The first question asked how they felt about promoting businesses that cater to UC Davis students and whether they had plans to do so. For Sue Greenwald, downtown was one of her main focuses—to make it vital. When she first arrived in Davis, the downtown was deserted on weekends and during the summers. She talks about focusing on more arts in the downtown area and Miskah’s café coming to the downtown. She wants it to remain bicycle friendly.
Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald wants to work with the business community to bring in more businesses that cater to students and that stay open after 9 pm. “We do need businesses that will stay open later, this is a university town.” She also talked about the downtown area remaining safe for bicyclist and bringing in more entertainment—bands, student nights once a month that will have music and entertainment.
The next question was directed to Stephen Souza and Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald, it asked about councilmembers having the ability to take positions on major issues such as the war in Iraq. Stephen Souza’s answer was simply yes. “We have a moral obligation to take positions on issues that directly affect this community in ways that sometimes don’t seem as direct.” He talks about the direct impact of the war in Iraq on money that has been taken from the community, the cost of human lives some of whom are community members, and finally talked about the “degradation and reduction of the ability of the national guard to respond to potential emergencies that occur.”
Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald: “Yes, definitely. We have members of the community that are impacted by the war.” Further, “I chaired the city of Davis’ Human Relations Commission and I was proud that I as chair of the commission and the commissioners that served with me, we took a stand when the war first started, we forwarded a resolution to City Council, the council was not in favor of it as a whole, there were some on the council that opposed it.”
Don Saylor and Sydney Vergis were asked: “What do you think the main source of revenue for Davis should be?” Don Saylor talked about sources for revenue. Mr. Saylor wants to look at creating a “balanced portfolio of revenues from all the sources.” Right now, sales tax revenue accounts for 30% of our general fund, half of that is from gasoline and automobile sales. Most cities it is around 20%. In sales tax, Davis ranks near the bottom in per person revenue. Without increased sales tax, we need to look at direct taxes in parcel and park taxes.
Sydney Vergis said that these are tough times. She first laid out in general the problem of finding where revenue can come from particularly emphasized increasing sales tax revenue. “I think one way is for the students right now you have a great meal plan set up where if you do buy a meal plan on campus you can go to vendors off campus and use your card; I would love to see that program expanded to all of not only our downtown businesses but to our businesses in various neighborhoods.” She said that will be a great way to increase business and student involvement.
How will you bring high-tech jobs or green collar jobs to Davis? Stephen Souza, “That’s a great question. We have to, we have to do it because of the answer to one of your prior questions, we have to diversify our sales tax base and we need to diversify our revenue base in Davis.” Talks about the need to set aside land to recruit spin-offs from this university. The land needs to be zoned and it has to be at least 100 acres. Souza wants to see an electric auto production facility, a photovoltaic production facility in this town, and a 30 megawatt facility on the edge of this town.
Sydney Vergis, “This is one thing that we’ve looked at hard on the BEDC, and that is, how do you attract good companies to Davis? Davis has an anti-business reputation” Talks about the need for zoning for such business—we need to create a green tech zone and to streamline the zoning process. “We are looking at bringing businesses to the Mondavi and showing them what a great place it is.” She then went on to say that “I personally outgrew the job opportunities here in Davis quite rapidly.”
The next question for Stephen Souza and Sydney Vergis asked about jobs and affordable housing. Souza talked about starting a business of his own and that the affordability of homes is far out of reach. “We on this council have passed the most stringent and fairest affordable housing ordinance in the nation. The problem is that if you don’t have any development of any potential size, you can have small little projects… you don’t have any of any potential size. The affordable housing ordinance that we passed has parameters within it right now that there has to be 45 percent of every project that is between the price ranges of $177,000 for a family of two, to 464,000 for a family of four in a three-bedroom house. That’s the ranges that you have to have for a homes within the Affordable Housing ordinance that we passed. We don’t get very many of those. We had 44 permits issued last year… You take the calculations and you find that the affordable numbers that you get out of that is even less because when the projects are smaller, that percentage shrinks. We did that so that the burden could be borne over a larger number of units. You need a large enough project to get a larger number of affordable units”
Sydney Vergis, “the common thread between jobs and housing is a lack of range of both. As I spoke before the range of jobs here is minimal and as I mentioned before, I outgrew my job opportunities here quite quickly and I’m now forced to work out of town [note: she’s a land use planner].” Also talks about a reverse commute to Davis by those who cannot afford to live in the city of Davis.
Sue Greenwald jumped in to argue that our housing choices are problematic. “I was the only one to vote against building the last three subdivisions with McMansions, I said let’s build smaller houses and get voted down.” She thinks the only that is really hopeful is “the collapse of housing prices, they’ve been ridiculous, they are going to come down… life is going to get a lot easier when they come back to the historical inflation adjusted average, which they will.”
Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald also jumped in. “When we speak of affordable housing, for the most part we are really talking about housing for middle income people.” She then went on to talk about the fact that Measure X really did not meet the affordability needs of most middle income Davis residents. $464,000 is not affordable for most working people. And the average price in Covell Village would have been higher than that. There are also environment trade-offs for such developments. She also talked about building smaller but more affordable homes for people who live in this community.
Don Saylor: “I think we need to look ahead to what the solutions are… We have a housing supply problem in Davis that we must address.”
One of the more provocative questions for Sue Greenwald and Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald. “Tandem properties owns the leases to about half of this group’s homes. What is your relationship with Tandem’s owner Mr. Whitcombe and have you accepted any donations from Mr. Whitcombe.”
Sue Greenwald: “My relationship with Mr. Whitcombe, I’d classify as very poor. I haven’t gotten money from any of the special interests—meaning the city employee groups, anyone who I am in the position to grant favors to in a major sort of way—not the fire department, not the major developers, peripheral developers… It allows me to not have to feel bad if I have to say no.”
Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald: “I am proud to say that I haven’t accepted any money from Mr. Whitcombe. I haven’t been offered any money… I will not accept developer money; you will notice that on the back of my brochure. ‘Cecilia’s campaign is not financed with developer contributions.’ I think that’s important. We are here as council candidates to serve you. If people are coming to us and talking about projects, I don’t want there to be a conflict of interest, I want the slate to be clean.”
Don Saylor responded: “I have received a $100 contribution from John Whitcombe and a $100 contribution from his wife. I have also received contributions from about 750 people from our community and beyond. These are people who for whatever reason or another have confidence in my ability to serve this community. We have a campaign finance limit, $100 is the maximum people can contribute. That’s a pretty small amount. My votes cannot be bought, they never have been.”
Stephen Souza: “Special interests come in many different fashions. My largest special interest group are retired people. If you look at my contribution list, you’ll see that the vast majority of those who have contributed to me are retired people, so I guess I’m going to favor retired people. No. I look at each and every issue on the basis of the issue not [who the group is]… I’ll take contributions from anyone who wants to contribute.” Mr. Souza also said that he was the largest contributor to his last campaign, so that would make him a special interest.
Sydney Vergis was the only one not to answer the question, according to her last disclosure, she had received money from Mr. Whitcombe as well.
Don Saylor responded again, and pointed out that Davis has among the most stringent funding requirements in the nation. He said in the last campaign, a candidate [presumably Lamar Heystek] spent $53,000, of which $37,000 came from his own money. He asked if that is what we want, for candidates to fund their own campaigns?
The candidates talked next about keeping Davis graduates in Davis after graduation. Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald talked about partnering with Sacramento and the Sacramento region. She referred to the UC Davis alumni center as a resource for students who are looking for jobs. She wants to see the city and the university to work together on this front. Sydney Vergis talked about the range of job issue and actively recruiting students to work here. But we need to produce more jobs here.
Don Saylor talks about the number of students, who have graduated, left, and then return ten years later and cites this as an extremely important factor. We need to retain that by producing housing and jobs. Stephen Souza talks about the fact that he went to school here and then stayed. “Right now thousands of students graduate every year, there is no way with 44 permits being issued last year, and even with a one percent growth rate if we were to do that, we would be able to house all of the students that graduate that choose to stay here, there’s no way that can happen.” We have to work to find more affordable housing and take the responsible for housing those who work for the university. “We can’t do all, but have to do some of it.” Sue Greenwald makes the pertinent point that we if were to take all of the people who want to live here or who graduated from here, we would be a city of millions. The Mayor talked about her experience of moving from Berkeley due to lack of jobs and housing.
There were three candidate specific questions. The mayor was asked how we could build more infill housing for students while at the same time accommodating those already living in Davis. “I still think that campus is the best place for student housing that there is because you won’t have to be competing with other people for houses, the houses can stay price regulated and there is price control. The university also has the most space for housing.” When the need for housing arises, we will find a place.
Don Saylor was asked about a promise he made to adopt a rental condition ordinance to monitor the quality of rental units. He was specifically asked whether this ordinance was adopted. “No, thank you for reminding me,” he answered. “We have not gotten off square one with that. We recently established a rental housing subcommittee which should be a place where that is grappled with.” He finished, “If you don’t get it done the first term, you always have the second term.”
Final candidate specific question was a pointed question addressed to Sydney Vergis. It said that the Yolo County Young Democrats was founded less than a year ago, and that she has been chair for less than that. It asked her about her previous Democratic Party experience. “My involvement with the Democratic Party is really recent. When I was an undergraduate here I was very involved in my sorority. I was the philanthropy chair and very much into how students could involve themselves with philanthropic activities.”
Four of the candidates responded to a question on Measure J: “Would you approve amend or repeal it?”
Sue Greenwald: “I would renew it. It’s been valuable, it’s a valuable tool. It’s democratic. If we do develop, what Measure J does is put pressure on the developers to offer more.”
Don Saylor: “Measure J is part of the environment. The idea of having people in Davis vote when we’re going to convert farmland to residential property, I think if it was on the ballot exactly as it was the last time, it would probably pass. We have only tested it once, we don’t know what that test means exactly.” We will probably have two future Measure J votes, one being the Wildhorse Ranch. “If the Nische Property, which is a great place for student housing right across the railroad from the Mondavi Center, if that comes forward as a project, then that would be a Measure J vote.” Mr. Saylor agrees that Measure J is tremendous leverage for the city, “but it’s only leverage if at some point a project actually passes.” The constitution he pointed out, has an amendment clause built into it. “I think you always have to keep in mind that maybe you didn’t get it right the first time. I don’t know if there should be a change to Measure J.” He finished, “I do know that Measure J is a part of our environment and should remain so because I think that’s what our residents want. The details of it, I don’t know yet.”
Stephen Souza jumped in: “Yes. Renew it in the form that it’s at. Put it before the voters as it was before the voters in the past. The voters will make the decision if they want to see it renewed.”
Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald: “I support Measure J in its current form. It is important to give the voters the right to have a say.” She mentioned that she came before council and asked council to take a stand one way or the other on Measure J, “and some people said they didn’t want to politicize it. It is a political issue because the voters want to know where people stand on Measure J. Get me on the council and I will vote to keep Measure J in it’s current form.”
Don Saylor: “One thing I think you should do when you listen to people articulate, ‘keep it exactly as it is’ is actually take a look at the language, it’s very complicated language. ‘Keep it exactly as it is’ that’s easy to say and maybe we should.” However, “it’s a pretty complicated thing and I don’t like to make decisions until I get the analysis from our staff and hear the commissions talk about it and what actually took place.”
Don Saylor and Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald were asked about student–police relations.
Don Saylor: “There’s been so much heat, so much smoke, and sometimes a little bit of light as we’ve looked at this issue over the years.” Mr. Saylor talked about the student-police relations committee and the need for communication, talking, and ride alongs. He also mentioned the levels of review that are in place. “One of the challenges is that relationships are often based on perceptions rather than realities… The more we understand the culture that different people work within, the better off we’re going to be to improving relations between groups.”
Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald: “I for six years was chair of the city’s Human Relations Commission, I had students, professors and graduate students come to the commission to express their concerns. And we did address those issues.” She talked about the review process that is now in place. “I think we have a police chief who is doing a better job of working with the officers… We’ll see them in and around the community more, communicating with people.” She talked about the improvement coming from the new police chief and the review process.
They were then asked what a living wage would buy people in this community. Sue Greenwald argued that that level of pay was not a lot, but it was an improvement over the current wages. “I wouldn’t want to have to live on that, I’ll tell you that. I have to be honest about it.” She said she would support a living wage with Lamar Heystek right now.
Stephen Souza said that $13.08 is the least that the city pays any employee which comes out to $21,000. They are talking about contracted out work and most of those pay a living wage except for cleaning services. He supports paying those workers as they do city employees.
Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald: “If elected to the city council, I would unequivocally support a living wage… We cannot as a city, ask the university to pay the Sodexho workers a living wage while not giving those who, even if they are cleaning people for the cit, a living wage. Everybody has to at least earn a living wage.”
Sue Greenwald: said that there was a motion to enact a living wage immediately, and that failed, only “Lamar and I voted for it.” What passed was coming back with more budget analysis.
Sydney Vergis and Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald were asked what issues were most important to them. Sydney Vergis talked about why she was running for city council. Her big focus is the environment. She wants go land use planning to reduce the city’s carbon footprint. She talked about looking at the innovative programs in places like Chicago and applying them to Davis in terms of building design and alternative energies.
Cecilia mentioned two key reasons. First, she talked about the future of our city and the need to protect Davis from sprawl development and preserve open space, agricultural land. “[Davis] is a beautiful town, it is a compact town, it is a town that has a character about it and I want to preserve that. We can still have affordable housing. We can still have urban design that is environmental, that is progressive, forward thinking and cutting edge, because we have a university, but we need to do that responsibly.” The other reason that she is running is that she is committed to building that bridge with the university, she wants to see a better collaboration and relationship with the university.”
Each candidate then issued a closing statement. This was the second public debate, however, after this the debate and forum schedule heats up. There is another candidates forum tonight, this time the Davis Democratic club is the sponsor, that will be a broader forum involving also the Assembly Candidates, the Supervisor Candidates, and the City Council Candidates—again only the Democrats among them. It will take place at 6:45 this evening in the Blanchard Room of the Davis Public Library.
Disclaimer: Doug Paul Davis is married to Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald who is a candidate for the Davis City Council.
—Doug Paul Davis reporting
David, was there a particular reason why Sydney Vergis did not answer the Measure J question?
David, was there a particular reason why Sydney Vergis did not answer the Measure J question?
David, was there a particular reason why Sydney Vergis did not answer the Measure J question?
David, was there a particular reason why Sydney Vergis did not answer the Measure J question?
Candidate Steven Souza’s statements here,not withstanding, his past public record does not inspire confidence that his position on Measure J will not “evolve” if he is elected to our next city council. On this issue, I would want to see him take a CLEAR position, on the record, by offering a resolution that the
current Council supports putting only the original Measure J wording on the ballot for renewal in 2010(minus clearly obsolete references like Covell Village) and will does not support putting competing versions of an amended Measure J on the ballot without unambiguous protections to prevent several Measure J options “gaming the system” to deny the clear public will of the electorate.
Candidate Steven Souza’s statements here,not withstanding, his past public record does not inspire confidence that his position on Measure J will not “evolve” if he is elected to our next city council. On this issue, I would want to see him take a CLEAR position, on the record, by offering a resolution that the
current Council supports putting only the original Measure J wording on the ballot for renewal in 2010(minus clearly obsolete references like Covell Village) and will does not support putting competing versions of an amended Measure J on the ballot without unambiguous protections to prevent several Measure J options “gaming the system” to deny the clear public will of the electorate.
Candidate Steven Souza’s statements here,not withstanding, his past public record does not inspire confidence that his position on Measure J will not “evolve” if he is elected to our next city council. On this issue, I would want to see him take a CLEAR position, on the record, by offering a resolution that the
current Council supports putting only the original Measure J wording on the ballot for renewal in 2010(minus clearly obsolete references like Covell Village) and will does not support putting competing versions of an amended Measure J on the ballot without unambiguous protections to prevent several Measure J options “gaming the system” to deny the clear public will of the electorate.
Candidate Steven Souza’s statements here,not withstanding, his past public record does not inspire confidence that his position on Measure J will not “evolve” if he is elected to our next city council. On this issue, I would want to see him take a CLEAR position, on the record, by offering a resolution that the
current Council supports putting only the original Measure J wording on the ballot for renewal in 2010(minus clearly obsolete references like Covell Village) and will does not support putting competing versions of an amended Measure J on the ballot without unambiguous protections to prevent several Measure J options “gaming the system” to deny the clear public will of the electorate.
I think its disappointing that they did not allow Rob Roy to at least be there and answer the questions. I’m sure they can’t officially endorse him since he is a registered Green, but this is a non-partisan election. All sides should be heard.
I think its disappointing that they did not allow Rob Roy to at least be there and answer the questions. I’m sure they can’t officially endorse him since he is a registered Green, but this is a non-partisan election. All sides should be heard.
I think its disappointing that they did not allow Rob Roy to at least be there and answer the questions. I’m sure they can’t officially endorse him since he is a registered Green, but this is a non-partisan election. All sides should be heard.
I think its disappointing that they did not allow Rob Roy to at least be there and answer the questions. I’m sure they can’t officially endorse him since he is a registered Green, but this is a non-partisan election. All sides should be heard.
Don Saylor is hoping for a repeat of Susie Boyd’s reelection as mayor pro tem. She was the only sitting councilperson/candidate who was openly anti-Measure J in 2000 and when running for reelection, received the anti-Measure J vote exclusively while the other candidates split the rest.. result? she became the Mayor pro tem and then mayor but represented a distinct minority of Davis voters. Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy to win the mayor pro tem’s seat in his attempt to parlay it into developer-backing for his run for Assembly?
Don Saylor is hoping for a repeat of Susie Boyd’s reelection as mayor pro tem. She was the only sitting councilperson/candidate who was openly anti-Measure J in 2000 and when running for reelection, received the anti-Measure J vote exclusively while the other candidates split the rest.. result? she became the Mayor pro tem and then mayor but represented a distinct minority of Davis voters. Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy to win the mayor pro tem’s seat in his attempt to parlay it into developer-backing for his run for Assembly?
Don Saylor is hoping for a repeat of Susie Boyd’s reelection as mayor pro tem. She was the only sitting councilperson/candidate who was openly anti-Measure J in 2000 and when running for reelection, received the anti-Measure J vote exclusively while the other candidates split the rest.. result? she became the Mayor pro tem and then mayor but represented a distinct minority of Davis voters. Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy to win the mayor pro tem’s seat in his attempt to parlay it into developer-backing for his run for Assembly?
Don Saylor is hoping for a repeat of Susie Boyd’s reelection as mayor pro tem. She was the only sitting councilperson/candidate who was openly anti-Measure J in 2000 and when running for reelection, received the anti-Measure J vote exclusively while the other candidates split the rest.. result? she became the Mayor pro tem and then mayor but represented a distinct minority of Davis voters. Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy to win the mayor pro tem’s seat in his attempt to parlay it into developer-backing for his run for Assembly?
“Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy…”
YES! Protection of Measure J IS the defining issue of this upcoming Council election. Voters need to put all other past perceived political “insults and hurts” aside for this election.
“Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy…”
YES! Protection of Measure J IS the defining issue of this upcoming Council election. Voters need to put all other past perceived political “insults and hurts” aside for this election.
“Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy…”
YES! Protection of Measure J IS the defining issue of this upcoming Council election. Voters need to put all other past perceived political “insults and hurts” aside for this election.
“Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy…”
YES! Protection of Measure J IS the defining issue of this upcoming Council election. Voters need to put all other past perceived political “insults and hurts” aside for this election.
“David, was there a particular reason why Sydney Vergis did not answer the Measure J question?”
You would have to ask her, the format was basically two were asked a question and in the first part, anyone could jump in after. Sydney rarely chose to jump in when she wasn’t directly asked a question.
“David, was there a particular reason why Sydney Vergis did not answer the Measure J question?”
You would have to ask her, the format was basically two were asked a question and in the first part, anyone could jump in after. Sydney rarely chose to jump in when she wasn’t directly asked a question.
“David, was there a particular reason why Sydney Vergis did not answer the Measure J question?”
You would have to ask her, the format was basically two were asked a question and in the first part, anyone could jump in after. Sydney rarely chose to jump in when she wasn’t directly asked a question.
“David, was there a particular reason why Sydney Vergis did not answer the Measure J question?”
You would have to ask her, the format was basically two were asked a question and in the first part, anyone could jump in after. Sydney rarely chose to jump in when she wasn’t directly asked a question.
“Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy…”
A large UCD student vote will play a critical role in the election outcome. Sydney Vergis is backed by Saylor’s developer-patrons to siphon off the UCD vote that could threaten Saylor’s reelection.
“Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy…”
A large UCD student vote will play a critical role in the election outcome. Sydney Vergis is backed by Saylor’s developer-patrons to siphon off the UCD vote that could threaten Saylor’s reelection.
“Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy…”
A large UCD student vote will play a critical role in the election outcome. Sydney Vergis is backed by Saylor’s developer-patrons to siphon off the UCD vote that could threaten Saylor’s reelection.
“Is there a way to thwart Saylor’s strategy…”
A large UCD student vote will play a critical role in the election outcome. Sydney Vergis is backed by Saylor’s developer-patrons to siphon off the UCD vote that could threaten Saylor’s reelection.
In addition to attending the forum, candidates for Davis City Council responded to an extensive questionnaire created by the Davis College Democrats further addressing pressing issues for Students. Read the Questions (and their Answers) at http://daviswiki.org/Davis_College_Democrats/
City_Council_Candidates_Questionnaire%2C_2008
(Note: Because we did not receive electronic copies of all the questions, and it takes a considerable amount of time to format the questions in a Daviswiki standard, the responses in the above link are not complete, but should be so by tomorrow evening)
Additionally, Councilmember Saylor emailed us this morning with additional information regarding the rental condition monitoring ordinance, and I will comment again with a more complete story/outcome later today upon receipt of further information.
Max Mikalonis
President
Davis College Democrats
In addition to attending the forum, candidates for Davis City Council responded to an extensive questionnaire created by the Davis College Democrats further addressing pressing issues for Students. Read the Questions (and their Answers) at http://daviswiki.org/Davis_College_Democrats/
City_Council_Candidates_Questionnaire%2C_2008
(Note: Because we did not receive electronic copies of all the questions, and it takes a considerable amount of time to format the questions in a Daviswiki standard, the responses in the above link are not complete, but should be so by tomorrow evening)
Additionally, Councilmember Saylor emailed us this morning with additional information regarding the rental condition monitoring ordinance, and I will comment again with a more complete story/outcome later today upon receipt of further information.
Max Mikalonis
President
Davis College Democrats
In addition to attending the forum, candidates for Davis City Council responded to an extensive questionnaire created by the Davis College Democrats further addressing pressing issues for Students. Read the Questions (and their Answers) at http://daviswiki.org/Davis_College_Democrats/
City_Council_Candidates_Questionnaire%2C_2008
(Note: Because we did not receive electronic copies of all the questions, and it takes a considerable amount of time to format the questions in a Daviswiki standard, the responses in the above link are not complete, but should be so by tomorrow evening)
Additionally, Councilmember Saylor emailed us this morning with additional information regarding the rental condition monitoring ordinance, and I will comment again with a more complete story/outcome later today upon receipt of further information.
Max Mikalonis
President
Davis College Democrats
In addition to attending the forum, candidates for Davis City Council responded to an extensive questionnaire created by the Davis College Democrats further addressing pressing issues for Students. Read the Questions (and their Answers) at http://daviswiki.org/Davis_College_Democrats/
City_Council_Candidates_Questionnaire%2C_2008
(Note: Because we did not receive electronic copies of all the questions, and it takes a considerable amount of time to format the questions in a Daviswiki standard, the responses in the above link are not complete, but should be so by tomorrow evening)
Additionally, Councilmember Saylor emailed us this morning with additional information regarding the rental condition monitoring ordinance, and I will comment again with a more complete story/outcome later today upon receipt of further information.
Max Mikalonis
President
Davis College Democrats
“the need to set aside land to recruit spin-offs from this university. The land needs to be zoned and it has to be at least 100 acres. Souza wants to see an electric auto production facility, a photovoltaic production facility in this town, and a 30 megawatt facility on the edge of this town.”
We just so happen to have 100 acres on the edge of town, within the city limits and zoned industrial- the Cannery. Unfortunately, to make way for acres of houses, Lewis Homes bulldozed all of the buildings which would have made an Eco Park financially possible. They greatly devalued the property on the gamble that with the buildings gone perhaps the city would be okay with rezoning the place. The city council did nothing to stop them and as I recall everyone except Mayor Greenwald seemed to cheer them on… sad.
“the need to set aside land to recruit spin-offs from this university. The land needs to be zoned and it has to be at least 100 acres. Souza wants to see an electric auto production facility, a photovoltaic production facility in this town, and a 30 megawatt facility on the edge of this town.”
We just so happen to have 100 acres on the edge of town, within the city limits and zoned industrial- the Cannery. Unfortunately, to make way for acres of houses, Lewis Homes bulldozed all of the buildings which would have made an Eco Park financially possible. They greatly devalued the property on the gamble that with the buildings gone perhaps the city would be okay with rezoning the place. The city council did nothing to stop them and as I recall everyone except Mayor Greenwald seemed to cheer them on… sad.
“the need to set aside land to recruit spin-offs from this university. The land needs to be zoned and it has to be at least 100 acres. Souza wants to see an electric auto production facility, a photovoltaic production facility in this town, and a 30 megawatt facility on the edge of this town.”
We just so happen to have 100 acres on the edge of town, within the city limits and zoned industrial- the Cannery. Unfortunately, to make way for acres of houses, Lewis Homes bulldozed all of the buildings which would have made an Eco Park financially possible. They greatly devalued the property on the gamble that with the buildings gone perhaps the city would be okay with rezoning the place. The city council did nothing to stop them and as I recall everyone except Mayor Greenwald seemed to cheer them on… sad.
“the need to set aside land to recruit spin-offs from this university. The land needs to be zoned and it has to be at least 100 acres. Souza wants to see an electric auto production facility, a photovoltaic production facility in this town, and a 30 megawatt facility on the edge of this town.”
We just so happen to have 100 acres on the edge of town, within the city limits and zoned industrial- the Cannery. Unfortunately, to make way for acres of houses, Lewis Homes bulldozed all of the buildings which would have made an Eco Park financially possible. They greatly devalued the property on the gamble that with the buildings gone perhaps the city would be okay with rezoning the place. The city council did nothing to stop them and as I recall everyone except Mayor Greenwald seemed to cheer them on… sad.
Mike said:
The city council did nothing to stop them and as I recall everyone except Mayor Greenwald seemed to cheer them on… sad.
It is again worth noting that candidate Souza’s public record, while full of vocal political posturing, is noteworthy for the absence of any meaningful vote(where his vote carried the majority) that was against the interests of his developer-patrons.
Mike said:
The city council did nothing to stop them and as I recall everyone except Mayor Greenwald seemed to cheer them on… sad.
It is again worth noting that candidate Souza’s public record, while full of vocal political posturing, is noteworthy for the absence of any meaningful vote(where his vote carried the majority) that was against the interests of his developer-patrons.
Mike said:
The city council did nothing to stop them and as I recall everyone except Mayor Greenwald seemed to cheer them on… sad.
It is again worth noting that candidate Souza’s public record, while full of vocal political posturing, is noteworthy for the absence of any meaningful vote(where his vote carried the majority) that was against the interests of his developer-patrons.
Mike said:
The city council did nothing to stop them and as I recall everyone except Mayor Greenwald seemed to cheer them on… sad.
It is again worth noting that candidate Souza’s public record, while full of vocal political posturing, is noteworthy for the absence of any meaningful vote(where his vote carried the majority) that was against the interests of his developer-patrons.
You can’t tell from the article?
You can’t tell from the article?
You can’t tell from the article?
You can’t tell from the article?
How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.
How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.
How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.
How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.
As a student at the meeting I really liked Souza’s and Cecilia’s energy. I noticed how the format will show how they will act on council. Sydney was very reserved and did not interject even when alot of other candidates were interjecting about their positions. Cecilia and Souza also impressed us by their long history of activism and it felt like they approached each topic with care. Saylor thought out each comment. I was not sure on his stance on measure J because he said he needed to review it before we renew it. Which could be a delay tactic or a way to remove measure J. I just was not impressed by Sue Greenwald at our forum. I felt at times it was she was divisive in her statements.
As a student at the meeting I really liked Souza’s and Cecilia’s energy. I noticed how the format will show how they will act on council. Sydney was very reserved and did not interject even when alot of other candidates were interjecting about their positions. Cecilia and Souza also impressed us by their long history of activism and it felt like they approached each topic with care. Saylor thought out each comment. I was not sure on his stance on measure J because he said he needed to review it before we renew it. Which could be a delay tactic or a way to remove measure J. I just was not impressed by Sue Greenwald at our forum. I felt at times it was she was divisive in her statements.
As a student at the meeting I really liked Souza’s and Cecilia’s energy. I noticed how the format will show how they will act on council. Sydney was very reserved and did not interject even when alot of other candidates were interjecting about their positions. Cecilia and Souza also impressed us by their long history of activism and it felt like they approached each topic with care. Saylor thought out each comment. I was not sure on his stance on measure J because he said he needed to review it before we renew it. Which could be a delay tactic or a way to remove measure J. I just was not impressed by Sue Greenwald at our forum. I felt at times it was she was divisive in her statements.
As a student at the meeting I really liked Souza’s and Cecilia’s energy. I noticed how the format will show how they will act on council. Sydney was very reserved and did not interject even when alot of other candidates were interjecting about their positions. Cecilia and Souza also impressed us by their long history of activism and it felt like they approached each topic with care. Saylor thought out each comment. I was not sure on his stance on measure J because he said he needed to review it before we renew it. Which could be a delay tactic or a way to remove measure J. I just was not impressed by Sue Greenwald at our forum. I felt at times it was she was divisive in her statements.
“How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.”
What specific developers will do is bundle their contributions, so they may get 25–100 dollar contributions. Also missing from the discussion was an acknowledgment that while Whitcombe may be one individual, you have many many developers in the community and if a large number are contributing, then developers as a whole are backing a candidate. The short answer is know the players in town and follow the money.
“How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.”
What specific developers will do is bundle their contributions, so they may get 25–100 dollar contributions. Also missing from the discussion was an acknowledgment that while Whitcombe may be one individual, you have many many developers in the community and if a large number are contributing, then developers as a whole are backing a candidate. The short answer is know the players in town and follow the money.
“How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.”
What specific developers will do is bundle their contributions, so they may get 25–100 dollar contributions. Also missing from the discussion was an acknowledgment that while Whitcombe may be one individual, you have many many developers in the community and if a large number are contributing, then developers as a whole are backing a candidate. The short answer is know the players in town and follow the money.
“How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.”
What specific developers will do is bundle their contributions, so they may get 25–100 dollar contributions. Also missing from the discussion was an acknowledgment that while Whitcombe may be one individual, you have many many developers in the community and if a large number are contributing, then developers as a whole are backing a candidate. The short answer is know the players in town and follow the money.
i’ve seen the ask 2 format in both city council and presidential debates, and it seems counterintuitive to me. i would think that you’d want to be able to compare answers across the entire field, although i guess that doing so reduces the number of questions that you can ask due to time constraints.
as for the “spoiler” thing (with roy, vergis, or whomever), given that people will have three votes in the election, i’m not sure what kind of spoiling that might be possible. what seems more likely is that people are encouraged to run as the third of three votes. in fact, the way that the third votes play out in unpredictable ways is often what makes council races a bit weird.
thanks for typing out the debate, DPD. i always seem to be busy whenever one of these things happen, it’s nice to get the information.
i’ve seen the ask 2 format in both city council and presidential debates, and it seems counterintuitive to me. i would think that you’d want to be able to compare answers across the entire field, although i guess that doing so reduces the number of questions that you can ask due to time constraints.
as for the “spoiler” thing (with roy, vergis, or whomever), given that people will have three votes in the election, i’m not sure what kind of spoiling that might be possible. what seems more likely is that people are encouraged to run as the third of three votes. in fact, the way that the third votes play out in unpredictable ways is often what makes council races a bit weird.
thanks for typing out the debate, DPD. i always seem to be busy whenever one of these things happen, it’s nice to get the information.
i’ve seen the ask 2 format in both city council and presidential debates, and it seems counterintuitive to me. i would think that you’d want to be able to compare answers across the entire field, although i guess that doing so reduces the number of questions that you can ask due to time constraints.
as for the “spoiler” thing (with roy, vergis, or whomever), given that people will have three votes in the election, i’m not sure what kind of spoiling that might be possible. what seems more likely is that people are encouraged to run as the third of three votes. in fact, the way that the third votes play out in unpredictable ways is often what makes council races a bit weird.
thanks for typing out the debate, DPD. i always seem to be busy whenever one of these things happen, it’s nice to get the information.
i’ve seen the ask 2 format in both city council and presidential debates, and it seems counterintuitive to me. i would think that you’d want to be able to compare answers across the entire field, although i guess that doing so reduces the number of questions that you can ask due to time constraints.
as for the “spoiler” thing (with roy, vergis, or whomever), given that people will have three votes in the election, i’m not sure what kind of spoiling that might be possible. what seems more likely is that people are encouraged to run as the third of three votes. in fact, the way that the third votes play out in unpredictable ways is often what makes council races a bit weird.
thanks for typing out the debate, DPD. i always seem to be busy whenever one of these things happen, it’s nice to get the information.
davisite and Vincente,
Which three candidates do you want to see elected?
Which three candidates do you think will get elected?
davisite and Vincente,
Which three candidates do you want to see elected?
Which three candidates do you think will get elected?
davisite and Vincente,
Which three candidates do you want to see elected?
Which three candidates do you think will get elected?
davisite and Vincente,
Which three candidates do you want to see elected?
Which three candidates do you think will get elected?
My top three are the two Greenwalds and Rob Roy.
I think Souza, Saylor and one of the Greenwalds win, probably Cecilia at this point but that can change.
My top three are the two Greenwalds and Rob Roy.
I think Souza, Saylor and one of the Greenwalds win, probably Cecilia at this point but that can change.
My top three are the two Greenwalds and Rob Roy.
I think Souza, Saylor and one of the Greenwalds win, probably Cecilia at this point but that can change.
My top three are the two Greenwalds and Rob Roy.
I think Souza, Saylor and one of the Greenwalds win, probably Cecilia at this point but that can change.
anon 1:06PM said:
Anonymous said…
How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.
Anon… The $100 contribution in the developer’s name is not what generates over $40,000,as an example,to Don Saylor’s campaign. Contributions in the name of developer’s friends,extended family, cronies, business associates(realtors, bankers, real estate lawyers, “retired”, etc.) make up the large sums that a developer-friendly candidate’s mailbox is inundated with..a flood of envelopes with contributions from “strangers”.
anon 1:06PM said:
Anonymous said…
How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.
Anon… The $100 contribution in the developer’s name is not what generates over $40,000,as an example,to Don Saylor’s campaign. Contributions in the name of developer’s friends,extended family, cronies, business associates(realtors, bankers, real estate lawyers, “retired”, etc.) make up the large sums that a developer-friendly candidate’s mailbox is inundated with..a flood of envelopes with contributions from “strangers”.
anon 1:06PM said:
Anonymous said…
How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.
Anon… The $100 contribution in the developer’s name is not what generates over $40,000,as an example,to Don Saylor’s campaign. Contributions in the name of developer’s friends,extended family, cronies, business associates(realtors, bankers, real estate lawyers, “retired”, etc.) make up the large sums that a developer-friendly candidate’s mailbox is inundated with..a flood of envelopes with contributions from “strangers”.
anon 1:06PM said:
Anonymous said…
How do we know who has “developer backing” and who doesn’t? It seems with the $100 campaign contribution limit, there’s not much difference one way or the other.
Anon… The $100 contribution in the developer’s name is not what generates over $40,000,as an example,to Don Saylor’s campaign. Contributions in the name of developer’s friends,extended family, cronies, business associates(realtors, bankers, real estate lawyers, “retired”, etc.) make up the large sums that a developer-friendly candidate’s mailbox is inundated with..a flood of envelopes with contributions from “strangers”.
Wu-Ming said:
i’m not sure what kind of spoiling that might be possible.
A student vote for Rob,Syndey and either Sue or Cecila as opposed to a student vote for Rob,Sue and Cecilia removes one vote from either Sue or Cecilia and adds vote to Vergis who has no chance of winning. We saw a similar scenerio in the last election. A student vote for Rob Roy took one potential vote for Stan Forbes.
Wu-Ming said:
i’m not sure what kind of spoiling that might be possible.
A student vote for Rob,Syndey and either Sue or Cecila as opposed to a student vote for Rob,Sue and Cecilia removes one vote from either Sue or Cecilia and adds vote to Vergis who has no chance of winning. We saw a similar scenerio in the last election. A student vote for Rob Roy took one potential vote for Stan Forbes.
Wu-Ming said:
i’m not sure what kind of spoiling that might be possible.
A student vote for Rob,Syndey and either Sue or Cecila as opposed to a student vote for Rob,Sue and Cecilia removes one vote from either Sue or Cecilia and adds vote to Vergis who has no chance of winning. We saw a similar scenerio in the last election. A student vote for Rob Roy took one potential vote for Stan Forbes.
Wu-Ming said:
i’m not sure what kind of spoiling that might be possible.
A student vote for Rob,Syndey and either Sue or Cecila as opposed to a student vote for Rob,Sue and Cecilia removes one vote from either Sue or Cecilia and adds vote to Vergis who has no chance of winning. We saw a similar scenerio in the last election. A student vote for Rob Roy took one potential vote for Stan Forbes.
Question: which two current City Council candidates promised students that they would not pass an open container ordinance which brought them student group endorsements in 2004?
Souza and Saylor!
They have have a history of broken promises to students.
Question: which two current City Council candidates promised students that they would not pass an open container ordinance which brought them student group endorsements in 2004?
Souza and Saylor!
They have have a history of broken promises to students.
Question: which two current City Council candidates promised students that they would not pass an open container ordinance which brought them student group endorsements in 2004?
Souza and Saylor!
They have have a history of broken promises to students.
Question: which two current City Council candidates promised students that they would not pass an open container ordinance which brought them student group endorsements in 2004?
Souza and Saylor!
They have have a history of broken promises to students.
What? They didn’t invite Rexroad? But he’s even got his campaign commercial!
What? They didn’t invite Rexroad? But he’s even got his campaign commercial!
What? They didn’t invite Rexroad? But he’s even got his campaign commercial!
What? They didn’t invite Rexroad? But he’s even got his campaign commercial!
I believe that the race is undecided for the four real contenders. It will depend upon voter turn-out, voter interest in the fate of Measure J campaign issue and whether the student vote explodes upon the local political scene as it has in the Dem primaries. I believe that Mayor Sue Greenwald is in the strongest position as her public record in office has been consistent, transparent with a primary focus always on the Davis voter’s interests. This cannot be said for Saylor and Souza’s public record that is replete with obfuscation, deception and political ambition.Real voter appreciation of the record of the candidates and the importance of who will make up the next council majority may well tell the tale.
I believe that the race is undecided for the four real contenders. It will depend upon voter turn-out, voter interest in the fate of Measure J campaign issue and whether the student vote explodes upon the local political scene as it has in the Dem primaries. I believe that Mayor Sue Greenwald is in the strongest position as her public record in office has been consistent, transparent with a primary focus always on the Davis voter’s interests. This cannot be said for Saylor and Souza’s public record that is replete with obfuscation, deception and political ambition.Real voter appreciation of the record of the candidates and the importance of who will make up the next council majority may well tell the tale.
I believe that the race is undecided for the four real contenders. It will depend upon voter turn-out, voter interest in the fate of Measure J campaign issue and whether the student vote explodes upon the local political scene as it has in the Dem primaries. I believe that Mayor Sue Greenwald is in the strongest position as her public record in office has been consistent, transparent with a primary focus always on the Davis voter’s interests. This cannot be said for Saylor and Souza’s public record that is replete with obfuscation, deception and political ambition.Real voter appreciation of the record of the candidates and the importance of who will make up the next council majority may well tell the tale.
I believe that the race is undecided for the four real contenders. It will depend upon voter turn-out, voter interest in the fate of Measure J campaign issue and whether the student vote explodes upon the local political scene as it has in the Dem primaries. I believe that Mayor Sue Greenwald is in the strongest position as her public record in office has been consistent, transparent with a primary focus always on the Davis voter’s interests. This cannot be said for Saylor and Souza’s public record that is replete with obfuscation, deception and political ambition.Real voter appreciation of the record of the candidates and the importance of who will make up the next council majority may well tell the tale.
How do you find the campaign finance reports at the city and county level? Thanks.
How do you find the campaign finance reports at the city and county level? Thanks.
How do you find the campaign finance reports at the city and county level? Thanks.
How do you find the campaign finance reports at the city and county level? Thanks.
” College Dem said…
As a student at the meeting I really liked Souza’s and Cecilia’s energy. I noticed how the format will show how they will act on council. Sydney was very reserved and did not interject even when alot of other candidates were interjecting about their positions. Cecilia and Souza also impressed us by their long history of activism and it felt like they approached each topic with care. Saylor thought out each comment. I was not sure on his stance on measure J because he said he needed to review it before we renew it. Which could be a delay tactic or a way to remove measure J. I just was not impressed by Sue Greenwald at our forum. I felt at times it was she was divisive in her statements.”
I think this student’s comments are instructive. Sue Greenwald has been perceived by some as divisive because of fights at the dais that have turned petty. Problem is, more often than not, it is caused by the Council Majority first picking the fight; doing underhanded things to circumvent process; and anything else to undermine the Mayor. Nor can the Mayor ever get a straight story out of City Staff, who usually align themselves with the Council Majority in exchange for favors.
Yet who was the City Council member who resisted the county’s push to develop housing on the periphery of Davis? Sue Greenwald led the charge, and only reluctantly and slowly did other Council members follow suit (with the exception of Lamar, who supported Sue from the get go) – once they saw the way the wind was blowing. Clearly the Council Majority has been able to undermine Sue Greenwald with plenty of unsavory tactics.
This student clearly picked up on Saylor’s method of politics – sticking his finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing. He then excuses his waffling by insisting he is being “deliberative”.
The student seems ready to embrace the thought of putting someone new on the Council like Cecilia, which is exactly how Lamar became a member – folks were tired of the same old drivel. Davisites were ready for a fresh approach.
The student also recognized Sydney Vergis would not be a particularly effective advocate, since she sat so quiet during the debate. The student also picked up on Souza’s waffling on Measure J, and her distrust as to whether he would stick to his word, whatever the heck his “word” is.
The student’s radar struck me as being pretty accurate, except for perhaps the read on Sue Greenwald. If a student, who has not been around as long in politics as the rest of us, can read the candidates pretty well, then maybe this student’s opinion is a reasonable predictor of outcomes! Out of the mouth of babes…
” College Dem said…
As a student at the meeting I really liked Souza’s and Cecilia’s energy. I noticed how the format will show how they will act on council. Sydney was very reserved and did not interject even when alot of other candidates were interjecting about their positions. Cecilia and Souza also impressed us by their long history of activism and it felt like they approached each topic with care. Saylor thought out each comment. I was not sure on his stance on measure J because he said he needed to review it before we renew it. Which could be a delay tactic or a way to remove measure J. I just was not impressed by Sue Greenwald at our forum. I felt at times it was she was divisive in her statements.”
I think this student’s comments are instructive. Sue Greenwald has been perceived by some as divisive because of fights at the dais that have turned petty. Problem is, more often than not, it is caused by the Council Majority first picking the fight; doing underhanded things to circumvent process; and anything else to undermine the Mayor. Nor can the Mayor ever get a straight story out of City Staff, who usually align themselves with the Council Majority in exchange for favors.
Yet who was the City Council member who resisted the county’s push to develop housing on the periphery of Davis? Sue Greenwald led the charge, and only reluctantly and slowly did other Council members follow suit (with the exception of Lamar, who supported Sue from the get go) – once they saw the way the wind was blowing. Clearly the Council Majority has been able to undermine Sue Greenwald with plenty of unsavory tactics.
This student clearly picked up on Saylor’s method of politics – sticking his finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing. He then excuses his waffling by insisting he is being “deliberative”.
The student seems ready to embrace the thought of putting someone new on the Council like Cecilia, which is exactly how Lamar became a member – folks were tired of the same old drivel. Davisites were ready for a fresh approach.
The student also recognized Sydney Vergis would not be a particularly effective advocate, since she sat so quiet during the debate. The student also picked up on Souza’s waffling on Measure J, and her distrust as to whether he would stick to his word, whatever the heck his “word” is.
The student’s radar struck me as being pretty accurate, except for perhaps the read on Sue Greenwald. If a student, who has not been around as long in politics as the rest of us, can read the candidates pretty well, then maybe this student’s opinion is a reasonable predictor of outcomes! Out of the mouth of babes…
” College Dem said…
As a student at the meeting I really liked Souza’s and Cecilia’s energy. I noticed how the format will show how they will act on council. Sydney was very reserved and did not interject even when alot of other candidates were interjecting about their positions. Cecilia and Souza also impressed us by their long history of activism and it felt like they approached each topic with care. Saylor thought out each comment. I was not sure on his stance on measure J because he said he needed to review it before we renew it. Which could be a delay tactic or a way to remove measure J. I just was not impressed by Sue Greenwald at our forum. I felt at times it was she was divisive in her statements.”
I think this student’s comments are instructive. Sue Greenwald has been perceived by some as divisive because of fights at the dais that have turned petty. Problem is, more often than not, it is caused by the Council Majority first picking the fight; doing underhanded things to circumvent process; and anything else to undermine the Mayor. Nor can the Mayor ever get a straight story out of City Staff, who usually align themselves with the Council Majority in exchange for favors.
Yet who was the City Council member who resisted the county’s push to develop housing on the periphery of Davis? Sue Greenwald led the charge, and only reluctantly and slowly did other Council members follow suit (with the exception of Lamar, who supported Sue from the get go) – once they saw the way the wind was blowing. Clearly the Council Majority has been able to undermine Sue Greenwald with plenty of unsavory tactics.
This student clearly picked up on Saylor’s method of politics – sticking his finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing. He then excuses his waffling by insisting he is being “deliberative”.
The student seems ready to embrace the thought of putting someone new on the Council like Cecilia, which is exactly how Lamar became a member – folks were tired of the same old drivel. Davisites were ready for a fresh approach.
The student also recognized Sydney Vergis would not be a particularly effective advocate, since she sat so quiet during the debate. The student also picked up on Souza’s waffling on Measure J, and her distrust as to whether he would stick to his word, whatever the heck his “word” is.
The student’s radar struck me as being pretty accurate, except for perhaps the read on Sue Greenwald. If a student, who has not been around as long in politics as the rest of us, can read the candidates pretty well, then maybe this student’s opinion is a reasonable predictor of outcomes! Out of the mouth of babes…
” College Dem said…
As a student at the meeting I really liked Souza’s and Cecilia’s energy. I noticed how the format will show how they will act on council. Sydney was very reserved and did not interject even when alot of other candidates were interjecting about their positions. Cecilia and Souza also impressed us by their long history of activism and it felt like they approached each topic with care. Saylor thought out each comment. I was not sure on his stance on measure J because he said he needed to review it before we renew it. Which could be a delay tactic or a way to remove measure J. I just was not impressed by Sue Greenwald at our forum. I felt at times it was she was divisive in her statements.”
I think this student’s comments are instructive. Sue Greenwald has been perceived by some as divisive because of fights at the dais that have turned petty. Problem is, more often than not, it is caused by the Council Majority first picking the fight; doing underhanded things to circumvent process; and anything else to undermine the Mayor. Nor can the Mayor ever get a straight story out of City Staff, who usually align themselves with the Council Majority in exchange for favors.
Yet who was the City Council member who resisted the county’s push to develop housing on the periphery of Davis? Sue Greenwald led the charge, and only reluctantly and slowly did other Council members follow suit (with the exception of Lamar, who supported Sue from the get go) – once they saw the way the wind was blowing. Clearly the Council Majority has been able to undermine Sue Greenwald with plenty of unsavory tactics.
This student clearly picked up on Saylor’s method of politics – sticking his finger in the wind to see which way it is blowing. He then excuses his waffling by insisting he is being “deliberative”.
The student seems ready to embrace the thought of putting someone new on the Council like Cecilia, which is exactly how Lamar became a member – folks were tired of the same old drivel. Davisites were ready for a fresh approach.
The student also recognized Sydney Vergis would not be a particularly effective advocate, since she sat so quiet during the debate. The student also picked up on Souza’s waffling on Measure J, and her distrust as to whether he would stick to his word, whatever the heck his “word” is.
The student’s radar struck me as being pretty accurate, except for perhaps the read on Sue Greenwald. If a student, who has not been around as long in politics as the rest of us, can read the candidates pretty well, then maybe this student’s opinion is a reasonable predictor of outcomes! Out of the mouth of babes…
Vincente said…
My top three are the two Greenwalds and Rob Roy.
I think Souza, Saylor and one of the Greenwalds win, probably Cecilia at this point but that can change.
Fair enough, what strategies and tactics do you think can/should be employed to make the second list as close to the first list as possible?
What do you see as the biggest reasons why your second list is likely to happen?
Vincente said…
My top three are the two Greenwalds and Rob Roy.
I think Souza, Saylor and one of the Greenwalds win, probably Cecilia at this point but that can change.
Fair enough, what strategies and tactics do you think can/should be employed to make the second list as close to the first list as possible?
What do you see as the biggest reasons why your second list is likely to happen?
Vincente said…
My top three are the two Greenwalds and Rob Roy.
I think Souza, Saylor and one of the Greenwalds win, probably Cecilia at this point but that can change.
Fair enough, what strategies and tactics do you think can/should be employed to make the second list as close to the first list as possible?
What do you see as the biggest reasons why your second list is likely to happen?
Vincente said…
My top three are the two Greenwalds and Rob Roy.
I think Souza, Saylor and one of the Greenwalds win, probably Cecilia at this point but that can change.
Fair enough, what strategies and tactics do you think can/should be employed to make the second list as close to the first list as possible?
What do you see as the biggest reasons why your second list is likely to happen?
Rob Roy is a wonderful person, in every way you can imagine, but he has no prayer.
So realistically the top four are the two S’s and the two Greenwalds. Money by the S’s and disorganization on the part of the Sue campaign are the chief causes for my belief.
Rob Roy is a wonderful person, in every way you can imagine, but he has no prayer.
So realistically the top four are the two S’s and the two Greenwalds. Money by the S’s and disorganization on the part of the Sue campaign are the chief causes for my belief.
Rob Roy is a wonderful person, in every way you can imagine, but he has no prayer.
So realistically the top four are the two S’s and the two Greenwalds. Money by the S’s and disorganization on the part of the Sue campaign are the chief causes for my belief.
Rob Roy is a wonderful person, in every way you can imagine, but he has no prayer.
So realistically the top four are the two S’s and the two Greenwalds. Money by the S’s and disorganization on the part of the Sue campaign are the chief causes for my belief.
re. 0l’-timer
you’re assuming that all voters vote solely (or even primarily) in political blocs. in fact, while most people here probably do, there are a whole lot of voters in town – myself among them – whose political leanings tend to cut across the so called moderate-progressive divide. and that’s not even getting into people voting on personal connections/endorsements, which determines far more in this town than i think is commonly assumed, especially those of us who have been here a while.
the thing is, voter preferences aren’t fungible. i considered voting for rob roy in that election, but there was no way i would have voted for stan forbes, for a host of reasonsl. a similar mistaken assumption drives the conflation that a lot of folks here make between the 60-40 vote on measure x and any presumed stable political alignments in the davis electorate.
the electorate here is more complex than it’s given credit for. not necessarily contemplative or informed, but much messier than a simple two-faction content over 5 seats.
re. 0l’-timer
you’re assuming that all voters vote solely (or even primarily) in political blocs. in fact, while most people here probably do, there are a whole lot of voters in town – myself among them – whose political leanings tend to cut across the so called moderate-progressive divide. and that’s not even getting into people voting on personal connections/endorsements, which determines far more in this town than i think is commonly assumed, especially those of us who have been here a while.
the thing is, voter preferences aren’t fungible. i considered voting for rob roy in that election, but there was no way i would have voted for stan forbes, for a host of reasonsl. a similar mistaken assumption drives the conflation that a lot of folks here make between the 60-40 vote on measure x and any presumed stable political alignments in the davis electorate.
the electorate here is more complex than it’s given credit for. not necessarily contemplative or informed, but much messier than a simple two-faction content over 5 seats.
re. 0l’-timer
you’re assuming that all voters vote solely (or even primarily) in political blocs. in fact, while most people here probably do, there are a whole lot of voters in town – myself among them – whose political leanings tend to cut across the so called moderate-progressive divide. and that’s not even getting into people voting on personal connections/endorsements, which determines far more in this town than i think is commonly assumed, especially those of us who have been here a while.
the thing is, voter preferences aren’t fungible. i considered voting for rob roy in that election, but there was no way i would have voted for stan forbes, for a host of reasonsl. a similar mistaken assumption drives the conflation that a lot of folks here make between the 60-40 vote on measure x and any presumed stable political alignments in the davis electorate.
the electorate here is more complex than it’s given credit for. not necessarily contemplative or informed, but much messier than a simple two-faction content over 5 seats.
re. 0l’-timer
you’re assuming that all voters vote solely (or even primarily) in political blocs. in fact, while most people here probably do, there are a whole lot of voters in town – myself among them – whose political leanings tend to cut across the so called moderate-progressive divide. and that’s not even getting into people voting on personal connections/endorsements, which determines far more in this town than i think is commonly assumed, especially those of us who have been here a while.
the thing is, voter preferences aren’t fungible. i considered voting for rob roy in that election, but there was no way i would have voted for stan forbes, for a host of reasonsl. a similar mistaken assumption drives the conflation that a lot of folks here make between the 60-40 vote on measure x and any presumed stable political alignments in the davis electorate.
the electorate here is more complex than it’s given credit for. not necessarily contemplative or informed, but much messier than a simple two-faction content over 5 seats.
that should read contest, not content.
that should read contest, not content.
that should read contest, not content.
that should read contest, not content.
Vincente said…
Rob Roy is a wonderful person, in every way you can imagine, but he has no prayer.
So realistically the top four are the two S’s and the two Greenwalds. Money by the S’s and disorganization on the part of the Sue campaign are the chief causes for my belief.
Okay, what can we do to address the issues you’ve raised in bold?
Vincente said…
Rob Roy is a wonderful person, in every way you can imagine, but he has no prayer.
So realistically the top four are the two S’s and the two Greenwalds. Money by the S’s and disorganization on the part of the Sue campaign are the chief causes for my belief.
Okay, what can we do to address the issues you’ve raised in bold?
Vincente said…
Rob Roy is a wonderful person, in every way you can imagine, but he has no prayer.
So realistically the top four are the two S’s and the two Greenwalds. Money by the S’s and disorganization on the part of the Sue campaign are the chief causes for my belief.
Okay, what can we do to address the issues you’ve raised in bold?
Vincente said…
Rob Roy is a wonderful person, in every way you can imagine, but he has no prayer.
So realistically the top four are the two S’s and the two Greenwalds. Money by the S’s and disorganization on the part of the Sue campaign are the chief causes for my belief.
Okay, what can we do to address the issues you’ve raised in bold?
If any incumbent is vulnerable, it is Souza. Souza could well be upset by Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald.
Mayor Sue Greenwald is in solid. She has been progressive, consistent, done great things for the downtown, and has worked to slow sprawl.
In Davis, voters reward consistency.
If any incumbent is vulnerable, it is Souza. Souza could well be upset by Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald.
Mayor Sue Greenwald is in solid. She has been progressive, consistent, done great things for the downtown, and has worked to slow sprawl.
In Davis, voters reward consistency.
If any incumbent is vulnerable, it is Souza. Souza could well be upset by Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald.
Mayor Sue Greenwald is in solid. She has been progressive, consistent, done great things for the downtown, and has worked to slow sprawl.
In Davis, voters reward consistency.
If any incumbent is vulnerable, it is Souza. Souza could well be upset by Cecilia Escamilla-Greenwald.
Mayor Sue Greenwald is in solid. She has been progressive, consistent, done great things for the downtown, and has worked to slow sprawl.
In Davis, voters reward consistency.
Sue Greenwald is only divisive in the sense that she doesn’t back down from her principled stands. Unlike some current candidates that continually waffle, reconsider, and/or obfuscate, Sue is outspoken and consistent in her beliefs, her reasoning and her platform. Because of this, she has a huge base of support in this community. She received the most votes four years ago for a reason, and that reason remains more important now than ever. With Measure J coming up for renewal, with pressures for peripheral sprawl increasing, and with a fiscal crisis in the city possibly looming on the horizon, we need Sue’s thoughtful and trustworthy voice representing us on the council!
Sue Greenwald is only divisive in the sense that she doesn’t back down from her principled stands. Unlike some current candidates that continually waffle, reconsider, and/or obfuscate, Sue is outspoken and consistent in her beliefs, her reasoning and her platform. Because of this, she has a huge base of support in this community. She received the most votes four years ago for a reason, and that reason remains more important now than ever. With Measure J coming up for renewal, with pressures for peripheral sprawl increasing, and with a fiscal crisis in the city possibly looming on the horizon, we need Sue’s thoughtful and trustworthy voice representing us on the council!
Sue Greenwald is only divisive in the sense that she doesn’t back down from her principled stands. Unlike some current candidates that continually waffle, reconsider, and/or obfuscate, Sue is outspoken and consistent in her beliefs, her reasoning and her platform. Because of this, she has a huge base of support in this community. She received the most votes four years ago for a reason, and that reason remains more important now than ever. With Measure J coming up for renewal, with pressures for peripheral sprawl increasing, and with a fiscal crisis in the city possibly looming on the horizon, we need Sue’s thoughtful and trustworthy voice representing us on the council!
Sue Greenwald is only divisive in the sense that she doesn’t back down from her principled stands. Unlike some current candidates that continually waffle, reconsider, and/or obfuscate, Sue is outspoken and consistent in her beliefs, her reasoning and her platform. Because of this, she has a huge base of support in this community. She received the most votes four years ago for a reason, and that reason remains more important now than ever. With Measure J coming up for renewal, with pressures for peripheral sprawl increasing, and with a fiscal crisis in the city possibly looming on the horizon, we need Sue’s thoughtful and trustworthy voice representing us on the council!
“i considered voting for rob roy in that election, but there was no way i would have voted for stan forbes, for a host of reasons”
Wu-ming.. my analysis is objective, your’s appears more subjective and personal. Yes, Stan Forbes had been around in Davis politics for some time and carried too much political
“baggage” to be a good candidate. The point is that I was describing a specific situation, namely a STUDENT vote spoiler. Many UCD students are new to Davis politics as well as not terribly involved or knowledgable about Davis political battles and history. Lamar and Stan were closely aligned in their campaign positions and involvement in the No on X campaign. Lamar was drawing a significant student population to vote in our Council election and Stan was the natural second vote… there really was no other attractive candidate for the UDC students. Rob Roy was there to siphon off those votes from Stan. I am not saying that Rob Roy was in cahoots in some conspiracy by running; he had every right to run and his campaign positions were admirable; there WAS a definite rumor floating about at that time that Gina Delaiden, Don Saylor’s campaign manager when he ran for Council, was “encouraging” Rob to throw his hat in the ring.
“i considered voting for rob roy in that election, but there was no way i would have voted for stan forbes, for a host of reasons”
Wu-ming.. my analysis is objective, your’s appears more subjective and personal. Yes, Stan Forbes had been around in Davis politics for some time and carried too much political
“baggage” to be a good candidate. The point is that I was describing a specific situation, namely a STUDENT vote spoiler. Many UCD students are new to Davis politics as well as not terribly involved or knowledgable about Davis political battles and history. Lamar and Stan were closely aligned in their campaign positions and involvement in the No on X campaign. Lamar was drawing a significant student population to vote in our Council election and Stan was the natural second vote… there really was no other attractive candidate for the UDC students. Rob Roy was there to siphon off those votes from Stan. I am not saying that Rob Roy was in cahoots in some conspiracy by running; he had every right to run and his campaign positions were admirable; there WAS a definite rumor floating about at that time that Gina Delaiden, Don Saylor’s campaign manager when he ran for Council, was “encouraging” Rob to throw his hat in the ring.
“i considered voting for rob roy in that election, but there was no way i would have voted for stan forbes, for a host of reasons”
Wu-ming.. my analysis is objective, your’s appears more subjective and personal. Yes, Stan Forbes had been around in Davis politics for some time and carried too much political
“baggage” to be a good candidate. The point is that I was describing a specific situation, namely a STUDENT vote spoiler. Many UCD students are new to Davis politics as well as not terribly involved or knowledgable about Davis political battles and history. Lamar and Stan were closely aligned in their campaign positions and involvement in the No on X campaign. Lamar was drawing a significant student population to vote in our Council election and Stan was the natural second vote… there really was no other attractive candidate for the UDC students. Rob Roy was there to siphon off those votes from Stan. I am not saying that Rob Roy was in cahoots in some conspiracy by running; he had every right to run and his campaign positions were admirable; there WAS a definite rumor floating about at that time that Gina Delaiden, Don Saylor’s campaign manager when he ran for Council, was “encouraging” Rob to throw his hat in the ring.
“i considered voting for rob roy in that election, but there was no way i would have voted for stan forbes, for a host of reasons”
Wu-ming.. my analysis is objective, your’s appears more subjective and personal. Yes, Stan Forbes had been around in Davis politics for some time and carried too much political
“baggage” to be a good candidate. The point is that I was describing a specific situation, namely a STUDENT vote spoiler. Many UCD students are new to Davis politics as well as not terribly involved or knowledgable about Davis political battles and history. Lamar and Stan were closely aligned in their campaign positions and involvement in the No on X campaign. Lamar was drawing a significant student population to vote in our Council election and Stan was the natural second vote… there really was no other attractive candidate for the UDC students. Rob Roy was there to siphon off those votes from Stan. I am not saying that Rob Roy was in cahoots in some conspiracy by running; he had every right to run and his campaign positions were admirable; there WAS a definite rumor floating about at that time that Gina Delaiden, Don Saylor’s campaign manager when he ran for Council, was “encouraging” Rob to throw his hat in the ring.
yeah, everyone thinks what they say is objective, and that those who disagree are subjective.
at any rate, stan forbes had told ASUCD students point blank just two years earlier that if they wanted affordable housing, they should live in woodland. not knowing that he was the guy responsible for the great underpass gridlock (or that he was a republican up until the year before the election) would have been a plus for him in that election, but he blew it when he treated students as an irritation and not real members of the community. it is true that he was using the no on x campaign to get some traction, but remember that students were largely ambivalent on that measure, if not slightly for it.
lamar was known on campus, and took students seriously. stan wasn’t and didn’t. forbes wasn’t an intuitive vote at all for students on the basis of the no on x campaign alone, roy wasn’t spoiling much of anything. as renters, students aren’t generally as invested in the whole “keep davis small” argument, although they tend to be pretty liberal on a lot of other issues.
voter preference isn’t fungible, the reason why one voter (or coherent batch of voters) chooses a set of candidates for a city council race is not necessarily going to follow the same logic as another voter or batch of voters who share a given issue or a candidate. the town doesn’t operate factionally at the voter level, even if it often does at times at the council level.
yeah, everyone thinks what they say is objective, and that those who disagree are subjective.
at any rate, stan forbes had told ASUCD students point blank just two years earlier that if they wanted affordable housing, they should live in woodland. not knowing that he was the guy responsible for the great underpass gridlock (or that he was a republican up until the year before the election) would have been a plus for him in that election, but he blew it when he treated students as an irritation and not real members of the community. it is true that he was using the no on x campaign to get some traction, but remember that students were largely ambivalent on that measure, if not slightly for it.
lamar was known on campus, and took students seriously. stan wasn’t and didn’t. forbes wasn’t an intuitive vote at all for students on the basis of the no on x campaign alone, roy wasn’t spoiling much of anything. as renters, students aren’t generally as invested in the whole “keep davis small” argument, although they tend to be pretty liberal on a lot of other issues.
voter preference isn’t fungible, the reason why one voter (or coherent batch of voters) chooses a set of candidates for a city council race is not necessarily going to follow the same logic as another voter or batch of voters who share a given issue or a candidate. the town doesn’t operate factionally at the voter level, even if it often does at times at the council level.
yeah, everyone thinks what they say is objective, and that those who disagree are subjective.
at any rate, stan forbes had told ASUCD students point blank just two years earlier that if they wanted affordable housing, they should live in woodland. not knowing that he was the guy responsible for the great underpass gridlock (or that he was a republican up until the year before the election) would have been a plus for him in that election, but he blew it when he treated students as an irritation and not real members of the community. it is true that he was using the no on x campaign to get some traction, but remember that students were largely ambivalent on that measure, if not slightly for it.
lamar was known on campus, and took students seriously. stan wasn’t and didn’t. forbes wasn’t an intuitive vote at all for students on the basis of the no on x campaign alone, roy wasn’t spoiling much of anything. as renters, students aren’t generally as invested in the whole “keep davis small” argument, although they tend to be pretty liberal on a lot of other issues.
voter preference isn’t fungible, the reason why one voter (or coherent batch of voters) chooses a set of candidates for a city council race is not necessarily going to follow the same logic as another voter or batch of voters who share a given issue or a candidate. the town doesn’t operate factionally at the voter level, even if it often does at times at the council level.
yeah, everyone thinks what they say is objective, and that those who disagree are subjective.
at any rate, stan forbes had told ASUCD students point blank just two years earlier that if they wanted affordable housing, they should live in woodland. not knowing that he was the guy responsible for the great underpass gridlock (or that he was a republican up until the year before the election) would have been a plus for him in that election, but he blew it when he treated students as an irritation and not real members of the community. it is true that he was using the no on x campaign to get some traction, but remember that students were largely ambivalent on that measure, if not slightly for it.
lamar was known on campus, and took students seriously. stan wasn’t and didn’t. forbes wasn’t an intuitive vote at all for students on the basis of the no on x campaign alone, roy wasn’t spoiling much of anything. as renters, students aren’t generally as invested in the whole “keep davis small” argument, although they tend to be pretty liberal on a lot of other issues.
voter preference isn’t fungible, the reason why one voter (or coherent batch of voters) chooses a set of candidates for a city council race is not necessarily going to follow the same logic as another voter or batch of voters who share a given issue or a candidate. the town doesn’t operate factionally at the voter level, even if it often does at times at the council level.
wu meng said:
“i’ve seen the ask 2 format in both city council and presidential debates, and it seems counterintuitive to me. i would think that you’d want to be able to compare answers across the entire field, although i guess that doing so reduces the number of questions that you can ask due to time constraints.”
When we were putting our endorsement procedure together we wanted everyone to be on the same playing field for our most important questions. Now everyone has been updated to the wiki so we know where they stand on our most important issues.
http://daviswiki.org/Davis_College_Democrats/City_Council_Candidates_Questionnaire%2C_2008
The forum shows how they act on their feet without over a week notice for answering questions.
Don Gibson
VP of Membership
Davis College Democrats
wu meng said:
“i’ve seen the ask 2 format in both city council and presidential debates, and it seems counterintuitive to me. i would think that you’d want to be able to compare answers across the entire field, although i guess that doing so reduces the number of questions that you can ask due to time constraints.”
When we were putting our endorsement procedure together we wanted everyone to be on the same playing field for our most important questions. Now everyone has been updated to the wiki so we know where they stand on our most important issues.
http://daviswiki.org/Davis_College_Democrats/City_Council_Candidates_Questionnaire%2C_2008
The forum shows how they act on their feet without over a week notice for answering questions.
Don Gibson
VP of Membership
Davis College Democrats
wu meng said:
“i’ve seen the ask 2 format in both city council and presidential debates, and it seems counterintuitive to me. i would think that you’d want to be able to compare answers across the entire field, although i guess that doing so reduces the number of questions that you can ask due to time constraints.”
When we were putting our endorsement procedure together we wanted everyone to be on the same playing field for our most important questions. Now everyone has been updated to the wiki so we know where they stand on our most important issues.
http://daviswiki.org/Davis_College_Democrats/City_Council_Candidates_Questionnaire%2C_2008
The forum shows how they act on their feet without over a week notice for answering questions.
Don Gibson
VP of Membership
Davis College Democrats
wu meng said:
“i’ve seen the ask 2 format in both city council and presidential debates, and it seems counterintuitive to me. i would think that you’d want to be able to compare answers across the entire field, although i guess that doing so reduces the number of questions that you can ask due to time constraints.”
When we were putting our endorsement procedure together we wanted everyone to be on the same playing field for our most important questions. Now everyone has been updated to the wiki so we know where they stand on our most important issues.
http://daviswiki.org/Davis_College_Democrats/City_Council_Candidates_Questionnaire%2C_2008
The forum shows how they act on their feet without over a week notice for answering questions.
Don Gibson
VP of Membership
Davis College Democrats
Wu-ming… I agree that Stan was not an intuitive choice for the UCD students.. but was Asmundson or Levy really a more attractive second vote to UCD students?.. not likely. In any event, the Saylor political faction was not going to take the chance that Stan would be considered Lamar’s running-mate and get the UCD student second vote.
Wu-ming… I agree that Stan was not an intuitive choice for the UCD students.. but was Asmundson or Levy really a more attractive second vote to UCD students?.. not likely. In any event, the Saylor political faction was not going to take the chance that Stan would be considered Lamar’s running-mate and get the UCD student second vote.
Wu-ming… I agree that Stan was not an intuitive choice for the UCD students.. but was Asmundson or Levy really a more attractive second vote to UCD students?.. not likely. In any event, the Saylor political faction was not going to take the chance that Stan would be considered Lamar’s running-mate and get the UCD student second vote.
Wu-ming… I agree that Stan was not an intuitive choice for the UCD students.. but was Asmundson or Levy really a more attractive second vote to UCD students?.. not likely. In any event, the Saylor political faction was not going to take the chance that Stan would be considered Lamar’s running-mate and get the UCD student second vote.
addendum: Wu-ming… as you remember, the Aggie took an editorial position calling for a No on X vote and Stan was a leading spokesperson for the NO on X campaign. This would make him a more attractive UCD student candidate than either Asmundson(NO open containers ordinance,overbearing maternal patronizing persona) or Levy
(I’ll leave it to you to fill in the list of negatives)
addendum: Wu-ming… as you remember, the Aggie took an editorial position calling for a No on X vote and Stan was a leading spokesperson for the NO on X campaign. This would make him a more attractive UCD student candidate than either Asmundson(NO open containers ordinance,overbearing maternal patronizing persona) or Levy
(I’ll leave it to you to fill in the list of negatives)
addendum: Wu-ming… as you remember, the Aggie took an editorial position calling for a No on X vote and Stan was a leading spokesperson for the NO on X campaign. This would make him a more attractive UCD student candidate than either Asmundson(NO open containers ordinance,overbearing maternal patronizing persona) or Levy
(I’ll leave it to you to fill in the list of negatives)
addendum: Wu-ming… as you remember, the Aggie took an editorial position calling for a No on X vote and Stan was a leading spokesperson for the NO on X campaign. This would make him a more attractive UCD student candidate than either Asmundson(NO open containers ordinance,overbearing maternal patronizing persona) or Levy
(I’ll leave it to you to fill in the list of negatives)
Maybe I am way off base, but in my experience, the “student” vote is as complex and varied as anyone else’s vote. Some students are Republican, some are Democratic, some like Obama, some like Hillary, some like Nader and some like McCain. Some are opposed to sprawl, others see peripheral housing developments as a benefit.
Over the years, some students have told me that they find Davis boring and can’t wait to leave. Many students have told me that they like Davis the way it is and don’t want to see it change much.
Maybe I am missing something, but I just don’t think that students vote as a monolithic block.
Maybe I am way off base, but in my experience, the “student” vote is as complex and varied as anyone else’s vote. Some students are Republican, some are Democratic, some like Obama, some like Hillary, some like Nader and some like McCain. Some are opposed to sprawl, others see peripheral housing developments as a benefit.
Over the years, some students have told me that they find Davis boring and can’t wait to leave. Many students have told me that they like Davis the way it is and don’t want to see it change much.
Maybe I am missing something, but I just don’t think that students vote as a monolithic block.
Maybe I am way off base, but in my experience, the “student” vote is as complex and varied as anyone else’s vote. Some students are Republican, some are Democratic, some like Obama, some like Hillary, some like Nader and some like McCain. Some are opposed to sprawl, others see peripheral housing developments as a benefit.
Over the years, some students have told me that they find Davis boring and can’t wait to leave. Many students have told me that they like Davis the way it is and don’t want to see it change much.
Maybe I am missing something, but I just don’t think that students vote as a monolithic block.
Maybe I am way off base, but in my experience, the “student” vote is as complex and varied as anyone else’s vote. Some students are Republican, some are Democratic, some like Obama, some like Hillary, some like Nader and some like McCain. Some are opposed to sprawl, others see peripheral housing developments as a benefit.
Over the years, some students have told me that they find Davis boring and can’t wait to leave. Many students have told me that they like Davis the way it is and don’t want to see it change much.
Maybe I am missing something, but I just don’t think that students vote as a monolithic block.
I think that what ol timer may be missing is that students, because they aren’t a unified block, and because they weren’t very involved with Davis Politics, were going to vote for Lamar, and Rob if they knew him, or no one else. Many students were uncomfortable casting their 2nd vote for people unbeknownst to themselves. I remember several students admitting to not voting for a second person, and either voting only for RR or LH. Also, Lamar had the record as a columnist (filled w/sarcasm and parodies, of course), and Rob Roy was a recent ASUCD Senator and prominent shit-stirrer. The No on X connection is tenuous at best, given the credibility of the Aggie and a lack of student interest in development. It’s not a big issue for us– a bigger issue is the results of the development in changing the character of the town itself, as opposed to its pure presence.
I think that what ol timer may be missing is that students, because they aren’t a unified block, and because they weren’t very involved with Davis Politics, were going to vote for Lamar, and Rob if they knew him, or no one else. Many students were uncomfortable casting their 2nd vote for people unbeknownst to themselves. I remember several students admitting to not voting for a second person, and either voting only for RR or LH. Also, Lamar had the record as a columnist (filled w/sarcasm and parodies, of course), and Rob Roy was a recent ASUCD Senator and prominent shit-stirrer. The No on X connection is tenuous at best, given the credibility of the Aggie and a lack of student interest in development. It’s not a big issue for us– a bigger issue is the results of the development in changing the character of the town itself, as opposed to its pure presence.
I think that what ol timer may be missing is that students, because they aren’t a unified block, and because they weren’t very involved with Davis Politics, were going to vote for Lamar, and Rob if they knew him, or no one else. Many students were uncomfortable casting their 2nd vote for people unbeknownst to themselves. I remember several students admitting to not voting for a second person, and either voting only for RR or LH. Also, Lamar had the record as a columnist (filled w/sarcasm and parodies, of course), and Rob Roy was a recent ASUCD Senator and prominent shit-stirrer. The No on X connection is tenuous at best, given the credibility of the Aggie and a lack of student interest in development. It’s not a big issue for us– a bigger issue is the results of the development in changing the character of the town itself, as opposed to its pure presence.
I think that what ol timer may be missing is that students, because they aren’t a unified block, and because they weren’t very involved with Davis Politics, were going to vote for Lamar, and Rob if they knew him, or no one else. Many students were uncomfortable casting their 2nd vote for people unbeknownst to themselves. I remember several students admitting to not voting for a second person, and either voting only for RR or LH. Also, Lamar had the record as a columnist (filled w/sarcasm and parodies, of course), and Rob Roy was a recent ASUCD Senator and prominent shit-stirrer. The No on X connection is tenuous at best, given the credibility of the Aggie and a lack of student interest in development. It’s not a big issue for us– a bigger issue is the results of the development in changing the character of the town itself, as opposed to its pure presence.
Anon. 2:26 AM
I defer to your observations since as an “ol’-timer”, but still young at heart, it sounds like you have a
good pulse on the UCD student political scene.
With regard to promoting a UCD student candidate to siphon off ANY student votes they can that may endanger the Saylor/developer political faction, it still makes campaign political sense to try and put it in place….remember. the last council election was extremely close..just 100 votes denied Lamar the mayor pro tem spot and the total spread for all the candidates was a few hundred. Promoting a spoiler UCD spoiler candidate would be something to try and impact the outcome,however unlikely the probability of a dramatic success.
Anon. 2:26 AM
I defer to your observations since as an “ol’-timer”, but still young at heart, it sounds like you have a
good pulse on the UCD student political scene.
With regard to promoting a UCD student candidate to siphon off ANY student votes they can that may endanger the Saylor/developer political faction, it still makes campaign political sense to try and put it in place….remember. the last council election was extremely close..just 100 votes denied Lamar the mayor pro tem spot and the total spread for all the candidates was a few hundred. Promoting a spoiler UCD spoiler candidate would be something to try and impact the outcome,however unlikely the probability of a dramatic success.
Anon. 2:26 AM
I defer to your observations since as an “ol’-timer”, but still young at heart, it sounds like you have a
good pulse on the UCD student political scene.
With regard to promoting a UCD student candidate to siphon off ANY student votes they can that may endanger the Saylor/developer political faction, it still makes campaign political sense to try and put it in place….remember. the last council election was extremely close..just 100 votes denied Lamar the mayor pro tem spot and the total spread for all the candidates was a few hundred. Promoting a spoiler UCD spoiler candidate would be something to try and impact the outcome,however unlikely the probability of a dramatic success.
Anon. 2:26 AM
I defer to your observations since as an “ol’-timer”, but still young at heart, it sounds like you have a
good pulse on the UCD student political scene.
With regard to promoting a UCD student candidate to siphon off ANY student votes they can that may endanger the Saylor/developer political faction, it still makes campaign political sense to try and put it in place….remember. the last council election was extremely close..just 100 votes denied Lamar the mayor pro tem spot and the total spread for all the candidates was a few hundred. Promoting a spoiler UCD spoiler candidate would be something to try and impact the outcome,however unlikely the probability of a dramatic success.
I was very disappointed to not have been invited to this forum. I was not even informed that it was going on. Ahhh, the irony of the “democrats” marginalizing democracy by silencing a candidate too “progressive” (ie Green party) for their liking. Since I’ve been called a spoiler I guess they really are likening me as Ralph Nader-like character. And really, if you’re 20 years old, involved in politics, and not in a third party like the Libertarians or the Greens, well then, it is a sad state of affairs on the matter of convictions and passion of a college organization emulating the old-fogies that have given up and just joined the “binary exclusive same-old same-old” two party system.
As far as the last election goes. I like Stan Forbes. He’s a nice guy and I agree with him on most city issues but many students that I talked to remembered him saying in the 2004 election that it would be good for students to find cheaper housing in Woodland and be bussed in. There is a connotation of second class citizen in that statement. Do you really think the students were going to vote for Stan? The development side ran Mike Levy (a fraternity founder and member of the marching band, active in the alumni association) just as they are running Sydney now. If you want to call me a spoiler, this is America so it is your right. But if I spoiled it for anyone I spoiled it for Levy. I was a fifth wheel in that election but this election is an even split so I don’t know how I could be considered a spoiler. Hopefully, by providing an institutional memory to the students they will not make the mistake of voting for candidates with a record of being buddy-buddy with the bigtime landlords. Student leaders have a history endorsing people that promise them letters of recommendation or political connections (as the ASUCD Senate did in 2004 when they illegally made an endorsement of a couple of the incumbents running for reelection and for Lamar, because they knew him). I’m going to try to make sure the students don’t fall for the trap.
I was very disappointed to not have been invited to this forum. I was not even informed that it was going on. Ahhh, the irony of the “democrats” marginalizing democracy by silencing a candidate too “progressive” (ie Green party) for their liking. Since I’ve been called a spoiler I guess they really are likening me as Ralph Nader-like character. And really, if you’re 20 years old, involved in politics, and not in a third party like the Libertarians or the Greens, well then, it is a sad state of affairs on the matter of convictions and passion of a college organization emulating the old-fogies that have given up and just joined the “binary exclusive same-old same-old” two party system.
As far as the last election goes. I like Stan Forbes. He’s a nice guy and I agree with him on most city issues but many students that I talked to remembered him saying in the 2004 election that it would be good for students to find cheaper housing in Woodland and be bussed in. There is a connotation of second class citizen in that statement. Do you really think the students were going to vote for Stan? The development side ran Mike Levy (a fraternity founder and member of the marching band, active in the alumni association) just as they are running Sydney now. If you want to call me a spoiler, this is America so it is your right. But if I spoiled it for anyone I spoiled it for Levy. I was a fifth wheel in that election but this election is an even split so I don’t know how I could be considered a spoiler. Hopefully, by providing an institutional memory to the students they will not make the mistake of voting for candidates with a record of being buddy-buddy with the bigtime landlords. Student leaders have a history endorsing people that promise them letters of recommendation or political connections (as the ASUCD Senate did in 2004 when they illegally made an endorsement of a couple of the incumbents running for reelection and for Lamar, because they knew him). I’m going to try to make sure the students don’t fall for the trap.
I was very disappointed to not have been invited to this forum. I was not even informed that it was going on. Ahhh, the irony of the “democrats” marginalizing democracy by silencing a candidate too “progressive” (ie Green party) for their liking. Since I’ve been called a spoiler I guess they really are likening me as Ralph Nader-like character. And really, if you’re 20 years old, involved in politics, and not in a third party like the Libertarians or the Greens, well then, it is a sad state of affairs on the matter of convictions and passion of a college organization emulating the old-fogies that have given up and just joined the “binary exclusive same-old same-old” two party system.
As far as the last election goes. I like Stan Forbes. He’s a nice guy and I agree with him on most city issues but many students that I talked to remembered him saying in the 2004 election that it would be good for students to find cheaper housing in Woodland and be bussed in. There is a connotation of second class citizen in that statement. Do you really think the students were going to vote for Stan? The development side ran Mike Levy (a fraternity founder and member of the marching band, active in the alumni association) just as they are running Sydney now. If you want to call me a spoiler, this is America so it is your right. But if I spoiled it for anyone I spoiled it for Levy. I was a fifth wheel in that election but this election is an even split so I don’t know how I could be considered a spoiler. Hopefully, by providing an institutional memory to the students they will not make the mistake of voting for candidates with a record of being buddy-buddy with the bigtime landlords. Student leaders have a history endorsing people that promise them letters of recommendation or political connections (as the ASUCD Senate did in 2004 when they illegally made an endorsement of a couple of the incumbents running for reelection and for Lamar, because they knew him). I’m going to try to make sure the students don’t fall for the trap.
I was very disappointed to not have been invited to this forum. I was not even informed that it was going on. Ahhh, the irony of the “democrats” marginalizing democracy by silencing a candidate too “progressive” (ie Green party) for their liking. Since I’ve been called a spoiler I guess they really are likening me as Ralph Nader-like character. And really, if you’re 20 years old, involved in politics, and not in a third party like the Libertarians or the Greens, well then, it is a sad state of affairs on the matter of convictions and passion of a college organization emulating the old-fogies that have given up and just joined the “binary exclusive same-old same-old” two party system.
As far as the last election goes. I like Stan Forbes. He’s a nice guy and I agree with him on most city issues but many students that I talked to remembered him saying in the 2004 election that it would be good for students to find cheaper housing in Woodland and be bussed in. There is a connotation of second class citizen in that statement. Do you really think the students were going to vote for Stan? The development side ran Mike Levy (a fraternity founder and member of the marching band, active in the alumni association) just as they are running Sydney now. If you want to call me a spoiler, this is America so it is your right. But if I spoiled it for anyone I spoiled it for Levy. I was a fifth wheel in that election but this election is an even split so I don’t know how I could be considered a spoiler. Hopefully, by providing an institutional memory to the students they will not make the mistake of voting for candidates with a record of being buddy-buddy with the bigtime landlords. Student leaders have a history endorsing people that promise them letters of recommendation or political connections (as the ASUCD Senate did in 2004 when they illegally made an endorsement of a couple of the incumbents running for reelection and for Lamar, because they knew him). I’m going to try to make sure the students don’t fall for the trap.
The student vote is marginalized and alienated from being sytematically disenfranchised over decades of Davis politics. They are indeed the monolithis sleeping giant of Davis politics. Of course this is the eay that most of the old people in Davis politics.
What sort of things does keeping students from participating bring?
1. Noise ordinances.
2. Open container ordinances.
3. Parking ordinances.
4.Rental agreements that make. students pay during summer even if they are not here.
5. No hip hop venues in town.
I’m sure there are others too
The student vote is marginalized and alienated from being sytematically disenfranchised over decades of Davis politics. They are indeed the monolithis sleeping giant of Davis politics. Of course this is the eay that most of the old people in Davis politics.
What sort of things does keeping students from participating bring?
1. Noise ordinances.
2. Open container ordinances.
3. Parking ordinances.
4.Rental agreements that make. students pay during summer even if they are not here.
5. No hip hop venues in town.
I’m sure there are others too
The student vote is marginalized and alienated from being sytematically disenfranchised over decades of Davis politics. They are indeed the monolithis sleeping giant of Davis politics. Of course this is the eay that most of the old people in Davis politics.
What sort of things does keeping students from participating bring?
1. Noise ordinances.
2. Open container ordinances.
3. Parking ordinances.
4.Rental agreements that make. students pay during summer even if they are not here.
5. No hip hop venues in town.
I’m sure there are others too
The student vote is marginalized and alienated from being sytematically disenfranchised over decades of Davis politics. They are indeed the monolithis sleeping giant of Davis politics. Of course this is the eay that most of the old people in Davis politics.
What sort of things does keeping students from participating bring?
1. Noise ordinances.
2. Open container ordinances.
3. Parking ordinances.
4.Rental agreements that make. students pay during summer even if they are not here.
5. No hip hop venues in town.
I’m sure there are others too
Got to get an editor
Monolithic
The way most of the old people in Davis want it.
Got to get an editor
Monolithic
The way most of the old people in Davis want it.
Got to get an editor
Monolithic
The way most of the old people in Davis want it.
Got to get an editor
Monolithic
The way most of the old people in Davis want it.
Rob…. your points are well-taken.
Just to lay to rest the “rumor” that was abroad during the last election campaign, was Gina Delaiden,Don Saylor’s campaign manager for his run for Council, encouraging you to throw your hat in the ring??
Rob…. your points are well-taken.
Just to lay to rest the “rumor” that was abroad during the last election campaign, was Gina Delaiden,Don Saylor’s campaign manager for his run for Council, encouraging you to throw your hat in the ring??
Rob…. your points are well-taken.
Just to lay to rest the “rumor” that was abroad during the last election campaign, was Gina Delaiden,Don Saylor’s campaign manager for his run for Council, encouraging you to throw your hat in the ring??
Rob…. your points are well-taken.
Just to lay to rest the “rumor” that was abroad during the last election campaign, was Gina Delaiden,Don Saylor’s campaign manager for his run for Council, encouraging you to throw your hat in the ring??
From: Newcomer to Davis
To: RON
What can I say? You’re an IDIOT!
From: Newcomer to Davis
To: RON
What can I say? You’re an IDIOT!
From: Newcomer to Davis
To: RON
What can I say? You’re an IDIOT!
From: Newcomer to Davis
To: RON
What can I say? You’re an IDIOT!
To UCD ALUM,
The open container ordinance should have been passed a long time ago. Having been here, 40 plus years, I have observed responsible people with open containers go to morons with open containers. You are clueless.
To UCD ALUM,
The open container ordinance should have been passed a long time ago. Having been here, 40 plus years, I have observed responsible people with open containers go to morons with open containers. You are clueless.
To UCD ALUM,
The open container ordinance should have been passed a long time ago. Having been here, 40 plus years, I have observed responsible people with open containers go to morons with open containers. You are clueless.
To UCD ALUM,
The open container ordinance should have been passed a long time ago. Having been here, 40 plus years, I have observed responsible people with open containers go to morons with open containers. You are clueless.
Dear Newcomer, Most people that know me don’t think I’m an idiot although some think I play one on this blog. Rather than call me names, since you think I’m mentally challenged for my unconventional views about democracy and the right to vote, wouldn’t it be more humane to explain why you feel that my diplomas aren’t worth the paper they are printed on by addressing the issues instead of name calling at someone who you believe has cognitive impairment?
Dear Newcomer, Most people that know me don’t think I’m an idiot although some think I play one on this blog. Rather than call me names, since you think I’m mentally challenged for my unconventional views about democracy and the right to vote, wouldn’t it be more humane to explain why you feel that my diplomas aren’t worth the paper they are printed on by addressing the issues instead of name calling at someone who you believe has cognitive impairment?
Dear Newcomer, Most people that know me don’t think I’m an idiot although some think I play one on this blog. Rather than call me names, since you think I’m mentally challenged for my unconventional views about democracy and the right to vote, wouldn’t it be more humane to explain why you feel that my diplomas aren’t worth the paper they are printed on by addressing the issues instead of name calling at someone who you believe has cognitive impairment?
Dear Newcomer, Most people that know me don’t think I’m an idiot although some think I play one on this blog. Rather than call me names, since you think I’m mentally challenged for my unconventional views about democracy and the right to vote, wouldn’t it be more humane to explain why you feel that my diplomas aren’t worth the paper they are printed on by addressing the issues instead of name calling at someone who you believe has cognitive impairment?
Dear anon 12:46 am
Are you talkng to me? I am not a UC Davis alum although my wife is one. I do, however, agree with you that there were problems with alcohol. That was not the point of my post. The post was not about what I want in the community. The post was about things that might be different if the students were not disenfranchised and alienated from Davis politics. It was more of a brainstorm than anything else because I really have no idea what the students want from local government and imagine that their issues differ from my own on policy.
My concern is purely about allowing participation in the electoral process without regard to the outcomes enfranchising students would generate. I think that is what is so disturbing to so many and yet it does expose those who put any other concern forward to the critcism I think they truly deserve.
Dear anon 12:46 am
Are you talkng to me? I am not a UC Davis alum although my wife is one. I do, however, agree with you that there were problems with alcohol. That was not the point of my post. The post was not about what I want in the community. The post was about things that might be different if the students were not disenfranchised and alienated from Davis politics. It was more of a brainstorm than anything else because I really have no idea what the students want from local government and imagine that their issues differ from my own on policy.
My concern is purely about allowing participation in the electoral process without regard to the outcomes enfranchising students would generate. I think that is what is so disturbing to so many and yet it does expose those who put any other concern forward to the critcism I think they truly deserve.
Dear anon 12:46 am
Are you talkng to me? I am not a UC Davis alum although my wife is one. I do, however, agree with you that there were problems with alcohol. That was not the point of my post. The post was not about what I want in the community. The post was about things that might be different if the students were not disenfranchised and alienated from Davis politics. It was more of a brainstorm than anything else because I really have no idea what the students want from local government and imagine that their issues differ from my own on policy.
My concern is purely about allowing participation in the electoral process without regard to the outcomes enfranchising students would generate. I think that is what is so disturbing to so many and yet it does expose those who put any other concern forward to the critcism I think they truly deserve.
Dear anon 12:46 am
Are you talkng to me? I am not a UC Davis alum although my wife is one. I do, however, agree with you that there were problems with alcohol. That was not the point of my post. The post was not about what I want in the community. The post was about things that might be different if the students were not disenfranchised and alienated from Davis politics. It was more of a brainstorm than anything else because I really have no idea what the students want from local government and imagine that their issues differ from my own on policy.
My concern is purely about allowing participation in the electoral process without regard to the outcomes enfranchising students would generate. I think that is what is so disturbing to so many and yet it does expose those who put any other concern forward to the critcism I think they truly deserve.