Candidate Survey – Yolo People Power – Part 2 (Corrected)

(Editor’s note: this is the second of six candidate surveys of the Davis City Council, Yolo Supervisor, and Woodland Council Candidates).

Yolo People Power 2020 Candidate Survey

Yolo People Power is a county-wide network of residents working toward criminal justice reform.  To better understand the level of commitment of current candidates for city councils and the Yolo Board of Supervisors races, Yolo People Power invited all candidates to respond to a six-question survey.  These were reviewed and scored independently by reviewers from Winters, West Sacramento, Davis, Woodland and UC Davis.

Yolo People Power appreciates the 14 candidates who thoughtfully responded to our questionnaire.  These included the following: Supervisor Jim Provenza and Linda Deos;  Woodland Mayor Pro Tempore Tom Stallard and candidates Karen Bayne and Victoria Fernandez; and Davis Vice-Mayor Lucas Frerichs, Councilmember Will Arnold, Josh Chapman, Kelsey Fortune, Connor Gorman, Larry Guenther, Dillan Horton, Rochelle Swanson, and Colin Walsh.  Their willingness to put their thoughts to paper and to respond to a community group demonstrates a level of responsiveness to community concerns which we commend.

The high scorers demonstrated complete answers and awareness of impacted populations. They provided examples of previous reform efforts, offered specific ideas they would support going forward and demonstrated a commitment to civic engagement, particularly with the most impacted populations.  A perfect score would be a “4”.

Yolo People Power (YPP) founded in January 2017, was originally focused on policing in Davis.  The group soon expanded its scope to all of Yolo County and now has active members from all Yolo municipalities. The group supports policies and programs which prevent crime, assist those in crisis, treat all people with dignity and prepare inmates to reintegrate into communities.  Hoang-Van Nguyen of the West Sacramento chapter explains “We recognize systemic and institutional racism and call upon our local governments to undertake the difficult work of transforming public safety from a policing and punitive approach to a public safety model.”

To receive a PDF of all the completed answers, please email YoloPeoplePower@gmail.com. To learn more about Yolo People Power, visit https://www.facebook.com/Yolo-People-Power-104100361133412


Q2. Do you believe there is systemic racism in your jurisdiction? Please elaborate.

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

Linda Deos

Absolutely. It is evident and clear, and one data point that cannot be denied is that Yolo County’s population is 3% black, but our jailed population is 25% black. The DA, in his recently released budget outline, would like you to believe that this disparity does not imply bias as not everyone arrested in Yolo is a resident of Yolo. But as outlined in the Yolo County Public Defender’s Office Blueprint for Change, “Nearly every decision in the criminal justice continuum is subjective and involves the discretion of the decision maker– including which crimes to investigate, who to arrest, what crimes to charge, setting bail or releasing from jail on own recognizance conditions, what plea offer to make, what sentences should be handed down, and what probation or parole supervision will look like.” Only the courts are authorized to act as a check upon these decisions. Currently, the DA’s ambitions appear to encroach upon the role of the courts.

Supervisor Jim Provenza

I believe that there is systemic racism in all jurisdictions. At my request, the county held a workshop this summer disclosing racial disparities in both our criminal justice and child welfare system. The next step is to identify the source or sources of those disparities and develop ongoing solutions. This will be included in our strategic plan discussion on September 15, 2020. I continue to support implicit bias training for all police officers, sheriff’s deputies, deputy district attorneys, and DA investigators in Yolo County. Also, every department should have a citizen’s commission to review bias related issues.


Davis City Council Candidates

Council Member Will Arnold

Systemic racism is embedded in every part of our society, in every institution, including healthcare, education, business, housing and yes, political leadership. But it is our system of policing and criminal justice where the consequences of systemic racism are the most troubling and severe, including people of color avoiding police interaction, living in fear, losing their freedoms, or being killed. It would be naive to suggest that the City of Davis and the Davis Police Department are immune to the realities of systemic

racism. As we know, systemic racism is not about what is in the “heart” of the individuals enacting policies and practices, but what is at the heart of the institutions that they serve. You do not need individuals to have or act on personal racists beliefs for institutional racism to exist.

Josh Chapman

Yes, there certainly is. As we all know, Davis has historically been primarily a homogenous community. For most of its history, the citizenry has been overwhelmingly white and privileged. That inevitably leads to systemic and institutional racism, even where the citizens have the best intentions. South Davis has a disproportionate number of low income and minority residents. It is one of the things about South Davis

that makes it such a wonderful and vibrant place. The diversity at Marguerite Montgomery Elementary school, and it’s Two Way Bi-Lingual Immersion program, has greatly benefited both of my sons’ educational experience. However, South Davis’s demographics have also led to the interests of many of its residents being ignored in city politics. I support the transition to district voting in large part because my community will finally have a voice and advocate on the City Council.

Kelsey Fortune

Yes. Whether or not the data indicate a bias in interactions, arrests, convictions, and sentencing; racism is inherent in any system that has racist roots. Modern policing is inextricably linked to the racist policies that have been historically enforced. Racism casts an unfortunate shadow over many long-standing institutions. We need to address all of these by implementing policies which limit the hold these systems have on our community.

Council Member Lucas Frerichs

Systemic racism exists in Davis, because it exists in the U.S. Systemic racism involves our institutions collectively upholding racist policies: education, health care, housing, etc. It’s a ripple effect from hundreds of years of racist and discriminatory practices that still play out across the country today. To see the impact of systemic racism, just look at the statistics. For example, African Americans are incarcerated at more than five times the rate of white people in America. Although African Americans and Hispanics make up about 32% of the U.S. population, they made up 56% of all incarcerated people in 2015, according to the NAACP. As for health care, in 2017, 10.6% of African Americans were uninsured, compared with 5.9% of non-Hispanic white people, according to the 2017 U.S. census. In 2018, 8.7% of African American adults received mental health services, compared with 18.6% of non-Hispanic white adults, according to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Minority Health.  I’m aware of my privilege. I believe its important that we all take the time to educate ourselves, recognize our implicit bias, and open our eyes to how we got here.

Connor Gorman

Definitely. The U.S. was founded and built on racism which is still embedded throughout our society. Davis is no exception. To begin with, despite what some may think, all of the weaknesses in modern policing described above apply to Davis just as much as they do to other jurisdictions. DPD certainly enforces unjust laws and both data and numerous personal accounts spanning decades show that bias exists within the DPD, one of the most egregious and well-known examples being the Picnic Day 5 incident. Along with police violence, housing is another major component of systemic racism in Davis. Because of the high cost of living in Davis, few low-income people (who are disproportionately people of color) can afford to live here. The resulting isolation and wealthy white bubble cause an unfriendly environment and increases the chances of interpersonal discrimination for members of marginalized communities who do live, work, or go to school in Davis. One reason for the relatively low level of police violence in Davis compared to other jurisdictions could simply be a result of demographics and which populations police tend to target, rather than having to do with the police themselves.

Larry Guenther

Yes. I believe racial, economic, and gender bias are endemic to our culture and our society. There is ample evidence to support this belief, but a quote by Jesse Jackson illustrates it well: “There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps… then turn around and see somebody white and feel relieved.” When the Davis PD are called on a ‘suspicious person,’ that is walking their dog in their own neighborhood but happens to be a person of color (actual incident), that shows the racism inherent in our culture. The police are part of our culture, but I believe the effect is amplified in the police department because of society’s view of the role of police, the way police are recruited, and the way they are trained. Khalil Gibran Muhammad’s book The Condemnation of Blackness, poignantly illustrates how the association of color and crime has occurred in our society. Overcoming this false association will be the most difficult thing our community and our nation has ever dealt with.

Dillan Horton

At first glance a strength of our system of policing is the rhetorical commitment from PD & City leadership to make this system more workable for traditionally underserved populations. This highlights the first glance weakness of the system that it is often unwilling to go beyond rhetorical gestures to develop true public safety for people of color, for those experiencing housing insecurity, those dealing with substance use issues, and those going through a mental health crisis. When people in these populations experience threat or crime their first thought usually isn’t to the police, because there is no expectation of genuine help or support.

Rochelle Swanson

Systematic racism exists in nearly every jurisdiction. Even if modern policies in one’s city are racially neutral, the inhabitants and visitors to a community have likely benefited or been harmed by generational structural racism. As an example, Davis had neighborhoods where there were restrictive covenants on who could purchase property. That no longer exists. However, a person of color who has moved here may come from a family where no one has held property and they are the first to attend university. Their classmate could be the fourth generation to own the home. Though they may be sitting side by side equal in measure in people, their monthly expenses, family support and general feeling of acceptance is vastly different. It is not enough to state current policies do not support structural racism. It is important to recognize that we are a product of individual experiences. If one is raised in a community where a neighborhood is patrolled by racist police officers, their interaction with even the best trained, anti-racist police officer will be one of fear. Therefore, it is imperative to foster a culture of seeing people as individuals, not stereotypes.

Colin Walsh

There is systemic racism in all American communities. It is impossible to separate current situations from a deep history and practices of racism in the US.  Police historically often existed as a system for managing and even producing inequality by suppressing social movements and unions, and by tightly managing the movements of poor and non-white people. This may not always directly and fully apply to the Davis PD, but systemic racism also affects housing, homelessness, employment, education, and other aspects of Davis.  In the not too distant past, redlining practices in Davis excluded minority home buyers from participation in the post WWII housing boom.  We may not exactly have red lines anymore, but bank lending practices have been found to continue to discriminate against communities and people of color.  These are complex problems and there is no one solution to any of them.  Events that work to change attitudes are important, but in some cases policies themselves need modification. Fortunately, in Davis there has been change over time, but there is a need for ongoing evaluation and systemic change now and into the future.


West Sacramento Candidates

None of the 7 candidates from West Sacramento responded the survey invitation.


Woodland City Council Candidates

Karen Rosenkilde-Bayne

Systemic racism exists throughout society, so it’s likely to exist in every law enforcement jurisdiction as well. But to say that all law enforcement officers are racist is simplistic and untrue. In fact, most people would define themselves as “not racist,” but this is myopic and simplistic. It is more accurate to say that we are all products of a society built on racism, and the systems we’ve created contain power dynamics derived from racism. Those dynamics continue to infiltrate all of us, no matter our background. Our responsibility is to create space in those systems for change. It is important that everyone is aware of our history of systemic racism and examine our systems for both overt and covert racism, as well our own running dialogue inside our heads. In Woodland, all voters are constituents, but not all constituents are voters. Many constituents do not vote: the young, the disenfranchised, and non-citizens. If non-voting groups were victims of racially biased policing, they would be unable to impact change through the democratic process. This leaves them especially vulnerable. Therefore, elected officials must be their voice.

Victoria Fernandez

I believe systemic racism exists throughout our country, and unfortunately, Woodland is no exception.  Although we may want to believe that it does not, we must examine our policies, our hiring practices, our schools, our real estate market, and our daily interactions with others.  Every person who lives in Woodland should feel equally valued and respected.

Vice Mayor Tom Stallard

Having taken two courses on implicit bias over four days in the last two years, I realized that systemic racism is a reality in America. Even those of us who do not like to think of ourselves as racist, have unconscious attitudes that form our behavior, particularly our response to certain situations. The way to address this is to understand it, accept it, and seek ways to provide antidotes such as dialogue among diverse groups. Being optimistic, I believe we can do this and that current challenges will lead us to a better place.


Support our work – to become a sustaining at $5 – $10- $25 per month hit the link:

About The Author

Disclaimer: the views expressed by guest writers are strictly those of the author and may not reflect the views of the Vanguard, its editor, or its editorial board.

Related posts

44 Comments

  1. David Greenwald

    *** Correction original version had inadvertently reported Kelsey Fortune’s answer for Connor Gorman’s.  Connor Gorman’s response is now accurately posted.

  2. Cindy Pickett

    I very much appreciate that Yolo People Power posed this question to the candidates running for local office and appreciate those candidates that offered a response.

    The theme that I see in the responses is that there is recognition that systemic racism exists and that it must be eradicated. But the challenge isn’t acknowledging systemic racism in the abstract (that’s easy), but seeing it when it is right in front of you in the everyday decisions and actions that you are a part of.

    What is extremely frustrating to BIPOC and others is when elected officials talk about ending racial injustice but still engage in it by supporting racist policies and actions and either denying the discriminatory outcomes or justifying it in some way.

    There are many wonderful candidates and incumbent officials who responded above. When you take office, it is my hope that you take an antiracist approach to your duties as an elected official. We ask staff to provide us with financial impact analyses and information about the environmental impact of projects, but why don’t we ask for a social impact analysis where there is a deep dive into how a project or policy might affect people of color in the community. Or how a project or budgetary decision does or does not contribute to structural racism and inequality. Why isn’t this a standard report? As I said in a discussion recently, Davis seems to care more about the fate of burrowing owls than the fate of its Black and Brown residents. Let’s do better.

    1. Ron Oertel

      Davis seems to care more about the fate of burrowing owls than the fate of its Black and Brown residents. Let’s do better.

      One way to “do better” is to avoid making incendiary comments like that.

      1. David Greenwald

        It’s a long-standing issue here. When I first started I was frustrated that people would often get up in arms about small matters but shrug off civil rights concerns.

        1. Ron Oertel

          You think that killing owls for development is a “small matter”?

          Sounds like you and Cindy think alike.

          That attitude, by the way, is the reason for the condition of the natural environment today – including species extinctions, loss of habitat, climate change, etc. Unfortunately, you and Cindy are not alone in that view. Not by a longshot.

          Ultimately, it will impact people including, (and perhaps especially) people of color. It already is.

          1. David Greenwald

            I guess I have two choice here – I could reciprocate with an in-kind response. Or I can beg out of the conversation.

    2. Alan Miller

      Davis seems to care more about the fate of burrowing owls than the fate of its Black and Brown residents.

      False comparison rhetorical trick that does nothing for anyone’s cause.

    3. Bill Marshall

      With all due respect Cindy, I recall things differently… you were silent, not even making a suggestion, that an election vs. appointment process would be used to fill your over half-term seat.

      You appear to have been content that an appointment process be used until that process resulted in appointment of a female white… I suspect you would have also objected if the appointee had been a male POC.

      I objected to the process, given the length of term remaining, and the proximity for the seat to be on a regular election, or a special election in an election year…[I think the Board could have done a temporary appointment, pending the results of the regular election, where the appointee could also run (I was disappointed that the appointee chose not to run)]

      When the petition to nullify the appointment (some call it “recall”, and that appears to be the effect (actually I think they used the word in the petition) was circulated, I saw it as a perfect opportunity to voice my objection to the process.

      But had the appointment process resulted in a female POC Board Member, I suspect you would have remained silent, except as a ‘congratulations’ to the appointee.

      You are ‘spinning’ your actions/inactions, IMNSHO.  Please own the decisions you made, and your inactions/actions.  That would be honest.

      For others, who like to excoriate those who signed the petition as race-motivated, buzz the F off!  I believe had the appointee been a male POC, there would have been a similar position.  Unless it was a female POC, those race/gender/”diversity” folk would have likely done the petition thingy… I believe that those would liked the ‘process’ initially, thought it was more ‘locked’ as to a female POC than an election might be.

      I am disappointed that the two “finalists” are not both running in November, for the remainder of the last at-large position…  I became convinced that as people, either could have served well as an interim, with the final choice being made by voters Nov 3.  Process!

      This “district” thing may well defeat the concept of diversity, in the future.

      But it is what it is… effort spent on woulda’, coulda’, shoulda’, is futile… yet, as some are playing that “game”, I’ll speak my piece as well.

      Dwelling on the DJUSD thingy last spring, is pretty close to being off-topic on this thread.

  3. Ron Oertel

    I’d be interested to know what any of these candidates think of the successful effort to recall a school board member, which was apparently acknowledged to be based upon skin color.

    1. Cindy Pickett

      Hi Ron – I just want to clarify that the individuals who signed the petition had many different reasons for doing so and that race might not have factored into their decision at all.

      As far as what motivated me personally to engage in the effort to put the seat up for election, I was concerned about having a board that did not reflect the full diversity of the community. The primary duty of a school board member is to “ensure that school districts are responsive to the values, beliefs and priorities of the community” (CSBA). In my opinion, it is difficult to achieve that goal without a board that is tuned into to the various sub-communities that exist. A vote allows those sub-communities to weigh in and determine for themselves who should represent them.

      1. Ron Oertel

        Thanks for the response.

        But as far as the goals that you list, recalling a school board member based upon skin color is not the same thing.

        In all honesty, I thought it was disgraceful.  I was actually embarrassed for those who initiated or signed the petition based upon that reason (skin color).

        Had they not been following the existing process, that would be a different matter.  Or, if the same effort would have been made – had the selectee’s skin color been more “desirable”.

        1. Cindy Pickett

          Hi Ron – I think I get where you are coming from. If one interprets the situation as a community recalling an official based solely on their skin color, then it does sound disgraceful and like a form of reverse discrimination. And if I were a white person, I would hope that my skin color would not automatically render me ineligible to serve. So, I get how it seems wrong.

          But I want to challenge you to think about this in another way. Imagine that there is a dining table with 5 seats and for years (since the inception of the table), it’s been dominated by the same groups of people. Making space at that table for different voices and perspectives means that someone else loses their seat.  The “cost” of achieving diversity is that the dominant group may lose out.

          How does that sit with you?

           

        2. Keith Olsen

          But that table had been set with one Asian and one black person, it wasn’t like it was all white people at that table.  The replacement was just a temporary position and she  didn’t get to serve based on her skin color.

          1. David Greenwald

            Cindy left. They were all men. And it wasn’t a temporary position, it was a two and a half year one. That’s more than half a term. It gets back to the issue we discussed at the time – the confluence between bad process and bad outcome caused people to act.

        3. Eric Gelber

          The “cost” of achieving diversity is that the dominant group may lose out.

          I would somewhat disagree with this statement in that diversity benefits the entire community, including the dominant group. An individual may lose out; however, that’s always the case with selection processes—whether for elected office, corporate board positions, job positions, college admissions, etc.—when slots are limited. Diversity is a valid goal and, thus, a legitimate factor to consider in filling positions. (I would also note that the individual removed from the school board had the same opportunity to run for the position as anyone else but chose not to.)

        4. Ron Oertel

          Thanks for your questions/interest, Cindy.  I’ll go ahead and respond to your comment.

          Hi Ron – I think I get where you are coming from. If one interprets the situation as a community recalling an official based solely on their skin color, then it does sound disgraceful and like a form of reverse discrimination.

          This isn’t my “interpretation” – it’s apparently an acknowledged reality (for some).  There is no such thing as “reverse discrimination”, as there’s ultimately only one type.  To call it “reverse” discrimination is to diminish it, in much the same way that some claim that people of color cannot be “racist”.  There is, however, legal discrimination and illegal discrimination.

          And if I were a white person, I would hope that my skin color would not automatically render me ineligible to serve. So, I get how it seems wrong.

          I would hope that this type of conclusion would not be limited to “white” people. In fact, I don’t believe it is, based upon (for example) the concerns of some Asians in regard to affirmative action and university admissions.  (I understand that the state affirmative action ballot measure is likely going to lose.)

          But I want to challenge you to think about this in another way. Imagine that there is a dining table with 5 seats and for years (since the inception of the table), it’s been dominated by the same groups of people. Making space at that table for different voices and perspectives means that someone else loses their seat.  The “cost” of achieving diversity is that the dominant group may lose out.

          In this case, there were 5 representatives who were already elected to represent the interests of customers of the school district.  4 remained, when one resigned.  Via the “recall”, there is an implication that they did not do a good job representing their constituents – based solely upon the skin color of the selectee.  That is the part that I take issue with.  As a side note, I understand that one of the 4 remaining board members is a person of color, as Keith noted above.

          (Interestingly enough, there doesn’t seem to be much concern regarding gender.)

          The only person who is now running for that seat is a person of color (though “which” colors, I’m not sure of, or how closely that represents the “desired” color(s).  Regardless, I would not conclude that the person running for that seat would do a better job (within the scope of their duties) of representing their constituents (or even have a greater understanding of those constituents, as not all “colors” are the same in the first place).  In such a situation, it’s entirely possible that someone of color would do a worse job of representing various colors.

          It starts bordering on absurdity, at some point.

          I assume there’s a reason (other than skin color) that the board selected a white person, in this case.

          How does that sit with you?

          Regarding “losing a seat at the table”, I don’t see that as an issue.  To do so would go back to “counting colors”, again.  There’s a lot of people who spend a great deal of time counting colors as a “goal” (as well as “counting gender”, etc.).  But to answer your question, it sits just fine with me.  I suspect that California (in general) will increasingly have diverse representatives, without forcing the issue by recalling someone of the “wrong” color.

          Personally, I also wouldn’t vote for someone based upon skin color, gender, disability status, sexual orientation, gender identity, etc.).

          I do, however, support people who care about owls (and environmental concerns in general).  Maybe some will claim that’s primarily a “white” thing?  😉  Then again, the Central Park “birder” (in regard to the “Karen” case there) was black.

          As a side note, some environmental organizations purposefully reach out to communities which have a high proportion of non-white persons (particularly “brown” and “black” populations), which I think is critical to long-term success.  But on a broader level, environmental problems will likely disproportionately impact people of color throughout the world, regardless.

          I’m curious as to your thoughts as to whether or not it would have been acceptable to appoint an Asian person, to the board.  (Since you specifically mentioned “brown and black” people, earlier.)

          I do not doubt that black people (in particular) face challenges that other people of color (or of “no color”) don’t face.  Again, this shows the problem of lumping together all “people of color”, in a political manner.

          Bottom line:  I don’t support quotas, much less recall efforts based upon skin color.  And that goes for purposeful discrimination against Asian college enrollments, as well.

           

           

           

           

           

        5. Ron Oertel

          But perhaps the most “odd” thing of all (regarding counting colors) was the deafening silence on this blog regarding the “Davis Buyer’s” program (or whatever it was called) in regard to WDAAC. In fact, it was “worse” than silence, as some who are (normally) exceedingly concerned about counting colors seemed to actually defend it.

          Where was the concern, then? Why did it only arise with an almost meaningless school board appointment – but not with a much bigger, potentially more-impactful issue? (With the notable exception of a couple of commenters, only one of whom still comments on here.)

      2. Bill Marshall

        I just want to clarify that the individuals who signed the petition had many different reasons for doing so and that race might not have factored into their decision at all.

        Darn straight.  Thank you for that!

  4. Ron Glick

    The first amendment right to petition for redress of grievances:

    How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.I love thee to the depth and breadth and heightMy soul can reach, when feeling out of sightFor the ends of being and ideal grace.I love thee to the level of every day’sMost quiet need, by sun and candle-light.I love thee freely, as men strive for right.I love thee purely, as they turn from praise.I love thee with the passion put to useIn my old griefs, and with my childhood’s faith.I love thee with a love I seemed to loseWith my lost saints. I love thee with the breath,Smiles, tears, of all my life; and, if God choose,I shall but love thee better after death.

    Elizabeth Browning

  5. Cindy Pickett

    Just getting back to this now after the internet outage and a long day of work on Friday.

    Bill – I recused myself from voting after receiving advice that I should let the remaining board members decide who should replace me and serve with them. I thought that this was the appropriate action. I regret that decision.

    And you are right that I would not have made a fuss if a WOC had been appointed because for me it was about the outcome. I felt that to fulfill its duty to represent the values and priorities of the community, there needed to be diversity on the board. I trusted and hoped that the appointment process would lead to that outcome (it would have saved the district money and that was a significant concern). But I was skeptical. If you go to video of the board meeting in early July (after the George Floyd murder) you will hear me say that women of color don’t get appointed, and that I wanted the seat to go to a vote.

    I am not sure how I can be more honest. I can also refer you to the Vanguard’s article right after the school board appointment. I clearly stated that I wasn’t happy with the fact the appointment process did not lead to the outcome that I thought was best for the community and that I thought the election process could get us there.

     

    1. Ron Oertel

      Congratulations?

      I still don’t understand how some can support affirmative action (knowing that it results in the displacement of Asians on campuses), but simultaneously use the opposite logic regarding a school board appointment (where they’re considered a “minority”).  Maybe it depends upon the “origin” of an Asian, as they are also not all “lumped together”?

      Seems to me that (given the logic put forth on here), the selection should have been limited to a “black” or “brown” person – whether or not they applied.

      I shudder to think of the impact all of this has on schoolchildren, and how they may be interpreting it (e.g., among various “skin colors”). Same thing with ethnic studies, actually. I sometimes wonder if there’s room to question what’s being taught, and encourage critical thinking regarding these types of subjects. (I suspect the answer to that is “no”.)

      1. David Greenwald

        This is what MLK wrote in 1967: “It is, however, important to understand that giving a man his due may often mean giving him special treatment. I am aware of the fact that this has been a troublesome concept for many liberals, since it conflicts with their traditional ideal of equal opportunity and equal treatment of people according to their individual merits. But this is a day which demands new thinking and the reevaluation of old concepts. A society that has done something special against the Negro for hundreds of years must now do something special for him, in order to equip him to compete on a just and equal basis.”

        1. Ron Oertel

          That response didn’t address the example I presented, regarding Asians.

          If anything, it reinforced the logical conclusion I did present – which apparently wasn’t among the choices.

          And in fact, that conclusion only focuses on one color. Not “people of color”.

          1. David Greenwald

            The importance of the passage is the notion of prolonged oppression and the need to affirmatively address that. It is not enough to take your knee of their neck, you must also help them up.

  6. Alan Miller

    I appreciate the candor as well, though I disagree.  I would have been cool with the reversal if the person who was appointed hadn’t got booted and was allowed to serve until the election, and I’d be cool if the same thing would have happened had the person who was elected been of a different — ahem — “race”.

    Because it was about process.

    I hope Dillan makes it to Council.  Not because of diversity, of his race, or even his politics.  Rather, because he seems like a solid guy who I’d want on the Council.

    I believe in the efforts of the group formed to promote and support people of color getting into office.  That is how such efforts should be done.  If everyone on the board, or city council, was a person of color, I wouldn’t feel I was “unrepresented”.  Have there been any Jews on the Council?  I don’t even know, nor do I count, or care.

    1. Ron Oertel

       Rather, because he seems like a solid guy who I’d want on the Council.

      He seems like a guy who would “solidly” support something like Trackside (and Paul’s Place), though I haven’t seen him weigh in on that level of specificity.

      Actually, THOSE are the types of questions I would ask. (And of course, questions regarding peripheral development proposals.)

      I would also ask about fiscal matters.

      Systemic racism in Davis? Not so much.

      1. Alan Miller

        He seems like a guy who would “solidly” support something like Trackside (and Paul’s Place), though I haven’t seen him weigh in on that level of specificity.

        Possibly so on the issues, though almost everyone at office level seems to feel they must support Paul’s Place.  After all, how can one not be for ‘housing for the homeless’.  If you frame it as ‘free housing for actively-using drug addicts’ it sounds entirely different, doesn’t it?  When I explain what ‘housing first’ is to people around town, I get a negative reaction from a majority,  yet everyone we elect, all over, seem to be for it, or more likely many feel that can’t possibly come out against it and not bring down a political firestorm upon themselves.

        I vote based on intuition more than issues.  Perhaps that seems like a crazy criteria to many people.  My intuition told me both Donald and Hillary would be horrible choices, and I couldn’t vote for either of them.

    2. David Greenwald

      There have been plenty of Jews on council – just off the top of my head Dave Rosenberg and Sue Greeenwald come to mind. There are certainly others.

      And to be clear, People Power isn’t a group that formed to promote and support people of color getting into office.

      1. Alan Miller

        Aaaaah, Dave Rosenberg, of course.  I even have a Dave Rosenberg oven mit.  True story.  And I didn’t even know S Greenwald was Jewish – I probably should have realized that.  But this just proves my point — I can’t say either one of them “represented me”, more or less than anyone else who’s ever been on council.

        And to be clear, I wasn’t talking about Yolo People Power, I was talking about Yolo Committee for Diverse and Inclusive Elections (YCDIE) “Our mission is to support political candidates who will contribute to diverse elected bodies in Yolo County.”

        1. David Greenwald

          “And to be clear, I wasn’t talking about Yolo People Power”

          I wasn’t sure, so thought it would be best to clarify

          I don’t think Sue was (is) religious at all, I do recall during a long debate on Palestinian-Israeli issues a Jewish person came up and called her a self-hater. It’s kind of like Stephen Miller is Jewish, but probably doesn’t represent the majority of Jews in this country.

        2. Alan Miller

          I see Jewish-ness as much deeper than whether one is religious or not.

          But books have been written about that – no need to get off on that tangent here.

          Two Jews / Three Opinions – Jews hold the entire range of views on the Palestine-Israel issues.  It’s a huge divide even amongst those at the local gathering spot.

  7. Ron Glick

    “I hope Dillan makes it to Council.  Not because of diversity, of his race, or even his politics.  Rather, because he seems like a solid guy who I’d want on the Council.”

    I think Dillon needs to respond to the Grand Jury’s critical report on the Police Accountability Commission that he chairs.

    1. Alan Miller

      I think Dillon . . .

      I wonder if Yolo County residents who misspell “Dillan” will be subject to the same accusations that GOP members are over the mispronounciation of “Kamala”:

      Democrats See Racism in GOP Mispronunciations of ‘Kamala’
      https://www.usnews.com/news/politics/articles/2020-08-22/democrats-see-racism-in-gop-mispronunciations-of-kamala

      And as for that Grand Jury report on the Police Accountability Commission, that there is some rough timing for release of that report vis-a-vis the election.

        1. Alan Miller

          My response?  Didn’t I outline that in the article about that?

          And no need to apologize, I allow people to make mistakes in spelling and pronunciation, and don’t make it into an excuse to find evil motives for political gain. So says Allen Miller!

  8. Ron Glick

    “It’s kind of like Stephen Miller is Jewish, but probably doesn’t represent the majority of Jews in this country.”

    Probably? That #$%^^&* was denounced by his own rabbi.

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