senior housing as well as single family housing. We could build our way to a lower price differential even if your unsupported notion that it would take thousands of houses to do so is correct.

    The problem of people deeply in debt because they bought during a time of too restricted growth should be taken into consideration but the resulting price differential of restricted growth makes the economics of expansion lucrative as we build to return to the mean of a more reasonable and historic Davis premium. In a free market prices go up and down. When they were going up nobody cried for those who couldn’t afford to get in. At least on the way down those who will be able to get in should have empathy for those who are upside down and as a result we should expand at a reasonable pace instead of the least the law allows or too rapidly without regard to market forces.

    By the way Don, if you don’t mind sharing, how come you have chosen to reside in Dixon all these years instead of living in Davis?

  46. Don Shor

    I don’t reside in Dixon. I live on a farm in Solano County. That’s where the land was, with the soil type and water quantity and quality that we needed, when we were looking for property to live on and for business purposes.

  47. Mr.Toad

    “Implicit in the whole discussion of housing policy is a desire to plan a city in which people actually want to live.”

    Obviously people want to live here and more would want to live here if they could afford.

  48. Matt Williams

    Mr.Toad said . . .

    [i]”Obviously people want to live here and more would want to live here if they could afford.”[/i]

    Toad, that is a whole different supply/demand situation . . . I can wish for all sorts of things in life, but if I don’t have enough supply of personal assets/money that fulfilling those wishes demands, then they will forever remain as wishes.

    I wish I could live in a penthouse at the top of the Washington Monument, or in the Papal Apartment at St Peter’s or in FLW’s Falling Water . . . but those wishes will forever remain as wishes.

  49. Mr.Toad

    What about in the damp wet darkness of Toad Hollow you would never know such bliss.

    The difference is that what i am talking about is possible just not popular.

  50. Robb Davis

    Mr Toad: You said: “As I have pointed out extending Davis one mile in every direction (exempting the natural boundaries) would provide thousands of acres.”

    The land in every direction one mile out from Davis is some of the richest irrigated farm land on the planet. It is an amazing natural resource. Irrigation water is plentiful and managed well (at least on the Yolo side, I assume it is managed well in Solano too but do not know that district). I think it would be terribly irresponsible of our generation to remove this land from its most natural and beneficial use: farming (of all scales and scope). We need denser housing in Davis which means more multifamily units built vertically. They may be condos, coops or rental units but this must be our future. We will have to learn to live differently. Families with children can live in this way if there are adequate green spaces nearby. In Davis, there are.

  51. Mr.Toad

    So where do you live Robb and what about the soil under your house?

    Robb said “I think it would be terribly irresponsible of our generation to remove this land from its most natural and beneficial use: farming (of all scales and scope).”

    First of all farming is not natural. Natural would be wetland with oaks, native grasses, elk and bears.

    Second, not all the land around here is class one soil. Plus there are hundreds of acres being wasted as golf courses or other uses that you overlook.

    Those are easy. The next one is a little is a little trickier but I’ll try. Davis was selected as the state farm to be a land grant university. It’s highest purpose is to further its mission of education and research for the State of California, the nation and the world. If you want to make your argument in Woodland, Winters or Dixon I might agree but the housing that is needed to support the university; its faculty, staff and students is a higher purpose and generates much more value than using the land around here to produce commodities. Workforce housing for Davis built in Woodland is also on soil worth preserving its just farther away and results in more fossil fuels getting burned. UCD has done and continues to do research that makes the preservation of class I soil less of a necessity by generating varieties of economic crops that can be grown on poorer soils with less water using fewer chemical biocides with greater crop yields. This research will do more to feed the world’s growing population than saving every inch of Yolo County Farmland. What do you think Monsanto/ Seminis, Dupont/Pioneer, Syngenta and Agraquest are doing here? This mindless fealty to the preservation of these soils neglects the role of humans in the local landscape. In your vision as we become more dense and go up we will squeeze out what little open space remains in town, not because we need to, but sadly, because we choose to.

    Robb in your vision of the future of Davis where do the children play baseball? Where do the dogs run and where do the Toads croak?

  52. Robb Davis

    Mr Toad – Thanks for your thoughts. Some further ideas: I cannot be responsible for what came before but I can try to be a steward of what I inherit. I know that not all the farmland around Davis is Class 1 but much of it is. Even lower classes are useful for growing crops that provide food. I agree that some is being wasted and I just want to be careful not to waste more. I am responsible (along with you and the entire community) for caring for and making decisions about what we have now. BTW, I said that this land is a natural resource but I did not say that farming is the natural use for it. However, given what has happened in this area, farming is a very good use of this land and it can remain that way for many generations with proper care.

    I am not sure that the picture you paint of a landscape in which open space is squeezed out is inevitable–that is why we plan. There are green spaces that can remain that way. And I would disagree that I am paying “mindless fealty to the preservation of the soils.” Given my experience in food insecure areas around the world, I am concerned about food security here and I would say what I am arguing for is conservation (not just “preservation”) of a vital part of a local food system (which will become more important as fossil fuels become dearer). I think there are spaces within Davis where dogs, toads and kids can play for a long time to come. Growing up does not mean paving over every green space.

    Your argument about UC Davis is an interesting one and I want to think about it more. I doubt I have answered your concerns to your satisfaction but I would value talking to you more about these things. They are the kinds of things we need to continue to wrestle with.

  53. Rifkin

    [i]”I don’t reside in Dixon. I live on a farm in Solano County.”[/i]

    Speaking of inter-district transfers from Dixon … Nick Watney, easily the most successful professional athlete to have ever come out of Davis High School, was a Dixon resident and an inter-district transfer student. I think he grew up in the heart of Dixon, not on the outskirts.

    [img]http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2011/SPORT/golf/03/14/nick.watney.triumphs/t1larg.nick.watney.gi.jpg[/img]

  54. Rifkin

    One point on apartment construction in Davis: There are a good number of very low-density apartment complexes that are one or two stories, but half or nearly half of the land is dedicated to parking.

    I don’t know if anyone has ever tried this, but I wonder if we could successfully increase the density of existing complexes by foregoing the parking space requirements, if new tenants would sign leases which disallowed them from owning (and hence parking) a car? (Alternatively, they could have a car if they paid to park it somewhere remote from their housing.)

    Obviously, that is not feasible for very many families or working adults. But a great percentage of Davis renters are students, and most students can live just fine in Davis without a car. They can ride Unitrans around town. They can use the Amtrak to leave Davis. And they might rent a Zipcar now and then

    If we allowed this, consider, for example, a 40 unit, 2 story 1970s era complex, 0.75 miles from campus on F Street, where 50% of the land is now for parking or driveways. Allow the building owner to add 10 more ground floor units and 10 more 2nd story units on the old parking lot. You now have 60 units. And then let the owner add a 3rd story with 30 more units. Without any paving over of Class 1 farmland on the periphery, you would increase the number of units by 125% from 40 to 90 on a single parcel.

    I would bet there are quite a large number of apartment buildings in Davis where most of the tenants are students, where it would not be hard to lease out to those without cars, and where a 3rd story would not cause trouble to other buildings.

    My fear, though, is that even if the parking ordinance were changed, the cost of new construction might not make this profitable.

  55. Mr.Toad

    Food insecurity here? I appreciate that you want to engage in an honest discussion but food insecurity here? This reminds me of when Sue Greenwald foolishly tried to argue that we are over carrying capacity. There are few places in the world where we are farther under carrying capacity than Yolo County. There are few places that have the capacity to produce more food/person than here.

    Robb since your seem truly interested in an honest discussion let me fill you in on the dirty truth about class I soil preservation around Davis. I am probably the only person to challenge this dogma in the community and i do it anonymously. Still this whole limits to growth argument is just cover for something more lower brain that really is the issue for many in Davis and Yolo County. A better biological model is mammalian territorialism, where, once your group has established territory, you don’t allow any intraspecific competition by limiting the establishment of territory by other groups. You can see it in rats put in a box and given all the food and water they want. Its the view held by the old landed families in the rural areas and the limits to growth, Club of Rome, Malthusians in Davis. Apply this view to the arguments people voice against growth and the picture will start to crystallize in your mind.

    Just yesterday I met the sister of a friend, a young married woman who had recently moved here with her husband and two beautiful children. She was going to move to Rocklin, farther from her familial support, because it was more affordable. She could afford Rocklin but not Davis. If Davis was a little more affordable she could have stayed, put her kids in Davis schools and contributed to our community. What kind of community turns a blind eye in such a cold hearted manner.

    When I was in college we were never supposed to get to 7 billion people. Now we are there and the cause of food insecurity is inefficiencies in distribution not production capacity. How did we get to 7 billion? We got there because of the development of our human capital through education and the subsequent advances in technology brought forth by that human capital. Only in a place like Davis are we so dismissive of our human capital that we are willing to drive away talented wonderful families that have so much to offer and would like to stay. How many wonderful, well educated, productive, taxpaying people do you know who left although they wanted to stay but couldn’t afford it? I know lots of them. It doesn’t need to be this way and it is shameful that people here are proud of their exclusionary policies of restricted growth.

  56. Robb Davis

    Mr Toad – Lots to talk about here. Doubt these exchanges are the best way. As a public health demographer I have studied the issues you raise about carrying capacity, limits of growth, population growth, Malthusianism, etc. I have considered the debates and I am NOT suggesting that we are reaching some carrying capacity. But we do grow certain foods for an entire region and in some cases for the entire nation.

    You said it yourself: “There are few places that have the capacity to produce more food/person than here.” We have been given a great resource and we should use it, develop it and invest in it so that it can continue to be part of a vital food system. I talk about food security because we have what very few places elsewhere have: a robust and varied food production system. We are food secure and we can remain that way and help others achieve greater security too. However, the food system we have built worldwide is based on an ability to process food and move it great distances with relatively cheap fuel sources. I don’t necessarily assume that we will have cheap fuel sources in the future (based on what you have written I am doubting you agree with me) and thus maintaining a resilient food system in our nearby is important.

    I hear your concern about people not being able to live here. My wife and I have continually downsized over the past 10 years. As we have done so we have also decided we want to live in Davis. Without going into the details here I can assure you that it is possible to live here on very modest means IF one is willing to live simply, in smaller quarters and without a car. These are possible in Davis (and we did it for a number of years with children at home). However, I do not disparage ANYONE who does not share my views. I know that our lives do not represent the American dream. However, we are quite content and feel like we can thrive here. I don’t want to force anyone out of Davis and I do not benefit from high home prices–I do not own a home. I do not want this to be a place “just for me.” There are ways of growing our housing stock (that is what started this discussion) in a way that allows many more people to live here but that housing will not look like most people’s idea of the American dream. Still, I believe it can be a good life.

  57. Mr.Toad

    Escaping the Laboratory: The Rodent Experiments of John B.
    Calhoun & Their Cultural Influence
    Edmund Ramsden & Jon Adams
    Abstract
    In John B. Calhoun’s early crowding experiments, rats were
    supplied with everything they needed – except space. The result
    was a population boom, followed by such severe psychological
    disruption that the animals died off to extinction. The take-home
    message was that crowding resulted in pathological behaviour –
    in rats and by extension in humans. For those pessimistic about
    Earth’s “carrying capacity,” the macabre spectacle of this
    “behavioural sink” was a compelling symbol of the problems
    awaiting overpopulation. Calhoun’s work enjoyed considerable
    popular success. But cultural influence can run both ways. In this
    paper, we look at how the cultural impact of Calhoun’s
    experiments resulted in a simplified, popular version of his work
    coming to overshadow the more nuanced and positive message
    he wanted to spread, and how his professional reputation was
    affected by this popular “success.”

  58. Don Shor

    [i]Don, so you live on a farm but think people in Davis should live on ever more dense landscapes. Do you see any irony in that?[/i]
    The farm is related to my business, and it grows food. And I do a lot of the work involved in both. So no, no irony in it.
    Again: interesting to have my motives and consistency questioned by someone who posts under a pseudonym. That makes it hard for me to evaluate your own motives and consistency.
    In general, urban areas should stay urban and avoid encroaching on rural land. The worst of all is dividing good farmland up into ranchettes which have no productive purpose. Build in and up first, then out if you have to. That’s basic urban planning.

  59. Mr.Toad

    Yes Don most farms are businesses of one type or another. So you live in a situation where you might have a density slightly above Death Valley Scotty but you think everyone who doesn’t live your life style should live in one of the most dense cities in the country and you don’t see any irony. Of course you do this as a sacrifice for your small family business and because of the importance of preserving ag land for food production not because you like having all that land (lots of land, underneath the starry sky, don’t fence me in). Do you tell Dixon to go in and up too? I mean its much less dense.

    Even if commodity production was the highest and best use of the class I soils around Davis, something I debunked above to the point where the thoughtful and honest Ross said he needed to think about my arguments, what about class II soils? Are ranchettes the only alternative to going in and up like Vancouver or San Francisco? Places with natural geographic limits instead of the artificial ones you seek to impose?

    I respect Ross Davis as he talks about his family living a lifestyle that allows for his ideals. He lives by example. The problem the farmers around here have is that they live a lifestyle that they enjoy then they tell everyone else to live on a tiny fraction of the land they live on desperately protecting their own life style and possibly their family heritage. A life style that is more carbon dense when it comes to going to the grocery store or running errands in the truck than someone in Davis who bikes to the store, drives a hybrid or even a Volvo SUV to do the same unless its to go out of town to shop for goods you seek to prohibit from being sold in Davis, then it might be an equal amount of carbon dioxide produced.

    I also respect Ross Davis more than the many local anti-growth advocates like Sue Greenwald who gain an economic benefit from the policies they seek to impose because they own rentals. Once again this is not leadership by example.

    As for my desire to use a nom de plume, like my good friend Thomas Pynchon, i did preface my question by saying if you don’t mind. So you could have simply not responded instead of whining about it. i will tell you this Don, i live in a dark underground culvert that is damp and humid 24/7. The climate is great for my skin. Because it is underground it stays warm in the winter and cool in the summer.This keeps my carbon footprints low and i also keep my lighting bill low with photovoltaics.

  60. Jim Frame

    Davis seemed very Mayberryish to me when I moved here from the East Bay, and I would have balked at calling it urban back then. I don’t now. It ain’t NYC, but it’s not just a “town” anymore, either. It’s a small city.

    .

  61. Don Shor

    “Urban planning” as a field includes all aspects of land planning, including the appropriate development of ex-urban areas. As to the rest of your screed, I’ll just say you know nothing about my lifestyle. Don’t accuse me of hypocrisy.

  62. Don Shor

    There are sustainable ways to manage farmland that takes it beyond mere commodity production. My farm has lots of wildlife habitat, as do many well-managed farms. Class II soils are very good for food production. Homes have been built locally on Class II soils (and worse) for the very reason that they are less suitable for ag production (Binning Tract, North Davis Meadows). Those can be appropriate uses for the heavier soils. But leapfrog developments can have adverse consequences. They can be costly for the counties to provide services.

    The density of Davis is a statistical fluke created by the presence of many apartments in a city that has a relatively small population. All it tells you is that there is a large university in a small city.

  63. wdf1

    Mr. Toad: [i]i didn’t realize we were urban here in Davis.[/i]

    The U.S. government, as reported in the Enterprise article I cited earlier, defines Davis as an urbanized area. Also Woodland.

    [img]http://davisenterprise.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/20UrbanChartW.jpg[/img]

  64. Rifkin

    We need to turn to a higher source than the Census to determine if Davis is urban.

    [img]http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbview_approve/4644438/2/stock-photo-4644438-pope-urban-ii.jpg[/img]

    Pope Urban II says, “Yes, Davis is urban.”

  65. E Roberts Musser

    [quote] I don’t have a problem with building apartments or senior housing as well as single family housing. We could build our way to a lower price differential even if your unsupported notion that it would take thousands of houses to do so is correct. [/quote]

    But suppose Davis were to decide to build like mad to lower the price of houses (a doubtful proposition, but let’s assume it for argument’s sake). How are the current citizens to pay for all the added city services that would have to be provided? (And please don’t try and argue to have the developers pay for it – it never works that way…)

  66. E Roberts Musser

    And by the way, I’m somewhat against extreme densification. I think everyone needs at a minimum some type of small yard to have a livable home, and the yards here in CA are abysmal (I used to live on a half acre wooded lot – it was wonderful!)

  67. David M. Greenwald

    The supply and demand issue misses the problem that so long as Davis is a desirable place to live, you really can’t exhaust the demand. Santa Barbara for example grew a lot but it always remained a nice place to live so even as it grew housing remained expensive

  68. Mr.Toad

    So if people want to live here why not let them come. If the demand is not exhausted then there will always be a premium to live here attracting a higher educated more talented professional population who can pay for services through their taxes just like we do now.

  69. Mr.Toad

    This argument about how allowing for more housing doesn’t pay for itself is a red herring. If a structural deficit exists it can be addressed but to say we shouldn’t grow because its not cost effective is just an excuse not a solution.

  70. Matt Williams

    Mr.Toad said . . .

    [i]”Well you could try to argue on the errors of my analysis.”[/i]

    Errors is too strong a word Toad . . . biases (or underlying principles) is where you and I differ. In my opinion, you put the “local good” ahead of the “greater good” in your argument. I would even go so far as to say you put “individual interests” ahead of the “local good.”

    You assume that each incremental person who wants to live hear is going to advance Davis’ mission as the home of a land grant university. That argument can probably be made for each incremental person who comes to Davis and rents their living space, but I think your assumption/argument falls down very badly for each incremental person who comes to Davis and purchases a single family residence. I don’t have immediate access to any of the Bay Area Economics (BAE) statistics about working households in Davis, but I would venture to say that the proportion of the jobs of the residents who have purchased the homes in the recent peripheral housing developments (Wildhorse and Mace Ranch and Willowbank 9 and Willowbank Park come to mind) is much, much more highly non-UCD than it ever was in the past. I even supect that the proportion of non-UCD employment is higher (perhaps much higher) than UCD employment.

    Why is that either meaningful or important? Specifically, because the acre lost to serve individual desires, has an alternative use of producing food that serves the greater good of the US as a nation, California as a state, the region as an economy, and even foreign consumers (lots of Yolo County’s rice goes to Japan and China for example). I will choose the greater good over the individual desires every time.

  71. Matt Williams

    E Roberts Musser said . . .

    [i]”. . . the yards here in CA are abysmal (I used to live on a half acre wooded lot – it was wonderful!)”[/i]

    Elaine, you and I have had this discussion in a different life, but it is worth resuming IMHO. The reason that yards are so small in California (square footage of houses are also very small by comparison) is that there is so much more recreational opportunity in California than there is in the East. Said another way, the housing market in California has said over the years, “Why pay for something that you aren’t going to use with any regularity?

    Where in the East can you find a Point Reyes or a Napa Valley or a Lake Tahoe or a Carson Pass or a Half Dome or a Big Sur or surfing at Pismo Beach or youth soccer in December or Lassen Peak or volunteering like Robb Davis does as a farmer at one of the local farms. The East has NYC and DC, but we have SF. The East has the Maine Coast, but we have Mendocino. The East has skiing, as do we. The East has walking on sandy beaches, as do we. In the East bicycling is a hazard to your health gicen the roads. Here it is a religion.

    Bottom-line, other than evenings during the week, people in California for the most part don’t really use their yards . . . therefore they purchase less of them.

  72. Matt Williams

    Mr.Toad said . . .

    [i]”[b]So if people want to live here why not let them come.[/b] If the demand is not exhausted then there will always be a premium to live here attracting a higher educated more talented professional population who can pay for services through their taxes just like we do now.”[/i]

    Because by doing so you will be diminishing the greater good by eliminating the food production from the lands you build on.

  73. Matt Williams

    Toad, with the above said, your earlier point about soil classes should not be disregarded. The soils to the west of Sutter Davis Hospital are A) Pescadero Silty Clay (soil class code Pa), which is Class III with a Storie Index of 35, and B) Pescadero Silty Clay, saline alkalai (soil class code Pb), which is Class IV with a Storie Index of 14. If we are to create an updated “urban plan” for Davis, the greater good isn’t being terribly well served by any agricultural production on those soils. That is not to say that those soils aren’t “productive.” Dwayne Chamberlain does farm them with hay as his crop.

  74. Mr.Toad

    Matt in those census reports recently published I think it said almost 70% of the households of Davis were employed by UCD. i think you can do the rest of the math.

  75. Mr.Toad

    i guess its that 68% of adults in Davis 25 and up have a bachelor degree or higher. I remembered it wrong but anyway it shows you that 2/3 of our adult population is well educated.

    From a census analysis:

    “Some 18.2 percent of Davis residents told the census they ride a bike to work. Another 4.9 percent said they walk, and 4.7 percent said they work at home. An additional 7.8 percent said they car-pool to work. But the great majority, 64 percent, drive to work alone in a car.
    By and large, Davis residents don’t seem to be long-distance commuters. Some 19.1 percent said they travel less than 10 minutes to work, another 23.5 percent said they travel 10-14 minutes, another 17.1 percent said they travel 15-19 minutes and 12.6 percent said they travel 20-24 minutes.”

    72.3% of Davis residents commute less that 24 minutes to work so 3/4 work close to home.

  76. Matt Williams

    Mr.Toad said . . .

    [i]”Matt in those census reports recently published I think it said almost 70% of the households of Davis were employed by UCD. i think you can do the rest of the math.”[/i]

    Toad, the number is much closer to 45% and that includes UCD students working part-time.

    The source data for that is the BAE report provided to the Housing Element Steering Committee . . .

    [i]Local Industry Employment

    Table 4 reports 2005 employment data supplied by the California Employment Development Department (EDD) for ZIP Codes 95616 and 95618. Though these ZIP Codes extend beyond the boundaries of the City of Davis, they represent the smallest geography for which EDD is able to provide current industry employment estimates. EDD employment figures include full- and part- time jobs, regardless of the number of hours worked. The large number of employed persons in the State Government category, nearly 20,700, reflects the economic magnitude of UC Davis within the local community. Though this is by far the largest employer outside of Davis, but within ZIP Code 95616, there are other notable employers outside the city limits including Teichert, north of the City. In addition, there are a few other State agencies with facilities in Davis, such as the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, whose employees would be captured in the State Government Category. Furthermore, the second largest employment category, Accommodation and Food Services, also includes employees contracted to serve the UC Davis campus population that are not directly employed by the University.

    Retail Trade, at over six percent of total employment in 2005, represented the third largest employment category. Local Government and Health Care and Social Assistance round out the top five employment industries, with nearly 2,000 employees each. The Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services category also employed over 1,000 people in the Davis area.”[/i]

    Table 4: Employment by Industry, Davis, 2005
    Industry (a) — Employed Workers (b) — Percent of Total
    Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing Hunting –363–0.7%
    Mining (c) –***–***
    Construction–765–1.0%
    Manufacturing–355–1.3%
    Wholesale Trade –453–0.5%
    Retail Trade –1,078–6.4%
    Transportation and Warehousing –56–0.2%
    Information–259–0.7%
    Finance and Insurance –363–1.0%
    Real Estate, Rental, and Leasing –765–2.2%
    Professional, Scientific, and Technical Services –1,078–3.0%
    Management of Companies and Enterprises –117–0.3%
    Admin and Support and Waste Management and Remediation –475–1.3%
    Educational Services (d) –295–0.8%
    Health Care and Social Assistance –1,957–5.5%
    Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation –449–1.3%
    Accommodation and Food Services –2,606–7.4%
    Other Services –519–1.5%
    Non-Classified (c) –***– ***
    Federal Government –365–1.0%
    State Government (d) –20,659–58.3%
    Local Government–1,969–5.6%
    Total (e)
    –35,427–100%

    Notes:
    (a) Industry employment figures report the number of jobs in each geography, not the number of employed residents.
    (b) Employment figures reported for 95616 and 95618 zip codes.
    (c) Confidential data is suppressed.
    (d) UC Davis employees are classified under the “State Government” category.
    (e) Sums may not add to totals due to rounding.
    Sources: EDD, 2007; BAE, 2007.

    **************************

    Table 24: UC Davis Off-Campus Households, 2006-2007

    UCD Faculty and Staff Living in the City of in Davis–5,856
    Subtotal: UCD Faculty and Staff Households in Davis (f) –4,505
    Total UC Davis Households in the City of Davis–11,019
    Total Households in the City of Davis–24,458

    Sources: UCD Office of Resource Management and Planning 2006-2007 On-Campus Population Estimates, 2007; UC Davis 2003 Long Range Development Plan Final EIR; City of Davis Internal Housing Needs Analysis, February 2003; BAE, 2007.

  77. wdf1

    15-24 minutes will get you to downtown Sacramento (state government-connected workers), plus other folks working in West Sac, Dixon, Woodland, maybe Vacaville would fall within those commute times. I also wonder how much telecommuting goes on these days.

  78. E Roberts Musser

    To Matt Williams: There are tons of state parks back East, good grief. And I was out in my 1/2 acre yard back East EVERY DAY enjoying it. Here there is absolutely no privacy or “room to breathe”…

  79. E Roberts Musser

    [quote]Mr. Toad: This argument about how allowing for more housing doesn’t pay for itself is a red herring. If a structural deficit exists it can be addressed but to say we shouldn’t grow because its not cost effective is just an excuse not a solution.[/quote]

    If it is such a red herring, then why can’t you address the problem of how to pay for more city services required if more unchecked housing is allowed?

  80. Matt Williams

    E Roberts Musser said . . .

    [i]”To Matt Williams: There are tons of state parks back East, good grief. And I was out in my 1/2 acre yard back East EVERY DAY enjoying it. Here there is absolutely no privacy or “room to breathe”…”[/i]

    I don’t disagree that there are lots of state parks back East. The issue isn’t quantity, it is quality. I absolutely love Baxter State Park. I have climbed Katahdin numerous times, but for all that love that I have for it, comparing it to Yosemite, or Kings Canyon or Avenue of the Giants or Carson Pass is like comparing the Davis Repertory Theater to Broadway. I love Acadia National Park, and it compares favorably to Point Reyes, but getting to Point Reyes take just over an hour. Getting to Acadia is a day’s drive. The West/California is Steppenwolf singing “Get out on the highway . . . Looking for adventure . . . And whatever comes our way” The East is much more about recuperating from the daily grind that comes from living in the megalopolis with 50 million other people. In simple terms we don’t need that level of instant recuperation in our lives here, and if we do it is all around us. If you want privacy and room to breathe I suggest you hop on Mace Boulevard and drive south. When you cross the Solano County line, you will have all the privacy and room to breathe you could possibly want. Turn right on Tremont Road and stop one mile down on the left and walk into the Tremont Church yard . . . heaven will meet you there.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for