County Proposes Site Locations for Reentry Facility

In a release yesterday afternoon, Yolo County announced that at a September 9 meeting, the Yolo County Board of Supervisors will consider three potential ites for a secure community reentry facility.

The potential sites include an industrial/commercial park east of the community of Madison (County Road 90 and State Route 16), a proposed industrial/commercial park southeast of the Esparto community (County Road 86a and State Route 16) and a site at the Yolo County Airport in the West Plainfield area (County Road 95).

According to the release:

"On March 18, Yolo County submitted a proposal to the state for funding for expansion of the county’s existing jail which included agreeing to assist the state in siting a reentry facility. Included in the proposal was the offer of a site located next to the jail facility, however this location was rejected as it was deemed by the state to be too small. The county was notified by the Corrections Standards Authority on May 15 that it had received a conditional award of $30 million for jail expansion pending the siting of a reentry facility in Yolo County. Since then, the county has been working with the California Department of Corrections & Rehabilitation to identify additional potential sites by the state’s deadline of August 15 (which has now been extended to September 16). Using criteria set forth by the state, county staff identified more than 100 parcels throughout the county that could meet the criteria for the reentry facility.

Initially, a number of locations were identified in the northern portion of the county, primarily along County Roads 14 and 85, south of the Dunnigan community. After additional on-site reviews, the state reconsidered the feasibility of these locations and indicated their preference for other sites better suited for the state’s needs. The sites being considered on September 9 appear to meet the state’s criteria and have already been identified for industrial/commercial development. These sites require considerable additional analysis and review before the state makes its final preferred selection.

Inmates in state prison are sent back into the community in which they lived prior to incarceration with $200 and a bus ticket. They are released with little to no job training, substance abuse treatment or any other skills or tools that might prevent new crimes and a quick return to prison. Reentry facilities can provide the critical tools to stop that revolving door. These tools include: job training, life and job-seeking skills, and medical, mental health and addiction treatment prior to release. Secure reentry facilities are key to breaking the cycle of crime and repeating criminal activity in California. Once fully integrated into the corrections system, these programs are expected to increase success on parole, increase public safety by reducing the incidence of new crimes by these individuals, and reduce overcrowding in state prisons. Reentry facilities throughout the state will be built and operated by the state."

While the issue has barely been a blip on the radar for people in Davis, it has created a firestorm up in the Dunnigan and Zamora area where the county has focused its energy.

Supervisor Matt Rexroad at one point recommended to the city of Woodland that they take on the project, however, they did not follow through on his recommendations.

Under the provisions of AB 900, cities like Woodland, Davis, Winters, or West Sacramento have veto power over proposed locations for reentry facilities. That has made rural and unincorporated locations like Dunnigan and Zamora, on the crossroad of I-5 and I-580 inviting and vulnerable targets.

Last week, Supervisor Rexroad suggested that the residents of Davis should step up on some of these projects.

"Most of you folks that read this are from Davis. Some of you are questioning why this project should not be located in Woodland. That is a fair question.

Another fair question is when the people of Davis are going to step up to the plate to provide land use that facilitates social services?"

He continued:

"I hear many of you claiming that you desire social services to be provided -- just not in Davis. That part is left out. Somewhere else in Yolo County would be fine.

The largest piece of industrial zoned property in the unincorporated part of Yolo County is Covell Village. How about that location?

The re-entry facility is something that we are going to work through over the coming weeks and even years.

My question for you is -- what land is Davis going to set aside for some of these things?

...

It seems funny to me that for all the social programs that the people that read this blog are likely to advocate for -- the use of land in your precious city never seems to be part of the message."

However, the issue has also been one of controversy in his own family. Supervisor Rexroad's father, himself a resident of the Dunnigan and Zamora area, has been outspoken in his opposition to the project.

On August 19, 2008 Jack Rexroad, the father of the Supervisor, wrote a letter to the Davis Enterprise.

In it, he argues that the reentry facility should be placed in an urban area

"because this is where the infrastructure is and where the parolees originated from and where they presumably will have families, lodging and other connections and gravitate to on release. In Yolo County they come primarily from Woodland, Davis and West Sacramento."

He continues:

"If none of these sites of origin will accept responsibility for their citizens, the whole concept of "re-entry" should be dropped. Transferring this unwanted "child" to a rural setting is tantamount to shirking responsibility and abandoning a pet animal in the country. We in the rural areas do not want what you produced and now don't want to deal with."

He concludes suggesting:

"Make no mistake; siting this prison in a rural area will not insulate Woodland, Davis or West Sacramento from the undesirable effects of a future penal colony. After all, where will the prisoner's families and friends live — in a tent city around the prison? My guess is in the cities where almost everyone else lives.

Do you think it's worth the risk? Tell your county supervisors."

From my perspective however, the unfortunate fact of the matter is that the unincorporated areas simply do not have the municipal protections that are afforded cities. However, from the standpoint of fiscal need and receiving $30 million of $42 million it will require to expand the Yolo County Jail--an expansion that will occur regardless. And from the standpoint of the project being a worthwhile endeavor even without the fiscal strings attached, this is a project that we must undertake as a county.

Where that project goes, I think is a secondary point. On that point, I can sympathize with the rural citizens who will have very little say over where such a project goes. On the other hand, from a practical standpoint, there is very little evidence that such a project would harm housing values. In fact, it might even augment them by putting good paying jobs in the area. Moreover, there hardly seems to be a safety issue either.

So while I can sympathize with the rural residents, I hardly think the issue is worth the alarm it is causing. From details of the project, it seems that the plan is for the design to be consistent with an urban industrial land use setting.

Here is the thing that gets me about Zamora and Dunnigan, they have pushed the Board of Supervisors to allow for the expansion of their "city" to within 20 years becoming around a city of a population of 25,000. They have no problem with such expansion of housing. But they do not want to bring in 300 jobs? They do not want to bring in something that would be an anchor for their community as it grows?

To me, these objections, the empowerment issue notwithstanding, really amount to NIMBYISM. They have no problem with development, with growth, with wholesale changes to their community, but they do not want a prison reentry facility in their backyard.

This does not dismiss legitimate issues that may arise here, but at the end of the day, it looks like they are probably going to be stuck with it. Hopefully at some point Jack Rexroad will forgive his son and the people of Dunnigan realize that the real impact will be the construction of 12,000 new housing units.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

A Burning Issue For Our Community

Programming note: Join the Vanguard tonight on KDRT 101.5 FM from 6 pm to 7 pm, as I host Alan Pryor who is one of the leaders in the fight to ban wood burning. You can call in with questions at 792-1648.

On July 29, 2008, the Davis City Council unanimously voted to recommend to the Natural Resources Commission to draft a resolution that would implement a full ban on wood burning in Davis with an exemption for hardship.

I will say at the onset here, that I am fully in support of that decision, particularly with such an exemption for people of lower income backgrounds who rely on wood burning as a cheaper means by which to heat their homes in the winter.

However, at the time I was concerned about the way in which this issue had been dealt with by the city, the city council, and the local paper--or that is, not dealt. I got up to speak before city council on the night of July 29, 2008, to recommend two things. First, that we need exemptions for people with hardships. And second, that we needed better outreach before this meeting.

On the morning of July 29, I wrote this article in the Vanguard. It essentially lays out my position on the technical aspects of this issue. But I believe that for many in this community, they did not know this issue was even under consideration until that article appeared the Vanguard and subsequently an article in the Davis Enterprise on July 31, 2008.

Following that article, the dam broke loose, and there have been several op-eds in the Enterprise, numerous letters to the editor, and commentary by Bob Dunning.

This is all a healthy part of the democratic process, but this should have happened before the July 29, 2008 meeting. This is an issue that effects so many in our community on both sides of the fence. Large numbers of people have come forward to tell of their health problems that they suffer from wood burning smoke during the winter months. They came before the council on that evening to present their compelling cases, and it is my belief that the council was moved by those testimonies and it enabled them to take tougher action that they were probably prepared to do prior to the meeting.

Unfortunately, there is also a group of people in this community who feel strongly the other way, and their voices were not heard on that night.

In yesterday's Enterprise for example, George Galamba suggests what he terms a more measured approach:

It is too bad that we are unable to see shades of gray in the debate. Yes, burning wood (or gas, oil, coal, etc.) does produce smoke, and smoke is a pollutant. But there is a bit of difference between burning a branch that was blown down a few months ago in an open-hearth fireplace and burning seasoned wood in an EPA-certified stove.

Rather than a draconian ban on burning all wood, why not a measured response to the problem, which is not wood, but rather smoke? I would like to offer a few suggestions:

-- If it is not already the law, ban open-hearth fireplaces in new construction. Why put a fireplace in a house and then tell the new owners that they can't use it?

-- As properties change hands, require that fireplaces be retrofitted with approved appliances or bricked up.

-- Prohibit burning on days when the air is polluted.

-- Issue burning permits that would require attendance at a workshop on how to burn cleanly.

In many ways it was Thomas Cahill editorial on August 5, 2008 that lit the fire.

He writes:

"One of the greatest threats to effective environmental progress is asking the public to bear the cost of environmental actions that later turn out to be unnecessary or unsupported by current science. Such errors erode the political will to do the hard and necessary environmental tasks. Think of the current credibility of the FDA, for example, after it erroneously labeled tomatoes as the salmonella culprit.

Davis is in danger of sliding down this slippery slope in instituting a total ban on wood burning when the science is not supportive of such an action."

He argues that Davis during the winter months has low levels of Wood smoke and even during the severe problems during this summer, there were no notable increases in doctors' visits or hospital admissions.

"There are two problems. One is that the city of Davis' Natural Resources Commission did not have key documents that have actually determined the surprisingly low levels of wood smoke in Davis in winter, a 55-page report submitted to the City Council in March 15, 1995. This work shows that even in the worst stagnation periods, Davis represents a tiny enhancement over the valleywide winter particulate pollution, which is largely caused by diesels and smoking cars.

In addition, for the past month we have been breathing smoke from the much more dangerous wildfires at levels roughly 100 to 200 times what which we saw during our worst stagnation period, the cold, hazy day in Davis on Dec. 23, 1995.

Yet Glennah Trochet, M.D., Sacramento County's health officer, noted no increases in doctors' visits or hospital admissions from the present wood smoke even in the worst period of mid- to late June 2008."

On the other hand, perhaps that should not be the measure of such problems. Many people I know cranked their air conditioning up and simply stayed inside during the horrid smoke and incessant heat of the early portion of this summer.

Alan Pryor, who will be my guest tonight on KDRT, had a response Op-Ed on August 14, 2008.

Mr. Pryor argues that:

"Cahill made three claims that are unfortunately not substantiated by the older data he presented nor accepted by the larger scientific community."

He then refutes Mr. Cahill's objections.

"Firstly, Cahill implies that wood smoke is not as harmful as suspected or represented... In that article, a county health officer said they had not yet observed a local jump in hospital emergency admissions due to respiratory difficulties during the recent weeks of wildfire- induced wood smoke pollution. There was no data to support that observation and that was the only item in that article that could be possibly be construed to minimize the hazards of wood smoke pollution.

In fact, the actual thrust of that article was to warn people how dangerous were the then-current levels of wood smoke pollution levels and. Both Kent Pinkerton, a UC Davis professor and expert on the health effects of air pollutants, and Larry Greene, executive officer of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, are extensively quoted in the same article, pointing out the severe adverse health effects of wood smoke. "

Next:

"Secondly, Cahill further claims his own research shows wood smoke concentrations are at "surprisingly low levels" in Davis and thus do not constitute a major pollution or health problem. This observation was based solely on a one-time measurement of air quality taken at only two different points in Davis on a single winter day about 13 years ago... The Yolo-Solano AQMD now estimates that, on average, about one-third of current wintertime particulate pollution in Davis is due to residential wood smoke. In Sacramento, the percentage of particulate air pollution due to residential wood - burning in winter is closer to 50 percent. "

Finally:

"Cahill also claims we can solve any "residual" wood smoke problems that might exist simply by heeding the "more stringent" "Spare the Air" restrictions on wood - burning that are periodically issued by the Sacramento Air Quality Management District. Well, that certainly sounds like a reasonable idea.

Unfortunately, the Sacramento AQMD issued only eight mandatory alerts last winter for restricting open-hearth fireplaces and no alerts at all restricting the use of EPA Phase II stoves. That means that during the unrestricted 112 days of the 120-day burn season (from Nov. 1 through Feb. 28), anyone in Davis could still burn an open-hearth fireplace as long as they wanted, at any time and anywhere — even next to a school, hospital, senior center or the home of an asthmatic child or senior. Similarly, an EPA Phase II stove actually could operate without any restriction whatsoever."

The debate is interesting, informative, and necessary. I encourage people to read the full op-eds from August 5 and August 14, in addition to the feature article from Claire St. John that appeared last Thursday in the Davis Enterprise.

However, again, I want to go back a step. This debate should have occurred before the July 29, 2008 City Council meeting. That is not to say the ordinance that will emerge from the NRC will be a done deal any time soon. There will be plenty of time to debate, but it would have been helpful to have a full debate prior to the direction to the NRC.

It is easy for a city like Davis to meet the basic Brown Act requirements for open meetings. Posting notices with able lee-time are sufficient for those requirements. But as I said at the July 29 meeting, the Brown Act should be considered the bare minimum standard for public notification, not the extent to which they go to inform the public on issues that they know will generate public debate. And this was clearly an issue that would. The debate that has emerged in the last month bears out my concerns at that time.

The city, in my estimation, does not make use of its considerable power of the bully-pulpit. It is easy to sit back and rely on reporters to report on the City Council meetings. However, in fairness to the Enterprise, at best one receives the agenda on Thursday late afternoon, that leaves Friday, Sunday, Monday, and Tuesday to report on anything that has to do with the council's agenda. That is not a lot of time to warn the public and to have any sort of public debate. And so, we often see debates develop after the fact.

Fact of the matter is that the city can write its own story and submit it to the newspaper whenever it wants and the the newspaper is pretty accommodating. Heck, they could submit it to the Vanguard and nine times out of ten, I would probably run it as well.

I think it would have been helpful had the George Galamba's and the Thomas Cahill's of Davis had been able to weigh in on the meeting on July 29, perhaps the council would have given the same recommendation, perhaps not. But at least they would have had their say.

I know they will get their say later on in this process, that is the justification that you will hear for the way this has unfolded, but as I have discovered, the further down the field they run with the ball, the harder it is to stop forward progress. Once they get the ball in field goal range, it is all a matter of damage control.

The debate on this issue will fortunately go on, the public will learn much more about this issue before the final vote is taken, it seems likely that the final vote will be considerably weaker than the direction given in late July. However, we should not lose sight of the fact that this is a serious health issue.

In last week's Davis Enterprise article, Jennifer Anderson of Ace Hardware was quote, among other things she suggested that the city of Davis stay out of the issue.

"Anderson said the YSAQMD should be responsible for regulating wood burning.

'It would be my dream to just leave it to the Yolo Solano Air Quality realm and not bring it into local politics, because that's what they're there for,' she said."

As I understand the issue however, the YSAQMD sets emission standards, it does not regulate wood burning or set policy for the city. The local jurisdictions are in charge of setting such policies.

I point this out because these are issues that must be fully vetted in public and explained. What are the emissions requirements that the city has no control over and what policies are needed in order to meet those standards.

The next question is whether those standards are tough enough. Just like the Brown Act, emissions standards can be minimum requirements rather than limitations on regulations. They are often based as much on political expediency as they are on scientific premises. We need to sort through and determine whether we need to simply adhere to these standards or whether we as the city of Davis, need to set our own in order to meet the health needs of the population.

Regardless, these questions still need to be sorted out and the city has a duty to educate the public on this issue. If the city believes that wood burning represents a health threat, then they should use the power of the bully-pulpit to communicate that, rather than sit back and let those who like the comfort of burning dictate the terms of this debate.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Vanguard Coverage of the DNC: Night One and Night Two

The Vanguard is primarily a blog that covers local politics and local government issues. However, there is no denying the fact that much of the world will be focused on the Democratic National Convention next week. So we have asked Don Gibson, a UC Davis Student who is President of College Democrats and an elected Hillary Clinton Delegate to the Democratic National Convention to write about his experiences at the Democratic Convention in Denver, Colorado.

Please note: due to technical problems, we were unable to post yesterday's entry, so today we have Monday and Tuesday Night's coverage

Monday Night

Michelle Obama gave one of the best speeches I have ever seen. Her speech about her husband's values was an incredibly honest description of who is he. The best thing about the speech was her style of presenting it. She spoke in a perfect mixture of calmness shielding powerful emotion. The most fun part was when Obama came in over the television link and his kids came out. I am still in a state of amazement on how great that speech was. The only way I could compare it to my universe was like seeing the Oakland Raiders win the Super Bowl in person.

Yesterday's speeches were all about getting to know who Obama is. It is working and I have been learning so much about this man.

The tribute to Edward Kennedy was a historic speech. It is likely to be Kennedy's last convention speech and a powerful statement from him now and his past. Giving every American health care is a passion and Obama is the person who could lead the way in actually doing that. His words wring strong in his passion for public service and his great legislative successes.

Media from all over was at the Pepsi Center and Al Jazera was under a seat of my friend.

The significance of being a delegate is becoming clear to me now and why people spend thousands of dollars for this experience. Sitting next to the states biggest leaders while waving signs all united for a common cause is a powerful feeling. There are only 441 delegates from the biggest state with nearing 40 million people. The rate is near 1 in 100,000 people living in the state. The green floor pass that was given to us is practically a magical ticket that lets you get into all but the most exclusive parts. We are able to avoid security for the Denver Convention Center. It is so important that people do not lose their passes because they are very strict about not replacing lost passes. These passes just look like the run of the mill tickets but they have little sensors within them that are actively scanned when people go into the Pepsi Center. On the rumor mill, they are actively tracking the delegates and where they go, I personally doubt that they are doing that because of the cost and lack of need.

The convention has almost 3 levels of security. The first one is getting onto the charter bus with the police officer. Then after the 45 minute to hour ride, delegates need to go through metal detectors, then before walking in the door of there is a final check before walking in the Pepsi Center. The final is before which section of the stands you go to, you need to show the pass again. There is more then one person I know who is trying to sneak into the good seats but it does not look easy for them.

The protesters are well hidden. At least the ones who want to do marches, I have only seen them once. I heard the police shut down the street my hotel was on because of a intense protest where tear gas was shot but since I rarely can access the internet or watch TV to double check this. The bus ride took along time to get to the Pepsi Center and my assumption is that they wanted us to avoid the protesters outside of the center. They have kept us very isolated between the protesters up until today.

That brings me to PUMA (Party Unity My Ass). There was little visible tension, just one or two unorganized people standing on a corner is what I have been used to seeing. Today at the state delegation breakfast Gloria Allred, who won election to be a delegate, is the person who started trouble.

It first was with people walking into the hall where speeches and breakfast is served. When people were taking the tickets a few of the PUMAs were passing out white ribbon for people to tie around their wrists. It was first told to some people that it was to show support for woman's suffrage but it was really for Gloria's media grab. Out of the 441 delegates there maybe only three that is actively undermining the normal activities. A smart delegate took the literature and tore it up right in front of one of the PUMA! And then a person next to them did the same. Their stunt is saying that they are "gagged" and not giving Hillary a voice even though her name will be on the ballot. The bad thing about this is that as I have been saying all along, the vast majority of activists are on board while only a few people hog all the media which loves controversy.

On the better side of things Lieutenant Governor John Garamendi has been reaching out to the Young Delegates at the convention. He sat down with 25 of us for an hour to talk about what our issues are. He is the only person, that I know of, offering to sit down with all of us while we are at convention.

Tuesday Night

Hillary Clinton just proved today why she inspired millions of Americans. The grand speech she gave reaffirmed the support that she garnered from her years of public service. Before she started speaking today, she had 2 minutes of a standing ovation to her. Her speech would not have brought in every PUMA supporter but it effectually convinced all of the iffy supporters to vote and campaign for Obama. My Mom who supported Obama in the primaries was cheering and clapping watching her rally the crowd. All of the hardcore Clintonites that I personally know were more then wooed over. These people were not only reaffirmed their love for Senator Clinton but were moved beyond the bitterness of the primary. The beauty of it was that she played to her reasons of her supporters while taking in those unsure of the support.

My friend and die hard Clinton supporter John Vigna said "So tonight, Hillary elected Barack Obama". He is right. I do not have any more significant qualms about voting for Senator Obama.

The two other speakers that really stood out to me were Ohio Representative Dennis Kucinich and Montana Governor Brian Schweitzer. Dennis Kucinich has the spirit of the flaming liberal in all of the delegates there. He speaks to that part of our mind that wants to get out and do huge social change and reform. It is not a view that would win an election across the country but is something that all progressive's have. It helps keep that liberal side of the Democratic Party true to their roots by having a presidential candidate represent that 20% to 30% of the party that wants huge change. It helps keeps the Democrats in touch with their hardcore base. It was by far the most impassioned speech I have seen by the representative from Ohio with emotion and passion flaring through. Governor Schweitzer has the populist style that shined in the crowd of cheering supporters. He by far outshined the keynoter Former Gov. Warner from Virginia. The speech that Schweitzer gave spoke to true American values that resonate in America. He walked all around the podium which helped show his great emotion and passionate speech. In my book, he should have been the keynoter.

Today I was a whip for the California Democratic Delegation. If you noticed in any of the shots, we were the ones in the neon vests. We had the pleasure of directing traffic and telling elected officials that they need to keep moving in the hallway. There was more then one time that I wanted to tell someone that they needed to move but I thought, he or she represents over 600,000 people, I am just going to let everyone else figure it out.

There were over six different sign changes. For the whips on the floor, it hell to figure out what goes when and where. Because of the rapid fire succession of the changes in the signs with the moderate democrats, such as Governor Sebelius of Kansas and Senator Bob Casey Jr. of Pennsylvania, we had to have the right signs waving at the right moments. It did not run smoothly. Many of us were picked up at the last few hours before the start of ceremonies. I had the pleasure of doing whatever needed to be done at the moment such as clearing out the hallway or passing out the latest sign. The whips are what ensure that the choreographed event goes off like it should. I knew what I was supposed to be doing at the convention hall but not the people attending.

There were far too many people who were not elected delegates that snuck in with their spouse or other they of pass. It was also my job to tell them that they should not be doing that. It was tough telling someone "I am sorry that you and your husband have been sitting together for the last 2 hours but elected delegates worked very hard to get here and you are taking their spot." Being a bouncer is not on a career path right now.

Tomorrow Bill Clinton, I have seen him speak 2 times before and have always been awestruck. Then VP candidate Biden will also be speaking. I am looking forward to jokes by him about McCain in the same fashion of Hillary's. Tomorrow I hope all of the PUMA's sleep in and do not cause a ruckus at the roll call vote which may of us are not sure how it will work. I was elected to vote for Hillary and that is what I plan on doing. I do not see anything that will change my vote as of now. Hillary had her light in the sun and the American people listened. Obama may have just won the election because of this amazing woman.

Did Fire Mascot "Sparky" Receive Overtime Pay from City Taxpayers?

The City Apparently Does Not Know the Answer

A few weeks ago in response to the initial wave of reports on city finances, the Vanguard received a tip that as part of the Davis Fire Department Public Education Program, the fire fighter who dressed as "Sparky" received overtime pay.

A phone conversation at that time with Davis City Manager Bill Emlen confirmed that this was indeed a distinct possibility. Thus the Vanguard fired off a public records request to find out in exact terms, what the fire mascot received in terms of overtime pay. Even by the standards of this city, the Vanguard is shocked and stunned by what it found.

The Public Education program, according to the city:

"is contained within the Fire Prevention Division of the Davis Fire Department budget. The Fire Prevention Division includes fire safety inspections, fire investigations, plan review, public education, weed abatement, youth fire diversion, water supply and permits. The scope of the Public Education program emphasizes citizen education regarding fire safety, to reduce the chance of fires in places of assembly, residences and in the business community."

Some of the activities include:

• Annual Fire Department open house in October
• Fire safety presentations
• Disaster preparedness presentations
• Pre-school presentations
• Third grade class presentations
• Career days at local junior and senior high schools
• Fire extinguisher operation presentations and drills
• Station tours
• Fraternity and Sorority fire safety talks
• Neighborhood Night Out
• Special events (approximately 20 annually)

However, when asked for budget items related to the funding of the Public Education Program, the Vanguard was stunned to find out that the city does not separately account for the program. Rather it contains the Public Education Program within the budget for the Fire Prevention Division, a grouping that also contains fire investigations, weed abatement, and the youth fire diversion.


Last year, the city spent $371,238 on such programs, a not so modest budget including $229,505 in salaries and another $19,491 in overtime.

When asked for the city to itemize "expenditures to the firefighter for work performed as the mascot 'Sparky,'" again the city had no answer.

"The Fire Department does not have any records responsive to your request because expenditures to a Firefighter for work performed as the Mascot “Sparky” are not recorded as working as “Sparky,” but as a public education event."

However, the city was able to tell the Vanguard:

"The mascot “Sparky” is typically used approximately 3-5 times a year. The events are: Farmers market twice a year (February and October) four hours each; Open House in October four hours; and possibly one or two additional City events for two to four hours."

This led to the conclusion that "Sparky" probably involved in about 20 hours of work.

The Vanguard asked if these payments constitute overtime pay. The response was illusive at best.

"Again, the Fire Department does not have any records responsive to your request because such time is recorded as public education time. That said, the Fire Department tries to limit overtime pay when feasible for public education events. Firefighters on overtime are only used when no one else is available."

When asked over the phone, Bill Emlen seemed fairly sure that the firefighter who dressed up as "Sparky" was given overtime pay. And even if "Sparky" was not directly given overtime pay, it seems likely that a firefighter who worked these extra shifts would eventually be given overtime pay because of the additional hours.

The Vanguard can approximate the amount of money the city might be paying the firefighter to dress up as "Sparky" in public events.

We know the average firefighter received $88,555.01 in base salary. Averaging that over a 40 hour work week gives us an approximate total of $42.57 per hour. That means that overtime pay at a time and a half would be roughly $63.86 per hour for a total over 20 hours of $1277.24 of cost to the Davis taxpayers. That is not over $1200 of money going to help fight fires, it is money going to a man dressed up in a dog suit.

You might ask why a fire department volunteer could not perform that task for no cost? Are you telling me that they could not get an individual to volunteer for a few hours at a time to dress up as "Sparky"? It seems inconceivable to me that there is a possibility that the city paid a firefighter overtime wages to dress up as "Sparky"--whether those are direct overtime wages or those hours would eventually push their regular duty into overtime is appalling to me.

But frankly I am not sure what is more appalling--the use of taxpayer money or the fact that the city cannot directly account for that use of taxpayer money?

This public records request was not a very complicated request. The city was not able to itemize those expenditures. They have no idea how much the fire department is spending on public education as opposed to some of the other fire prevention programs. They have no idea how much overtime they are paying for these support programs. That is appalling and it is completely irresponsible.

The people who run this city have very little idea how the taxpayers money is being spent and amazingly they have admitted as much in their response to the Vanguard's public records request.

The only reasonable explanation I can think of is that the city does not want to know specifically how this money is being spent because then they have plausible deniability. They cannot be held accountable for what they do not know--and they know money is being misspent.

Any responsible agency should be embarrassed that they cannot breakdown exactly how taxpayer money is being spent by departments under their control. This definitely makes one wonder how many other times this is the case as well, in how many other city departments.

I implore the city council to hold the city manager's office and the city finance department responsible for the amount of money that the city spends on various programs so that the city council and the public can no exactly where the city's tax money goes and whether or not it is being spent wisely.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Commentary: Why I Strongly Support Measure W--The Parcel Tax

I have been thinking about writing this commentary for several days now, ever since I put the work into the two articles last week on the parcel tax. As I was putting together those articles, I questioned myself. Why was I going through all this effort in support of this measure? This is not generally what the Vanguard does. The Vanguard covers the dark underbelly of Davis, exposes malfeasance in government, protects people from the excesses of governmental power, shines light on subjects not often covered enough. Why this issue?

As I was pondering this question, the answer of course was right in front of my face. The answer actually came to me last week during my interview with Jann Murray-Garcia.

Some people have used the closing of Valley Oak as an excuse to vote against the parcel tax. However, I think they have it backwards. You see, no one supported keeping Valley Oak open more than I did. I will match my 70 articles on or about Valley Oak, the late night meetings, the special coverage, against anyone's passion. Unless you sat on Davis OPEN itself, you will not win. And even then, I'll take it to a tie unless you are a certain dragon and the lovely lady who stands inside there come rain, heat, or fog.

No folks, if you believe in Valley Oak and the Valley Oaks of the world, you need to support the parcel tax. If you are worried about the achievement gap, then you need to support the parcel tax. If you do not want future parents to anguish over what school their kids will go to, then you need to support the parcel tax.

You see, unfortunately, and I am not casting aspersions at anyone, it's just the way things are right now, but when the economy goes south, when funding gets tight, the first things that go are funding to special programs and unfortunately by special programs I mean minority schools in Davis.

When I first saw the budget cuts list last winter, one of the things that drew my attention was cutting the climate coordinator position. I have been critical of the climate coordinator. But I also know how hard and how long people struggled to get that position created in the first place. The Human Relations Commission had a townhall meeting with former Superintendent David Murphy on the issue of bullying and racism, hundreds of parents came, students came forward with horror stories, it took a lot of work. Superintendent Murphy was at times intransigent. But in the end, the HRC and the community won out.

And now it was going to be gone in one fell swoop. It is not because the position is not important, it is not because the school board was against having the position, it is simply that when you have a choice because cutting elementary school science and the climate coordinator, it is not really much of a debate. And yet I know full well why that position was created in the first place and it will hurt a lot of kids if it is canceled.

I remember the meeting in 2007 when they were discussing the report from the Achievement Gap Task force and their recommendations, and how Tansey Thomas stood up and pointed out a very similar report from 1990 that was put on the shelf as soon as passions cooled and times got tough. I remember that in 2007, every single candidate running for the board brought up that as one of their goals--to help close the achievement gap. I do not know if I have heard the word uttered in 2008 and you know why? Because they are fighting to keep from firing 100 teachers.

At the end of the day, I believe in my heart of hearts that when budget times get tough, the first people to suffer are those who can least afford to suffer. Those who are the most vulnerable. It happens in all walks of life. The people who suffer the most are the most recent ones hired, those at the bottom end of the totem pole, those who are least able to create a safety net.

In Davis, I believe that the children of affluent middle class backgrounds will thrive regardless of whether or not the parcel tax passes. Are they better off with better schools with more challenging programs? Of course. However, they will prosper regardless. It is the children of those who are less fortunate who will not prosper under more difficult times with programs cut. These are the most vulnerable kids. These will be the ones to suffer the most. The children who go to the Valley Oaks of the world who had a school where they were thriving only to see it closed due to budget considerations. And yes, I am convinced that there are other schools that are very good in this district, but I do not believe you can replace that sense of empowerment and sense of community that was at work at Valley Oak Elementary School.

And though Valley Oak is now closed until further notice, there is still much to fight to protect, which is why I cannot in good conscience punish other children for mistakes made by the school board.

People have talked about fiscal mismanagement as a reason to vote against the parcel tax. I know something about fiscal mismanagement in this district as I spent a good four or five months researching what had happened in the district under Superintendent David Murphy and Budget Officer Tahir Ahad.

A few things about that I want to share. The first thing is that I did this investigation with full and complete cooperation from the school district and several of the board members. This investigation would not have been possible without their assistance. Moreover, the district went above and beyond the call of duty in assisting me. They absolutely wanted the public to know exactly what had happened under the previous administration. Two of the board members went on the record to discuss it with me.

The second thing is that the new school board, elected in 2005, cleaned up most of the problems that had occurred under the previous administration. Tahir Ahad left the district and eventually was replaced by Bruce Colby as the new chief budget officer. David Murphy left the district and eventually was replaced by James Hammond as the new superintendent. Frankly, James Hammond alone is reason to vote for this parcel tax, I cannot think of a better person to do this job than Dr. Hammond. I talked to him the day after the board decided not to support him on the charter school and all he could talk about was how sorry he was that he did not have another week to convince them to take the chance on it. He was genuine about that loss. No blame, no political posturing, just sincere compassion for those students.

The fiscal problems in this district are not the result of the actions of the current board. Not one single member of this board was around when the decision was made to put the facilities bond on the ballot. Not one single member of this board was there when the decision was made to hire Tahir Ahad or David Murphy for that matter. And not one single member of this board was there when the deadline was missed for matching funds to Montgomery.

But the majority of this board was in place when every single one of the FCMAT recommendations were carried out, when a new CBO and Superintendent were hired, when the Montgomery funding was rescued by a concerted and joint effort of the board and the interim Superintendent, when the fiscal ship of this district was righted. This board deserves the trust of the voters in handling the taxpayers money and giving the board the resources to continue to make this district one of the best in the state.

Finally folks, people are complaining about raising taxes again, one year after the previous parcel tax was passed. People are complaining that the number is $120 rather than $80 which would have been more likely to pass. I can appreciate both of those concerns.

However as far as the $120 goes, the district is asking for the amount of money that they believe they need in order to continue to fund the programs that have been listed here.

I have been critical of the city's overindulgence of certain public employee salaries and t he risk of raising more taxes to pay for their fiscal irresponsibility. Moreover, the amount of money people will pay in water rate hikes will dwarf the meager $120 annual tax increase. We are talking about up to $200 per month for water rate hikes compared with $120 per year for the parcel tax. This is on top of other fees, taxes, and possible rate hikes. There is really no comparison. Moreover, if I am going to pay out more money, I would choose to give money to help children be educated and help teachers earn a better living. Those are my priorities.

My biggest fear in all of this is that people may use the wrong reasons to not support education in Davis. It is not the children's fault that the previous administration made a series of very serious errors. It is not their fault that you may feel overburdened in your taxes, overwhelmed by a poor economy, a bad housing market, high fuel prices, etc. I understand all of that. But at the end of the day once again, we only get one shot at educating the youth in this community, they get only one shot at childhood, and for some kids, they need all the help they can get.

I hope for their sake and theirs alone you will consider supporting this tax as a modest investment into the future of these children, this community and this country.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Vanguard Coverage of the DNC: Day Four in Denver

The Vanguard is primarily a blog that covers local politics and local government issues. However, there is no denying the fact that much of the world will be focused on the Democratic National Convention next week. So we have asked Don Gibson, a UC Davis Student who is President of College Democrats and an elected Hillary Clinton Delegate to the Democratic National Convention to write about his experiences at the Democratic Convention in Denver, Colorado. Here is his fourth report.

by DON GIBSON

The convention activities have just begun today. I moved into the Sheraton where its lobby has all of the important people in California and New York walking through. I bumped into Mayor Gavin Newsome, vice chair of the California Democratic Party Alex Rooker, and campaign adviser Bob Mulholland. This is the place where all of the action is happening. Even though the Pepsi Center is what everyone envisions as the epicenter, the Sheraton has such a large amount of energy that the media does not seem to cover. The press is setting up to find the thoughts of delegates here at this hotel.

The media is trying to find controversy. I had two television interviews today, one for KCRA 3 in Sacramento and another for ABC 7 in Los Angeles. Both of the reporters looked for controversy between Clinton and Obama supporters where I had to talk about how to unite the party. They tried to ask leading questions to have me or other delegates to say something like "I want Clinton to be the nominee" or "Obama is unfit to lead". The views of the vast majority of activist are that those are flat wrong. I did learn something about the media today; political talking points don't work for them when you are on TV as a young delegate.

Sponsoring the delegates has become a tradition. An experienced democratic activist told me to bring a spare bag for all of the junk that I will be getting for free. He is right! I got two full conventions bags as I registered to be a delegate. I have received over 50 labeled really random things from different corporations, lobbying groups, and people campaigning for office. There was so much stuff that it covered my entire bed as you can see in the photos. The best thing I got was the wine glass from Lt. Governor John Garamendi. The oddest thing has to be the bobblehead for Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa. The most useful thing is the USB drive from California Treasure Bill Lockyer. The coolest things to find will be the Obama-Biden buttons and signs but they have yet to be given to us.

Denver's atmosphere is completely changed from just a day ago. The police are not only out in force but they have assault rifles and squads of horse troopers are set up to stop anything from happening.

The protesters are finally out. Two people in pig costumes riding around in a coverable were waving signs saying "Tax Meat!" Other groups were not as light. Hardcore pro-lifers held out signs with pictures of abortions. Not fun to say the least. When I was walking out of subway on the 16th St. mall I was able to see the anarchists march down the outdoor mall. The best thing was that 20 officers walked behind the marchers in full riot gear. People may be afraid that the police are taking too extreme of an approach but they not stopping anyone from expressing their views (that I know of).

There does not seem to be tension between the city's residents and the delegates. People would rant to me or other activists on the light rail but not in a combative fashion. The city tends to have people who want to speak up .

I went to my first totally delegate exclusive event. The Gulf States hosted a reception for the host committee, with great gumbo and live New Orleans musicians to celebrate the revival of New Orleans. They had "Obama Beer" exclusively for the event. It was the first drink to run of all of the bars. It was hosted by Chairman Dean to bring in the thousands of delegates and the open bar kept all of them happy.

Tomorrow young democratic activists and I will be sitting down with John Garamendi to talk policy for an hour. Then have the first event at the Pepsi Center will be fun seeing the first big speakers. I just got offered to be a whip for the floor and I may take up this opportunity to help control the delegation.

Guest Commentary: The case for home rule for Davis

by Lamar Heystek

In Davis, the power of the people is real, and anyone who seeks to tamper with it is playing with fire. The campaign to defeat Measure X, the 2005 Covell Village proposal, is the perfect example of that. In the face of a six-figure developer-driven effort, a grassroots campaign of dedicated Davisites managed to beat the odds and garner a resounding rejection of the largest development proposal in the history of Davis. I am proud to have been part of that campaign.

Now, as a member of the Davis City Council, I believe the people of Davis will be able to exercise their power and assert their municipal rights more fully under Measure N, the proposed city charter which provides home rule for Davis.

When the City Council unanimously passed a resolution last year supporting Assembly Bill 1294, which would have allowed general law cities like ours to decide for themselves whether to adopt choice voting for Council elections, I wrote to Governor Schwarzenegger on City letterhead asking for 10 minutes of his time to explain why the City of Davis deserved this right. Through an official letter of his own, my offer to meet with the Governor was curtly turned down.

As others, including Councilmember Greenwald, have pointed out, all other University of California host cities are charter cities. This reinforces the fact that home rule encourage cities to pursue innovation, not promote the status quo. For example, several charter cities across the state provide for public electrical utilities, which Davis citizens supported when they voted overwhelmingly in favor of Measures H and I in 2006. The prospect of providing electricity through the financing of solar infrastructure makes public power an especially attractive possibility under charter city status.

Examples of our innovation to date include our agricultural mitigation, inclusionary housing and green building ordinances. However, as a general law city, the state may decide to legislate that general law cities like Davis cannot establish such high standards, rendering the benchmarks we have set for ourselves meaningless. Measure N would allow Davis, under the power to govern its own municipal affairs, to codify and protect these laws in the charter if necessary. This protection would also be afforded to Measure J, which establishes the right for the people to vote on the development of peripheral ag land. In fact, Measure N by design alludes to Measure J, stating that:

“[M]anaging and limiting growth… are essential elements of local control and therefore are municipal affairs. The intent of this Charter is to allow the City Council and the voters to exercise the maximum degree of control over land use matters within the city of Davis.”

However, the issue really isn’t whether you support public electrical power (or choice voting or other ideas), but whether you support the notion that the city of Davis shouldn’t have to ask a bunch of people in Sacramento (including Governor Schwarzenegger) permission to adopt such ideas. The latter issue, not the former, should be the primary focus of Measure N as much as possible.

Some argue that the true beneficiary of power under a broadly drafted Measure N is the City Council, not the people at large. After all, on a weekly basis, the City Council makes most of the decisions on behalf of the people. I certainly appreciate that argument because my election to the City Council, to some degree, resulted of people’s disenchantment with the decisions of a majority of the Council. Thus, I understand people’s skepticism about what they consider the prospect of handing more powers to a City Council they (or I, for that matter!) don’t agree with most of the time. However, just as the people of Davis have shown they possess the strength to override the Council and defeat a billion-dollar development, they definitely have the strength to change the balance of power on the City Council every two years (or more frequently, through the power of recall, which, along with the power of referendum, remains intact under a charter). Let’s not pretend that this is beyond the people’s reach.

In fact, nothing prevents the people of Davis, either through their elected representatives or through the power of initiative, from actually downsizing and restricting municipal powers that would otherwise be granted through a charter. Take the proposed charter, for instance: as a municipal agency, the City of Davis would still negotiate with its employees under meet-and-confer. Upon the suggestion of Councilmember Greenwald, Measure N bars the Council from adopting binding arbitration, which has financially crippled city agencies such as San Luis Obispo. This is a fine example of how the city can limit its own powers.

Speaking of finances, don’t forget that any new tax measure under the charter would still be subject to the people, per Proposition 218. Personally, my support for the charter does not come from a desire to impose taxes that we do not levy now. In fact, I am skeptical about renewing the taxes we currently levy in the absence of a more responsible fiscal policy. I have strongly questioned, and will continue to question, the presentation of new tax measures (including the extension of existing ones) unless we truly begin to exercise control of our skyrocketing personnel costs, for example. Under general law, the City of Davis already has the power to levy a utility user’s tax and increase its business license tax (but hasn’t), so for me, potential new revenue streams don’t play into my support for Measure N.

I am proud to join councilmembers Sue Greenwald and Stephen Souza and Mayor Ruth Asmundson in supporting a charter because the people of Davis clearly deserve home rule. Davisites have proven that they are willing and capable of governing their affairs. My hope is that the people will keep an open mind about Measure N in the coming weeks and months. I will do my part to gain more information and share it with as many Davisites as possible before Election Day. I hope the people of Davis continue the discussion by providing their insights, whether those insights support or oppose the charter. Ultimately, the power is in their hands.

Lamar Heystek is a Davis City Councilmember. He is Co-Chair of the Yes on Measure N Committee and a longtime supporter of Choice Voting.

Vanguard Coverage of the DNC: Day Three in Denver

The Vanguard is primarily a blog that covers local politics and local government issues. However, there is no denying the fact that much of the world will be focused on the Democratic National Convention next week. So we have asked Don Gibson, a UC Davis Student who is President of College Democrats and an elected Hillary Clinton Delegate to the Democratic National Convention to write about his experiences at the Democratic Convention in Denver, Colorado. Here is his second report.

by DON GIBSON

Today was a slower day. One thing is becoming very apparent though, a rush to see Obama's speech. Right now I am at University of Denver at the College Democrats of America convention. This is where the lead college activist through out the nation for holding trainings and elections. Too bad the elections are happening at 8am while the reception for CDA starts at 11pm. There will be a lot of college students not coming to elections because of the late night party.

All of the activists who were not able to be elected to be a delegate need some kind of connection to get into Invesco Field. The best way is to volunteer. These people will be everywhere, on the field, in the nosebleed seats, and in the parking lot. A new rumor is that roads one mile around the stadium will be shut down when Obama is giving his speech. Delegates and volunteers will be bused in from downtown's hotels while the light rail's stadium connection will be out of service. I wish I had the $1,000,000 to spend on the box seats and then being able to hang out with Obama and Biden after the big speech. That high donor area is the only part where the regular volunteers would not be allowed to go explore.

The stadium should be packed. Originally there would have been enough tickets that family members and all of the activists that came to town could see Obama. This is no longer promised because people from all over the nation are now calling in all the favors to get a ticket. Residents in Colorado are fortunate by comparison where many of them simply have to offer to prove they are registered to vote or register at a local campaign office.

Police protection is out in force. There could be literally a dozen on a corner at anytime downtown. Half of the police officers around the Denver Convention Center are decked out in riot gear. I have yet to see a single protester these few days. This may have been the safest event I have ever been to. They even have more bike cops than Davis. Road blocks haven't popped up yet but I would not be surprised to see them soon. The concert blocks protecting the buildings are already up and ready.

Even through I have yet to see protesters, I have been handed literature from one random group calling to ban all drugs. The price was professionally done but lied and used scare tactics about the softer drugs of alcohol and marijuana.

I was able to put some of my thoughts to Obama's choice as Biden now that I can digest it. He is a fighter that can put the hurt on McCain. It is unfortunate that Biden's presidential run I could only remember two things, he talks about Iraq and he made a good joke about Rudy Giuliani. Biden would have been a great candidate in 2004 primaries but in 2008 he was going against the cream of the democratic crop leaving him behind in the minds of the people. Biden is an incredibility smart man who is a leader in the Senate and first elected in 1972. Now he is a member of the US Senate Committee on the Judiciary and the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Relations. The two biggest things lacking in the Bush administration, intelligent foreign policy and respect for the Judiciary branch is what Biden knows.

I am already looking forward to a Biden vice president. I hope Republican friends of mine can even admit that he is better than Cheney.

Apparently 5th Senate District Race Features A Couple of Relative Moderates

If you have listened to the rhetoric of both Democrat Lois Wolk and Republican Greg Aghazarian, you have heard horror stories about their Senate opponents. Lois Wolk is of course a Davis Liberal associated with the Toad Tunnel and other eccentricities. Greg Aghazarian is right wing Republican who wants to make abortions illegal.

The truth turns out to be something very different. This week the Capital Weekly came out with its legislative scorecard. Unlike the rhetoric, Greg Aghazarian and Lois Wolk turn out to be a bunch of moderates. Or do they?

• Click here to see the full scorecard

In the Assembly there is just one Republican with a more liberal voting record than Greg Aghazarian. However in absolute terms, the Assemblyman from San Joaquin County only scores a 19 out of 100, well to the right of a true centrist. He may be more liberal than his colleagues, but clearly he's not centrist.

Assemblywoman Lois Wolk is actually even more liberal than Aghazarian is conservative scoring 91 out of 100. That puts her as the 9th most conservative member of the Democratic caucus in the Assembly. Then again she is hardly Cathleen Galginni who scored a 51 or the now infamous Nicole Parra who scored a 52 and was removed from the Capitol for crossing party lines on the budget. There are four Democrats scores between 51 and 64, making the Democrats far more moderate than their counterparts.

Compared to those Democrats, Assemblywoman Wolk is a flaming liberal with her 91. Then again there are 16 Democrats with perfect 100 scores. Seven Republicans scored a perfect 0.



In actuality, it was not that Assemblywoman Wolk crossed party lines on her votes, she was simply marked down because she failed to vote on three of the 20 votes that Capitol Weekly did their scoring on. She did not vote on AB 2058--Plastic Bag Recyling, AB 2083--Tuition for Undocumented Residents, and AB 2716 Sick Leave. The Wolk campaign did not respond to the Vanguard email requests for comments.

Assemblyman Greg Aghazarian on the other hand did cross party lines on four votes. He voted yes on SB 606--School Accountability, Yes on SB 304--Media Access to Prisoners, Yes on AB 1781 the 2008-09, and Yes on AB 1945 Recission. Of those of course, the yes vote on the Budget will innoculate him on potentially the most explosive issue given the crisis in Sacramento. He also did not vote on AB 118--Low-Carbon fuels.

How good are these measures?

The Capitol Weekly discussed the weaknesses of their scorecard in the article that unveiled the rankings published on Thursday, August 21, 2008.

"Every political scorecard has its problems, and this one is no exception. The selection of bills is subjective, chosen after conversations with Capitol staff and experts, and our own observations of big debates over the last two years under the dome.

The bills we chose were not necessarily the most publicized, or even the most hotly contested in all cases. But we sought to pick a variety of bills dealing with diverse topics that lawmakers have been asked to tackle over the last legislative session.

Part of the problem with this particular scorecard is the fact that both legislative houses, and all legislative committees, are controlled by Democrats. As such, the controversial bills that do find their way to the floor are disproportionately Democrat-sponsored bills."

However they go on to say:

"Also, our scorecard reflects what most Capitol observers know to be true: That Democrats from the Central Valley tend to be more moderate than their caucus colleagues, while Republicans in contested districts like Abel Maldonado and Greg Aghazarian earn more centrist marks than those lawmakers in more solid, partisan districts."

It is also worth noting that as Ben van der Meer of PolitickerCA.com does , that the 5th District as a whole tends to be centrist.

"State Sen. Mike Machado (D-Linden) had the second-lowest score of any Democrat, and he is termed out of the 5th Senate District seat, another target of both parties this fall.

The two candidates for that seat, Aghazarian and termed-out Assemblywoman Lois Wolk (D-Davis), are both ranked as relative moderates."

Senator Machado scored a 67, only Lou Correa scored lower in the Senate as a Democrat with a 47. That means that Assemblywoman Wolk is quite a bit more liberal representing Yolo and Solano Counties while Assemblyman Aghazarian is quite a bit more conservative.

Our previous analysis showed that Democrats in this district now have a much stronger advantage than they did in 2004 when Machado held off a strong challenge from former Stockton Mayor Gary Podesto.

However it also indicates that despite the relative moderation of both candidates, the strategy by both will be to paint each other as extremists. How well that works, time will tell.

One thing we know, this will be a heavily funded battle. By August 4, 2008, the Aghazarian campaign reported a 7-to-1 fundrasing advantage.

A press release at the time said:

"Assemblyman Greg Aghazarian continues to turn in strong fundraising numbers, including raising over $565,000 in the latest period ending June 30th. Aghazarian's fundraising topped that of his opponent, Lois Wolk, by a nearly seven-to-one margin. Wolk raised just over $76,000 for the period. Current cash-on-hand for Aghazarian is $1,040,000 - over fives time more than Wolk's $185,000."

Aghazarian Spokesman Tim Clark said:

"Greg Aghazarian has built a strong reputation in the Valley as a balanced ‘can-do' legislator who is willing to do what is right, even if it means going against the ‘party' line... Voters want to see him continue representing them in the State Senate, and that's one reason why the outpouring of support has been so strong. Greg's broad base of support is a sharp contrast to that of Lois Wolk, who continues to struggle in her fundraising."

However, with just two targeted Senate races, it is unlikely that money will be an issue for Assemblywoman Wolk either, Senate Democrats will likely open up their coffers as well.

The Vanguard will continue to cover this race and much more as election day approaches.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Vanguard Coverage of the DNC: Biden is the VP Pick for Obama and More

The Vanguard is primarily a blog that covers local politics and local government issues. However, there is no denying the fact that much of the world will be focused on the Democratic National Convention next week. So we have asked Don Gibson, a UC Davis Student who is President of College Democrats and an elected Hillary Clinton Delegate to the Democratic National Convention to write about his experiences at the Democratic Convention in Denver, Colorado. Here is his second report.

by DON GIBSON

How did I get here?

As a college democrat, the DNC was not my first idea of helping getting democrats to take back the state. A few political friends of mine suggested that I run because they thought that I would be a passionate delegate. The general goal for getting elected to be a delegate is get the most registered democratic voters to come out to the caucus to vote for you. There are stories of all the crazy ways people got elected to be delegates. From rumors I have heard, one person running to be a delegate in San Francisco's district went all out. He filled a bus load of homeless, offering them coffee and donuts and registering them to vote then cast their ballots.

I did not have the resources or connections to do something that intense. A goal for me was to have the caucus site on the UC Davis campus where I could get all of my friends to vote for me. But the first CD is a geographically large district. It reaches from West Sacramento to Napa City to Eureka and the boarder of Oregon. What ended up happening was unique for this CD. This was the only CD in California had two sites for people to cast votes. I thought I was done for. How could I get dozens of my friends to Napa? And then deal with the fact that someone could bring their entire church to vote.

In the Democratic Party, the strict rules about gender equality work on the delegate level. The delegates work out to a 50% to 50% ratio through out the state. In the 1st CD, Obama beat Hillary by .3% points. So he got three delegates and one alternate while Hillary received two, one male and one female delegate.

I thought, I doubt I would win but why not try? I filled out all the paperwork already. I got a van with me and six other Davis College Democrats to come to the caucus. On a side note, they did not encourage my run. The entire hour car ride was them joking about me. They were saying everything from "Don Gibson supports the Iraq War" to "Vote for Don Gibson to make abortion illegal". It was not the most encouraging car ride I had experienced.

Once we all got to the high school in Napa, the whole mindset changed. The game was on. I met up with a fellow Hillary delegate candidate. She had not committed to support a male on her slate so I made a deal that my friends who came would vote for her and me. Due to the ability of people to cast two votes, I was able to help out fellow candidates who pledged to support my run.

I had to shake every hand that walked through the doors of the high school's theater. I knew I could not win only on the fact that six of my friends came but that I had to win uncommitted voters. The odd thing about this run was that a significant number of people came supporting a female candidate but not a male one. The voters had the ability to cast two votes. I had the pleasure of convincing them that I would go for Hillary all the way.

Two different conversations still stick out to me today. One woman asked me "What would cause you to change your vote to Obama?" At the time, the primary was still in full swing and no one was sure who would come out on top. My only response was that "If I was personally insulted by her". The other person who really asked where I stood on his issue was abortion. He asked me where I stood even telling me he was a catholic and strong pro lifer. I could only say that "different people have different ideals of morality and government should not regulate morals" I do not know if I ended up getting the pro-lifer's vote by it was a trying experience.

After producing literature and shaking over 100 hands, all the votes have been cast. The votes for the male ended up being around 89 total votes where I received 45 to my astonishment. Four other males received votes and the female that won was not even from this caucus but was from the one in Eureka. I vowed to ensure that ever American had health care and that we would get out of Iraq as my impromptu acceptance speech.

What happened today?

Governor Dean! Luckily I did not call the contents of his speech as in my last post. He talked about how our current leadership in college democrats is what needs to take the lead to win the swing states for Obama. He asserted that Obama was the candidate of the future and McCain was the one of the past. This is a great way to invigorate the activists at the convention. The big idea was his campaign plan for the country. In 2005 the DNC held experiments with voters about how to increase Democratic turnout in Virginia. Groups that received robocalls or direct mailers increased their turnout by 1% to 2%. While those who were in the neighborhood leaders program had a 12% increase in Democratic turnout. Those people had their door knocked on 4 times for 40 households with members of their own community. According to Dean's speech voters under 30s actually voted more than the 65 and older crowd in the Iowa caucus pushing Obama over the edge. Dean was only a 10 to 20 points away from winning the democratic caucus in Iowa. Even though he did not go down as the candidate, he is doing an amazing job as DNC chairman.

Nothing other than that really happened today. More college democrats flew into town and there was a community service project outside of the University of Denver. But I can not forget to mention this thing. Biden is the VP for Obama! I hope I did not ruin anything for you guys but it came out publicly as many of us were leaving for the evening reception for College Democrats of America. I got the text message at 1:08 am MST.

Davis Joint Unified School District Expenditures

The Vanguard has received data from the Davis Joint Unified School district that examines district general fund expenditures. We have charts showing the historical spending by specific activity area from 2003 through next year. Over this time period, the district consistently spends of 80% of the budget on direct student support. The next largest line item is operations which keep school sites clean, safe and operational. With operations added to direct student support, the district spends over 90% of the budget on operating schools and teaching students.

The district only spends roughly 7% of its general fund budget on administration. That percentage has actually gone down slightly over the seven year period of time we track. In raw numbers, spending on administration rose by only a slight amount from $4.5 million to $5.2 million.

During the entire period, total spending rose from $59 million to $73 million. Of that $14 million increase over a seven year period, $13 million of that spending was in the classroom and $10 million went to teachers, aides, and books. Compare that small increase in cost to the rapid increase in Davis City expenditures on salary over a similar period which was upwards of $26 million in total compensation.

The first chart shows the spending broken down by category both in dollars and percentages of the total budget.



Next a pie chart shows the percentage breakdown by category.



Next we see the trendline of spending broken down by category which shows both the magnitude of teacher spending compared to other categories and also the rate of increase for teacher spending compared to the other categories.



Next the same trendline except the categories are broken down into classroom spending and non-classroom spending compared with total spending.



Finally two charts which show the same categories except broken down by percentage of the budget--here again you see relative stability in the categories across time.




COMMENTARY

Why are we looking only at general fund expenditures? The budget crisis occurring is a general fund budget crisis rather than a facilities fund budget crisis. For all of the talk of fiscal mismanagement by critics of the school district, the expenditure figures look relatively healthy. The majority of funding goes directly into the classroom. The percentage that goes to administration is small at around 7%.

A second point that needs to be made is that while teachers got a healthy pay increase a couple of years ago, overall, their salaries have not gone up by that much. If you compare teacher salaries to city employee salaries, particular fire salaries, they not only have gone up by nearly two-thirds less in percentage terms, but in absolute terms they are well below those in city government.

In other words, one can really not argue that the budget crisis for the school district was created by runaway spending. On the contrary, the roughly 24% budget increase in spending roughly mirrors that of inflation and does not keep pace with rising costs of housing and living in Davis. Nor does it keep pace with the astronomical rise of salaries in other sectors.

If one is looking for reasons to vote against the parcel tax, irresponsible spending increases by the school district does not appear to be one of them. Cuts to the budget, even if dispersed equitably across categories would necessarily have to more heavily impact money going directly into the classroom, toward core curriculum programs.

The bottom line here is that the public will have a choice--they can continue the high level of education in the district by supporting the parcel tax at an additional $120 per year or they can face cutting teachers and programs in the district. To me, that choice is very clear.

---Doug Paul Davis reporting

Vanguard Coverage of the Democratic National Convention

The Vanguard is primarily a blog that covers local politics and local government issues. However, there is no denying the fact that much of the world will be focused on the Democratic National Convention next week. So we have asked Don Gibson, a UC Davis Student who is President of College Democrats and an elected Hillary Clinton Delegate to the Democratic National Convention to write about his experiences at the Democratic Convention in Denver, Colorado. He arrived in Denver last night and has submitted his first report.

by DON GIBSON

Who is a delegate?

Delegates are the ultimate political junkies. Not only do almost all of us read multiple newspapers, blog, and never turn off CNN, we also poured hundreds of hours into campaigns. The delegates are party activist who were elected to support their respective candidate at convention. Registered Democrats in the Congressional District get to vote. I was elected to vote for Senator Clinton way back in April.

Today delegates are diverse. On age, race, and sex, the party has worked tirelessly that no group would be unrepresented. There are an equal number of men and women from each state while states like California set affirmative action goals to fairly represent the party's base. The newest demographic that is popping for this convention is young delegates. 11% of California's delegation is under 30 (49 of 441) compared to only 8% in 2004.

Why are so many of us not becoming involved? Is it Obama or Bush's presidency or something else? I don't think that there is any one thing that drove fellow young democrats to be delegates and myself to run. Many are excited about Obama (including Clinton delegates like myself). 8 Years under this disastrous presidency gets many young people afraid of what another Republican in the office will do. My thought is that we are the wired generation. Our generation is now plugged into the world 24-7. The level and ability for awareness in my generation is beyond anything just 20 years ago. Now millions of us will get a text message from Obama's campaign when he announces his VP choice in just a day or two now. It is almost hard to imagine for me what the world would be without the internet or cell phones.

Young voters are increasing going democratic. We do not care about same sex marriage, we care about college affordability and the Iraq War. In a head to head vote between Obama and McCain 18 to 29 year olds support Obama 60% to 33%. 47% of this electorate describes themselves at Democrats to 28% Republican. The old thought about young people not voting is no longer true. If they are targeted for outreach they will vote at 64.4% turn out. In the California 2008 Presidential primary young voters were 14% of the voters. With per-to-per outreach and campaign resources we not only vote more but can change the outcome of elections. If only 500 more people voted for Al Gore in 2000 in Florida then the course of the country would have forever been changed. 500 is less than the number of students in the Emerson dorm hall in the Cuarto part of UC Davis. Students can change elections. As Barbra Boxer put it "elections have consequences"

Today's first update:

I just got to Denver. I may have been the only person on that flight going to Denver and will be active at the convention. My activism may have been given away with my 5 buttons and sticker on my backpack. The airport and city are all decked out in "Welcome DNC to Denver" and volunteers all in orange sticking out in the crowd. They are waving signs with big question marks and lines like "Ask me questions Democrats". It almost feels like this is Beijing's Olympics where the city is pulling out all the stops to make people feel like there is focus. But they did not destroy half the poor areas in the process. Although there a lot of rumors about what the city is doing about the homeless, everything from giving them tickets to the zoo to sending them to Salt Lake City.

Before the big convention with Obama and the Clintons, I am going to College Democrats of America convention. The first cool thing is meeting people from all over the nation. Right now sitting next to me is 3 fellow bloggers, one from Princeton, one from UC Berkeley, and another from Tuffs. The only thing I wanted is nice hotel rooms. As you can see in the pictures I will not be staying the lap of luxury tonight. For the DNC convention the California and New York delegations get to say in the Sheraton, formerly the Adam's Mark.

Nothing too exciting has really been happening now. The only thing that is going on is random groups of people meeting up and partying in their respective dorm rooms. I am about to go walk all around the campus looking for some fast food for dinner.

Tomorrow should be fun, College Democrats are putting together a community service project in the city. Then for kick of Gov. Dean will be speaking to the hundreds of us. I hope it is not the speech that ever politician gives to us student activist. The: "You are the future of country… Hope… Destiny… Future… On the door step of a new millennium… Tomorrows leaders… and so on"

Please Donate to the Children of Fallen DPD Officer Paul Narr

Last week, Davis Police Officer Paul Narr tragically took his own life. He leaves behind two small children and a wife. The Davis Police Department has set up a trust fund for Peyton and Jack Narr. Peyton is five and Jack is about to turn three. College trust funds for Officer Narr's children have been established at First Northern Bank. Donors may make contributions at any branch of the bank, which has offices in downtown Davis, Woodland, Winters and Dixon.