Disjointed Thoughts on Election Morning

Today is Election Day. The projections for voter turnout according to Clerk and Recorder Freddie Oakley are rather bleak. Frankly that's not all that surprising, but it is disappointing. We have four elections in the next 365 or so days, each of them has its own inherent importance.

I know many in Davis live for the city council elections--and I agree that those are extremely important. But the school board elections and parcel tax elections are of the utmost importance as well. At times on this blog, we have spent as much time discussing school board issues as we have City Council issues. To the point that there has been a running joke between the two as to which one can stay off the Vanguard. Then acting police chief Steve Pierce was going to send Interim Superintendent Richard Whitmore a fruitcake for helping to keep the police off the Vanguard and focus the attention on the school district (I'm not making that up).

My point here is that school issues at times have dominated the scene in Davis over the first year and a quarter of the Vanguard's existence.

For those with little interest in the school board, we can skip ahead a bit. I noticed that the Final EIR has come down on the Hunt-Boyer Mansion Tank House restoration and relocation project. The city staff is going to recommend the pursuit of Alternative 3--disassembling, reassembling, and then rehabilitating the Tank House while at the same time constructing a new two-story building between the Mansion and the Varsity Theatre.

Guinness will then be called in to assess whether this new building qualifies as the thinnest building in the world. I jest, but that is not a large space between the two.

This issue will be the on the city council agenda at the end of the month. It figures to be a long and heated discussion on the historic nature of the tank house and the site versus the potential for commercial usage there.

However, tonight, the issue is on children and who is best to lead our school district for the next four years in helping to determine policy direction. Honestly, we all have our favorites perhaps. But I am far from certain that we can go wrong no matter who is elected. I have covered numerous events and all the candidates seemed committed to improving the educational prospects of Davis students. That's not to say we agree with everything everyone is proposing, it is only to say there is not a single candidate who lacks the commitment to this school district.

Perhaps as important, we have two ballot measures that would fund a good percentage of our school's budget (Measure Q) and help maintain the library (Measure P).

One point of interest, a lot has been made of Richard Harris and the amount of money he has raised--I'm kind of wondering exactly what he spent it on. There were no ads that we saw in Sunday's Davis Enterprise. We got a mailer or two but certainly nothing massive. So far all the fuss about influence peddling, I just do not see it.

Valley Oak Charter will go forward with more than enough signatures to qualify it for consideration As I said last week, I think the Best Uses of Schools Task Force missed the boat here, focused too early on closing a school and not hard enough on alternatives to closing a school. Now the district will likely have to go back to the drawing board. Did the task force really serve the school district well?

Finally, a hearty farewell to Interim Superintendent Richard Whitmore. Did I agree with everything he did? No. But he was thrust into a difficult situation, his first meeting as Interim Superintendent was when they voted to close Valley Oak. He faced tough challenges in his brief time here. But he was always available to me to answer questions and he was a person who understood the importance of high tech and tried to get many others (at times unsuccessfully) to read the Vanguard as a means to better understand the community. So we will certainly miss him and wish him well on his future endeavors while at the same time looking forward to the new leadership under James Hammond.

So there is much to do and think about in the coming days, but once again today is about the children and who we believe is best to lead them into the future. Stay tuned this evening for live blogging election coverage. We'll have roaming bands of reporters from around the town and I will be blogging live at the Yolo County Election Office.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Davis Council Approves Plans to Expand Varsity Theater

The city council unanimously approved the idea of adding a second screen to the Varsity Theater on Tuesday. The theater was originally configured for a second screen, and all council members agreed that it was a good idea to continue down that route.

Since the Varsity turned into a revenue generator for the city against original predictions, there was little opposition at the meeting to the idea that downtown could be given another screen to draw people into the downtown business area at night.

Since the Varsity had it’s grand re-opening in April of 2006, it has had about 3,252 average monthly viewers. In it’s first nine months, the Varsity raked in roughly 50-60% of comparable Sacramento theaters. In the last seven months, it has been more along the lines of 70-80% of those numbers.

The tenants of the Varsity appeared during the council meeting to express their satisfaction at running the theater, and would like to continue to do so with the addition of a second screen. With another screen, it is predicted it will bring more people (about 56,500 annually) into downtown, as well as allowing more new independent films to release sooner in Davis.

Some have expressed concern about the cost of the project which is listed at $750,000. People wondered how the city could afford that money for a project like this. However, it is important to understand that this money did not come from the general fund. Instead it comes from the Redevelopment Agency.

There are separate types of monies that are available to municipal governments. Redevelopment money could not go to pay for Fire Fighters. In fact, Councilmember Lamar Heystek noted that absence of the Fire Department as evidence that this was not a general fund budget issue.

According to the city's website, the City of Davis Redevelopment Agency's purpose is the elimination of "blight" from the downtown Core, Olive Drive, and South Davis sub-areas. It does this through a variety of means but mainly the acquisition of property or partnerships with property owners in efforts to improve property.

One of the reasons the Varsity Theater was an alluring target for Redevelopment Money is that the city would recoup its expense in a variety of ways.

There are several different options as to the aesthetic nature of the possible renovations, in particular where the path to the second screen will be located. Councilman Don Saylor was not very warm to the idea of a tunnel leading to the second screen, expressly stating that it would be “plug-ugly” and that he hopes it is not the architectural choice for the renovations.

As far as the timeline, once details are worked out with the architect and then a plan for approval comes before the council in about 6 months, another 9 months or so of construction will be required.

Contrary to the reporting in the Davis Enterprise, the City Council for the most part was very pleased with the project. According to the Davis Enterprise,

"Some, however, had reservations."

There were a few reservations sort of, but the vast majority of the meeting was very positive. And some of the items that were mentioned in the Enterprise were actually jokes, for instance,

"Councilman Lamar Heystek said he was disappointed the Varsity didn't screen a Dutch film that he and his girlfriend — both of whom speak Dutch — were disappointed to miss.

"When you think about foreign films, think about the Netherlands and the dozens of Dutch people you could be reaching," Heystek said."

I do not understand why that was reported in the paper.

The council was actually very excited about this project.

Mayor Sue Greenwald said:

“It’s been a dream of mine to bring independent film to Davis since I first moved here 18 years ago…so for me this is the culmination of 2 decades of work, its been a spectacular success. Almost every other college town has an independent film theater, it was a major gap in our cultural offerings, and now we have one and its one of the nicest.”

Jon Fenske, one of the managers of the Varsity Theater, said a few words to the council.

“Receipts are up over 20% this year, and we expect to continue to grow next year, it usually takes a theater about three years to get established. The studios we deal with think our numbers are fantastic and winning the trust and the faith of the studios is a key component to this business… A second screen is much more than doubling our film offerings, which is a negligible increase in operating costs. There is also the timing effect, which is huge.”

The timing effect refers to the ability to show new arthouse films the weekend that they open. With only one screen, the Varsity sometimes shows a movie long after its release date due to commitments to other films. “You want to grab the film while its hot”, Fenske said.

I am happy that the Varsity will be getting a second screen. An art theater is always the one that has the best movies, and it is much more of a community landmark than the Regal theaters in downtown. I hope the council continues with this project and allows the Varsity to become the premier theater in Davis to see great movies.

---Simon Efrein

Mishkas Cafe Project: Evaluating Historic Preservation with Commercial Development

The latest project that appears once again to threaten the historic nature of our downtown is the proposed redevelopment of a City-owned parcel at 604 Second Street between the historic Dresbach-Hunt-Boyer Mansion and the Varsity Theater. Currently, the site contains the Tank House and orange trees that contribute to the historic resources of the mansion.

The Mansion was built in 1874 and the Tank House was constructed sometime between 1874 and 1888. It was built to provide water to the Mansion and the grounds. It was originally located behind the house but was moved to its present location in 1979 to accommodate the construction of commercial development south of the mansion.

The Mishkas Cafe project would seek to demolish the Tank house, remove ten of the orange trees and then construct a three-story commercial building with the new Mishkas Cafe on the ground floor and two stories of office space above.

According to the Draft Environmental Impact report, the Mishkas Cafe project features competing goals and objectives. On one hand, the city is committed to commercial revitalization of the Downtown Commercial Core through the work of the Redevelopment Agency. On the other hand, the site being proposed contributes to the historic setting on the Hunt-Boyer Mansion.

The question here is whether one can achieve the proper balance between economic and commercial redevelopment and historic preservation.

The project proposal would have a number of significant and unavoidable impacts. First it would significantly impact the immediate visual context of the location. Second the removal of the 10 organge trees which are eligible for listing as Landmark trees represents a significant impact.

Third, "The Proposed Project would demolish the Tank House and 10 historic orange trees, contributing resources to the listed Dresbach-Hunt-Boyer Mansion, and would trench for foundation and utilities for a new three-story building. This would be a significant impact."

Fourth, the demolition of the Tank House would remove a listed contributing structure to a National Register property, again a significant impact. Also fifth, the height of the building would reduce the open space around the Mansion and again be a significant impact on the historic setting. Sixth, the trenching for the foundation and utilities for a three-story building would have a significant impact on loss of cultural resources.

While the project proposal contains a number of significant and unavoidable impacts, there are six project alternatives. These range from no project, to reducing the height to two stories to moving and rehabilitating rather than demolishing the Tank House.

According to the EIR, the sixth alternative which involves disassemble/ reassemble and rehabilitating the Tank House in its present location for commercial or public use--such as as a visitor or public information kiosk. There would be no significant environmental issues associated with this alternative. However, while it would meet historic preservation goals, it would not meet Downtown Core Commercial goals and policies including the creation of an economically viable project that generates direct fiscal benefit to the city.

According to one source, a two story building would be acceptable to the developer. As mentioned above, the tank house was originally moved from behind the mansion to the east side of the property. Moving the pump house to the west side of the property would be preserve it and be viable in terms of historic preservation. In fact, it would give it more visibility as it would move it closer to the street rather than between the Mansion and the Varsity Theater.

There is great concern about the downtown area's economic viability. We have recently lost or are losing a number of long-time businesses. Running an independent coffee shop is the type of economic activity I would like to encourage in the downtown area rather than discourage as long as key aspects of historic preservation can be maintained. Moreover, having a coffee shop next to the theater seems like a good use of coordinate commerce.

Therefore, so long as the pump house is in some way preserved, I would like to see an alternative aspect of this project go forward.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting