By Rob White
Without fail, I run across someone on a daily basis describing the ways agriculture impacts the Davis economy.
There is the recent discussion around ‘farm-to-fork’, or more simply put, sourcing more of the food used in restaurants and at home from local outlets. Also, the University was named an agricultural technology (AgTech) innovation hub by the federal government about a year ago. And just last week I spent time with the UC Davis manager of the entire complex of greenhouses across the campus. And without fail, it seems like I am in a discussion at least once a week for need for corporate research fields.
But what does this mean? Who’s involved? And how does this affect the Davis economy?
At the most rudimentary of levels, our community is engaged in local agriculture through the Davis Farmer’s Market, where locally sourced produce, nuts, olives, cheeses and even meats are available (now twice a week). This is a direct impact on the local and regional economy by creating jobs, supply chains, and economic exchange. There is also an incredible array of local options in food stuffs available at the Davis Food Co-Op, which again create jobs, supply chains, and regional imports. And not to be left out of the equation, many of our local traditional grocers have taken up offering some form of locally sourced products, again creating local and regional economic churn.
On the restaurant side, we have a variety of formats ranging from locally sourced selections to restaurants that are predominantly ‘farm-to-fork’ like Monticello Seasonal Cuisine on G Street (between 6th and 7th). This restaurant format provides food variety and locally sourced choices that are not typical at chain restaurants and creates opportunities for our local small farms. It also begins to create a roadmap to realize the potential of concepts like the urban farm proposed at the Cannery project by creating local demand for the products.
UC Davis is also part of this equation. The extensive research that is conducted at the University is one of several reasons why they have been recognized as a top agricultural school in several international rankings. We are also unique in that the geographic setting for the University is suburban in the middle of some of the best agricultural lands in the world, while still being in close proximity to a large urban city with well-developed transportation modes and major infrastructure. And the promise of research in areas like increased crop production due to bio-based pest eradication, AgTech applications in harvesting and processing and development of new agricultural-based textiles and products, it is no wonder that the University and the Davis ecosystem are the cradle of agricultural innovation.
The culture of research in Davis has in turn generated several significant agricultural science companies in the last few years, including Agriquest (now part of Bayer Crop Sciences) and Marrone Bio-Innovations. These companies are growing and in turn are attracting corporate investments from larger agri-business companies from across the globe.
And then there are programs at the University like Seed Central which are attracting national and international corporations to Davis, including Nunhems and H.M. Clause. Or the AgTech Innovation Center partnership between UC Davis and SARTA, winner of the i6 Challenge Grant from the US Economic Development Administration. This program is focused on developing stronger ties between research and application and seeks to create deployment of the innovations created at the University.
And many of the aforementioned corporations are keenly interested in how they can partner with the local agricultural supply chain and engage with Yolo County’s strong belief in conservation of agricultural lands. This translates to investments in research fields and greenhouses, new innovations in planting, harvesting and processing, and local employment for technicians, farmers, researchers and professional services.
Though I cannot prognosticate on what this will all mean in 5 years, or even 25 years, one thing seems certain: we are witnessing an evolution of agriculture from front row seats. And Davis seems to be a nursery for this evolution, generating significant new innovations and opportunities. The City is strongly committed to be a partner in this evolution. We are working to assist businesses in finding appropriate locations, working with the university and corporations to develop more extensive research facilities, and ensuring that our local farms become an important part of the effort to create sustainable and local food choices. We are being proactive and diligent about continuing these efforts so that the offshoots from this evolution can find appropriate integration into the overall ecosystem.
Don’t forget, there are several ways to get engaged in the City’s innovation and economic development discussions. The next DSIDE meeting will be on June 13th at 8:30 am at the Davis Chamber of Commerce. Future meeting dates, times and location will be posted at www.dside.org. Or come share your ideas at the next Business and Economic Development Commission meeting. And you can follow and post on twitter (#DavisCA and #InnovateDavis), on Facebook (www.facebook.com/CityofDavis), or email Kemble Pope at the Davis Chamber of Commerce (director@davischamber.org) or me directly (rwhite@cityofdavis.org).
The value added through innovation at UC Davis, now considered by some to be the top ag school in the world, is far greater than the production loses from cropland being taken out of production locally to support the infrastructure needed to carry out that part of our land grant university’s mission.
I agree with Mr. Toad. Ag (i.e., food), beer and wine are three markets that the city of Davis should be leading in. We need a new vision for city that includes a robust economic development plan that partners with the university, but frankly exploits the university. It is not gonna’ get it done limiting acceptance of new business to just those that meet some narrow scope of politically-correct, green technology. Damn Governor Brown for killing RDA.
[quote]is far greater than the production loses from cropland being taken out of production locally[/quote]
Ag and ag tech businesses generally need a good supply of ag land nearby, whether for crop trials or greenhouse space. The good news is that they generally qualify for ag zoning. So they are a net benefit to the county. The model generally is that they go from start-up to being purchased by a larger corporation: CalGene to Monsanto, AgraQuest to Bayer, Genentech to Roche.
Ag sciences are obviously among the great features of UCD, easily exploited without causing development conflicts.
[quote]Damn Governor Brown for killing RDA.[/quote]
One of the best of many good things he’s done so far.
Don, I think it is telling that you think killing RDA was a good thing and you also have a strong aversion to economic growth and development. It all adds up, but there I think your objectivity concerning RDA is questionable to say the list.
say the least. Damn iphone.
[quote]Damn Governor Brown for killing RDA.
One of the best of many good things he’s done so far. [/quote]
Hey Frankly, when their guy cuts back these liberals always think it’s a good thing, but if a Republican makes cuts then they’re just heartless bastards.
[quote]and you also have a strong aversion to economic growth and development.[/quote]
That statement is false. Totally, provably false. You are, as you often do, ascribing positions to me that I do not hold.
RDA is another debate, but redevelopment funds were simply a diversion of tax funds to special projects that benefited particular parts of town. Nothing in the RDA funding would have encouraged the sort of economic development that we’ve been discussing here.
Ok Don. Sorry. I thought you opposed target and peripheral business development. I stand corrected.
[quote]you also have a strong aversion to economic growth and development.[/quote]
vs.
[quote]I thought you opposed target and peripheral business development.[/quote]
I’m guessing you can see the difference between those two sentences.
RDA-generated tax revenue was tax revenue that otherwise would not have existed. The elimination of RDAs was essentially a Democrat union job of stealing. They spent the state into a position where education funding was cut. But instead of truly reforming public sector pay and benefits, Brown raided the RDA cookie jar. It was theft. Most people don’t understand what they lost. The governor screwed them to pay off his union benefactors.
[quote]RDA-generated tax revenue was tax revenue that otherwise would not have existed.[/quote]
Not true. Most of the revenues from RDA’s were simply due to the increase in property values in California. Some was from RDA projects increasing that property value. But to say that the RDA funds from South Davis were generated by RDA projects in the Davis redevelopment area would be barely plausible. Most of it came simply from those houses in South Davis getting more valuable.
[quote]The elimination of RDAs was essentially a Democrat union job of stealing.[/quote]
Unions were barely supportive of the governor’s action, if at all.
[quote]But instead of truly reforming public sector pay and benefits, Brown raided the RDA cookie jar.[/quote]
From the governor’s budget:
[i]The elimination of RDAs allows local governments to protect core public services by returning property tax money to the cities, counties, special districts, and K‐14 schools. This funding can now be used by local governments to fund police, fire, or other critical public services that may have been significantly cut back due to difficult economic conditions. In those areas that contained RDAs, it is estimated that over the current year and budget year, approximately $1.6 billion will be distributed back to counties, $1.2 billion will be distributed back to cities, and $400 million will be distributed back to special districts. This will be a steady source of funding in the future for these entities and will provide significant relief to stretched budgets at the local level.[/i]
[quote]It was theft. Most people don’t understand what they lost. The governor screwed them to pay off his union benefactors.[/quote]
Nope.
More to the point, I can’t see how RDA funding would help with any of the economic development proposals that have been discussed. What did you have in mind that can’t be done now due to lack of RDA funding?
[i]Unions were barely supportive of the governor’s action[/i]
The public-sector unions were more than supportive. Come on Don, you know what I meant. The theft of the tax revenue derived from the redevelopment improvements was specifically to prevent or delay the day of reconing for these over-paid employees of the government.
[i]What did you have in mind that can’t be done now due to lack of RDA funding?[/i]
G Street. Richards Blvd overpass. Help with Nishi.
Nishi doesn’t need any help. What does G Street need? What do you have in mind for Richards Blvd.? I can’t imagine the ‘optics’ — to use David’s term from before — of using taxpayers’ money for dressing up the entrance to town while the parks and greenbelts are being neglected and the streets are barely being patched. We couldn’t even get a parking garage. I don’t think you’re going to find much support for using tax dollars for any of those things right now.
There was no ‘theft of tax revenue’. If anything, the RDA’s represented a gross distortion and inappropriate redirection of tax dollars. The money from RDA’s is going to other local governments and agencies. Inasmuch as local governments and agencies have staff, it is, as you note, going to pay the staff there. But your obsessive bias against public employees is skewing your analysis, again.
The governor has achieved some measure of pension reform and has reduced the budget deficit, with a projected surplus in the next budget year. Eliminating the RDA’s made a simpler, fairer budget. It made it possible to return some money to school districts that need it, and reduced the amount of tax increase he needed to go to the voters for. And I couldn’t find a single article indicating public-sector union support for abolishing the RDA’s. Maybe you can find one for me.
The projected surplus is the result of Brown’s tax increases and an over-heated stock market. In terms of real growth in the California economy…
[quote]California’s poverty rate adjusted for housing costs grew over five percentage points from 1990 to 2011, the third largest increase among all states (see Neumark and Muz 2013). Even excluding the Great Recession, California’s growth in the poverty rate still ranked 13th highest among states. This rise in poverty is consistent with relative declines in job opportunities for less-skilled workers. California’s relatively high economic growth combined with its relatively low job growth may have disadvantaged less-skilled workers, highlighting a key challenge facing policymakers. That is, the greater economic efficiency that helps spur economic growth sometimes comes at the cost of social equity.[/quote]
This result echoes the expected pattern of current liberal Democrats’ economic policy. That is to dismantle or ignore infrastructure that directly and indirectly serves those that need a job, and use the money that would otherwise be spent on these things to pad the pockets of the public sector unions, while growing a larger population of unemployed people having no choice but to vote for the party that gives out the most free stuff.