Davis City Council Meeting - July 1, 2025

The Davis City Council met on Tuesday, July 1, 2025, at 6:30 PM in Community Chambers. The meeting covered routine consent items, a Planning Commission request to explore UC Davis campus annexation, a presentation on the state of the nonprofit sector, an update on the Daytime Respite Center, an activation update for G Street Plaza, and council administration including subcommittee consolidations and calendar planning. The meeting adjourned for summer recess at approximately 10:30 PM.

Consent Calendar

• The council approved the agenda minus Item 3E (Palomino Place Final Map) which was pulled by the developer. Item 3L (Planning Commission request to explore annexation of UC Davis campus) was pulled by the mayor for discussion.
• The remaining consent items were approved unanimously (5-0) and included: construction contract for traffic signal improvements, amendments for flooding hot spots and storm drain pump station design, adoption of the 2025 Moving Transportation Forward Plan, extensions for Chiles Ranch subdivisions, a grant application for a playground, updated salary schedule, authorization for city manager actions during recess, cross connection control program updates, re-adoption of military equipment use policy, and approval of commission minutes.

Public Comments & Testimony

• Ningwan (former Historical Resources Management Commission member) requested the city reorganize the commission, noting state requirements for designated historical monuments.
• Speaker on annexation supported annexing the UC Davis campus, citing historical disenfranchisement of students and the desire for student voting rights.
• Yolo County Association of Realtors representative requested clearer communication from the city regarding the Davis City resale inspection ordinance, stating frustration with lack of response to formal inquiries.
• Respite center supporter urged the council to keep and invest in the respite center, moving it to South Davis if necessary, noting the center's value and the consequences of removal.
• Alan Miller commented on various topics including nonviolence, anti-Zionist Jews, and the situation in Gaza.
• Connor Goman (recorded) supported the fiscal commission's temporary reduction and urged broader definitions of expertise; also supported allowing the Planning Commission to explore UC Davis annexation.
• Alan Hirsch (recorded) criticized the lack of shade at new bus stops, requested functioning drinking fountains at Central Park, and noted that recent hate incidents were limited to three graffiti incidents in 12 months.
• Respite center neighbor described ease of alcohol purchase at the center by teenagers and the impact on the neighborhood.
• G Street area resident complained about the plaza becoming a gathering spot for unhoused individuals, with misuse of bathroom facilities and litter, urging the city to find solutions.
• Tracy Favor (Executive Director of Davis Community Meals and Housing) thanked the council for engagement and highlighted successful programs including peer support training and a new year-round flex bed shelter.
• Diane Parrow and Doug Busby (board members of Davis Community Meals and Housing) reiterated willingness to partner and thanked the council for attention to homelessness issues.
• Alan Miller (second public comment) praised the well-run neighborhood meeting on the respite center but noted continued problems with litter and police response in the area around 2nd and L Street.
• Tim Hoban (K Street resident) described ongoing issues at Cedar Park including litter, drug use, and overnight camping, and urged moving the respite center.
• Ben Blitzing questioned the cost-effectiveness of the respite center ($500k/year for 30-40 people) and suggested permanent housing instead; also criticized the location selection process.
• Jessica Maria Ross (co-founder of Davis Manor Neighborhood Council) acknowledged recent improvements in communication and transparency but noted that crime statistics may not reflect actual impacts because residents have stopped calling police; asked to be included in future decision-making.
• Connor Goman (recorded) supported the respite center as a valuable resource and suggested rotating or adding additional centers.
• Gaina Lambang (recorded) strongly supported keeping the respite center in a central location and urged finding a permanent overnight shelter.
• G Street commenter provided constructive feedback on the plaza design, suggesting more permanent infrastructure, better street resurfacing, and reducing barriers for businesses to use the space.
• Another G Street commenter (in person) urged the city to expedite outdoor seating approvals for businesses, noting months-long delays.
• Connor Goman (recorded on G Street) supported the car-free space and called for more social furniture, art, and low-barrier events.
• Alan Hirsch (recorded on G Street) criticized the lack of tree planting and shade in the G Street plan, noting that $1 million originally allocated for downtown tree planting was redirected to this project.
• Alan Miller (on subcommittee item) declined to speak.
• Honey (recorded on long-range calendar) urged the council to set a concrete date to discuss restrictions on gas-powered leaf blowers, citing health and environmental concerns.
• Alan Hirsch (recorded on long-range calendar) expressed concern about a potential privatization of city tree maintenance and a hidden structural deficit in the tree budget, calling for full disclosure.

Discussion Items

Item 3L: Planning Commission Request to Explore UC Davis Campus Annexation

• Mayor Vaitla pulled the item and supported allowing the Planning Commission to research annexation, emphasizing collaboration with UC Davis and noting changes since 2010.
• Councilmember Deos opposed, citing staff capacity constraints with the General Plan update and major development projects, and questioned fiscal benefits.
• Vice Mayor Neville opposed, noting UC's constitutional independence, lack of property taxes, and potential liability; supported continued collaboration without annexation.
• Councilmember Partida had concerns about timing but was not completely opposed; suggested focusing on smaller parcels like Royal Oaks.
• Councilmember Chapman raised concerns about timing, the need for university and county involvement from the start, and staff capacity.
• Public comments included support for allowing the commission to explore the idea and a statement from UC Davis's Director of Local Government Relations expressing willingness to discuss but noting university concerns.
• Outcome: A motion by Mayor Vaitla to allow the commission to gather information without staff burden failed 4-1. A subsequent motion by Vice Mayor Neville to accept staff's recommendation not to move forward passed 4-1 (Mayor Vaitla dissenting).

Item 4: Yolo Community Foundation Presentation – State of the Nonprofit Sector

• Jessica Hubbard (Executive Director) and Carolina Valverde (Program Manager) presented findings from a survey of 68 nonprofit organizations in Yolo County.
• Key statistics: 53% of organizations saw expenses increase by at least 10%, while only 37% saw revenue increase by 10%. 52% have less than six months of reserves (up from 29% in 2024). 30% can provide salaries that keep pace with inflation. 47% are concerned about declines in government funding. 48% report less than 10% BIPOC board representation, while over 50% of Yolo County residents identify as BIPOC. 44% are very concerned about staff burnout.
• Council members thanked the presenters and discussed ways to support nonprofits, including volunteer portals and partnerships.
• No action taken; informational only.

Item 5: Daytime Respite Center Update

• Interim City Manager Stachowicz provided a recap: the center (530 L Street) has operated since February 2020, managed by Downtown Streets Team since 2023, at an annual cost of $500,000 plus city staff time. Serves 40-60 people per day.
• Survey results: 92 responses from Davis Manor, 56 from Huntwood/Da Vinci families. Top concerns: safety, increase in unhoused individuals, trash, yelling/violent language, encampments, public urination. Top suggestions: move the center and increase police patrol.
• Council subcommittee (Neville & Partida) emphasized that no decision was made tonight but that a comprehensive analysis of homeless services, including duplication, is underway and will be discussed in September.
• Public comments included both support for keeping the center (with improvements) and strong opposition citing ongoing problems with crime, litter, and safety.
• No formal action; council directed staff to continue analysis and prepare a report for September.

Item 6: G Street Activation Update

• Directors Yancey, Chapman, and Machado presented on infrastructure, maintenance, and programming. Construction was completed early 2025; cable fencing replaced with more durable materials. Maintenance costs: $23,000 annually for staffing (2 part-time temps) and $25,000 for materials. Challenges include litter, misuse of facilities, and difficulty cleaning platform tiles.
• Programming: teen summer kickoff (June 7) and planned pizza and paint night. Placemaking includes Adirondack chairs and potential murals. Outdoor dining licensing: 2 of 3 applications approved, with one business beginning operations.
• Council discussion: Members supported low-barrier events, shade structures, better seating, and public art. They created a subcommittee (Councilmembers Partida & Neville) to work on short-term placemaking improvements over the summer recess. Council also expressed interest in exploring entertainment districts under new state law (AB 969).
• Outcome: Motion to create subcommittee passed 5-0. Staff will report back in the fall on longer-term improvements.

Item 7: Council Meeting Administration – Subcommittees and Calendar

• Staff presented options for legislative calendar and subcommittee consolidations.
• Council actions:
  • Renamed the Inclusionary Multifamily Rental Housing Ordinance subcommittee to Subcommittee on Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, with tasks to review the rental ordinance's performance and develop for-sale inclusionary requirements (motion passed 5-0).
  • Combined the Long Range Growth subcommittee with the General Plan Community Engagement subcommittee; disbanded the General Plan Solicit Staff Input subcommittee (motion passed 5-0).
  • Disbanded the Budget subcommittee (consensus, no formal vote needed).
  • Kept the Business Retention/Expansion and Business Attraction/Economic Growth subcommittees separate for now, with a plan to revisit in the fall.
  • Decided to wait until after August to finalize the 2026 summer recess schedule (July vs. August).
  • Council will continue to explore options for public comment procedures (e.g., transcribing voicemails, time limits).
  • Added items to the long-range calendar: urban forestry discussion (August 19), homelessness discussion (September 2), and a staff presentation on new housing/land use bills (SB 131 and AB 130) and available state housing funds.

Key Outcomes

• Consent Calendar: Approved (5-0) minus Item 3E and 3L.
• Item 3L (Annexation): Council voted 4-1 to not move forward with the Planning Commission's request; staff recommendation adopted.
• G Street Activation: Subcommittee formed (Partida & Neville) for short-term placemaking improvements; council to explore entertainment districts.
• Subcommittee Changes: Inclusionary housing subcommittee renamed and retasked; general plan subcommittees consolidated; budget subcommittee disbanded; business subcommittees kept separate for now.
• Calendar: Summer recess decision deferred; items added to future agendas including housing/land use bill overview and homelessness discussion in September.