Making Democracy Work

LWV Davis Positions

May 1995

Consensus of the Davis League of Women Voters on City and County Government

City of Davis (pre-1995)

Support of policies consistent with the Davis General Plan. (pre-1995 this was "the general planning process", 1995 annual meeting made the change with mention of the 1987 general plan)

Objectives:

a. To preserve the character and identity of Davis as a separate community.
b. To maintain a high quality of life through provisions for city services, parks and greenbelts.
c. To provide a greater variety and availability of housing to meet the needs of the Davis community.

LONG-RANGE PLANNING (pre-1995)

Support for long-range planning by the city of Davis.

Objectives:

a. Professionally staffed and adequately financed planning department.
b. Conformance to the current City General Plan, with periodic review, zoning ordinances based upon the plan, performance standards for industrial zoning and broad design review positions.
c. Participation in Regional Planning.

LAND USE (1995)

Support orderly and contiguous development through the use of prezoning and annexation of contiguous territory conforming to the Davis General Plan.

Objectives:

a. Periodic needs studies, internally generated, to determine need for future growth and the availability of an adequate supply of good quality water to sustain the growth
b. Comprehensive planning to identify land scheduled for future development: balanced citywide development of open space of varied sizes and uses located near to users, with increased requirements for open space as density increases. Greenbelts to be encouraged and developed (Old Putah Creek channels).
c. Balanced citywide development of parks and recreational facilities of various sizes, planned to meet the needs of the elderly, preschool children, university students, school children, teenagers, adults, and special facilities for the disabled.

Support: Efficient use of land to preserve agricultural land, to prevent sprawl, and to minimize the impact on schools and public services.

Objectives: Imaginative site development with encouragement of alternatives to single family dwellings on conventional lots, including residential infill in existing residential neighborhoods to allow greater density.

Support: Action to prevent the development of a regional shopping center outside the city.

Support:. Encouragement of low density residential uses in the University Avenue area and the retention of the commercial corridor to the campus.

Support: Development of light industrial or commercial uses for Olive Drive area that do not generate heavy traffic.

Support: Efforts to attract new industry that will demonstrably strengthen the city tax base.

Support: Comprehensive capital improvements providing for: early acquisition of future development sites.

Objectives:

a. Consideration of all factors influencing costs.
b. Investigation of all feasible financial sources.
c. Attention to "aesthetic considerations" of proposals.
d. Encouragement of informed citizen participation.
e. Periodic review.

FISCAL (pre 1995)

Support: An adequate level of city services partially supported through park maintenance fees or fees for other public services, which may be charged on city utility bills.

CORE AREA (pre-1995)

(In 1993 this includes the area between First & Russell and the railroad to UCD campus).

Support: Cohesive downtown growth with these goals: commercial development allowed to expand within the Core Area as pressures for more shopping increase; provision of a variety of goods and services to meet the needs of Davis consumers of various ages and incomes.

Support: Housing as a permissible Core Area use; replacement of deteriorating housing by either residential or commercial development; with the encouragement of combining small lots.

Oppose: Mandatory mixed use zoning as counter-productive to the development of a strong Core Area. 3. Coordination between downtown business, the campus community, and city services.

Support: A Civic Center easily accessible to the community, providing coordination of related governmental services, good traffic circulation and room for future expansion.

Support: Accessibility for all Davis citizens with parking convenient to shopping.

Support: A Core Area safe and pleasant to the pedestrian with appropriate amenities and a focal point for community activities.

Support: Financial participation in the Core Area by the City of Davis.

TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION (pre 1995)

Support: Development of a comprehensive, efficient, and safe transportation system that is energy efficient, environmentally sound and enhances the mobility of the residents.

Objectives:

a. Establishment of a City Transportation Commission with staff assistance to coordinate long-range planning for all transportation modes, to explore funding sources, to provide public participation channeling and to publicize transportation information.
b. Support of a multimodal transportation center in the Core Area as a transfer point between rail, intercity bus, Unitrans, dial-a-ride, taxi, limousine, bicycle and pedestrian modes.
c. Continued improvements of auto, pedestrian and bicycle circulation system in the City of Davis. Attention to be paid to safety.

Support: Increased and convenient transit service throughout Davis, avoiding UCD transfer.

Support: Shared financial responsibility between participating public agencies and private organizations.

Objectives:

Year-round bus service with improved levels of service for summer, UCD vacations and weekends: (expanded service within the city should receive higher funding priority than bus travel outside UCD Davis area).

Support: Intercity bus fares based in part on distance traveled during peak hours with reduced fares for students, senior citizens and low income passengers.

a. Specialized transportation needs met in cost-effective manner; explore contracts with private providers to supplement publicly operated service when desired service levels cannot be economically provided (e.g., Intercity handicapped transportation, summer school busing).
b. Ride sharing in private vehicles (car, van, bus, taxi) to be encouraged as cost-effective modes to help reduce air pollution, fuel use, congestion, and parking problems generated by work, school, family transportation and recreational trips.
c. Park-and-ride lots near express bus lines and/or freeway ramps with secure, all-day parking for autos and bikes; site development costs financed by developer, city and/or other revenue sources.
d. More public information on all public and private transportation options available to Davis-UCD community provided: by central information number, newspaper listings, information on bus stop signs, posters, schedules, transportation publications.

CHILD CARE (pre-1995)

Support: Encouragement of child care that is affordable, accessible and of good quality for all the children in the City of Davis.

Support: Expansion and permanent funding for the City of Davis Child Care Services' Office.

Objectives:

a. Development of strategies to encourage start-up and expansion of licensed child care providers.
b. More subsidized child care for low income families.
c. Development of after-school care programs for all children at affordable, flexible rates with cooperation of the Davis Joint Unified School District.

Support: Greater contribution by the University of California-Davis to support the needs for child care of students, staff and faculty; recommend more child care facilities be established on campus.

Support: Child care facilities in lieu of fees as part of any housing or large commercial development in the City proper.

Support: Giving incentives for building child care facilities to developers.

Support: Earmarking child care spaces for children with special needs in public child care centers.

Support: Continued development and maintenance of the broad range and variety of child care services to meet the eclectic needs and tastes of the Davis community.

Support: Support child care for sick children.

HOUSING, (1995)

HOUSING, (Revised May 13, 1995)

1) Support: Sound housing in a variety of costs, styles, and locations for all ages and economic groups in Davis, with a choice of well-designed and well-constructed housing for students, for the elderly, for low-income people and the disabled.

Objectives:

a. Support possibilities for city creation of permanently affordable communities of mobile home owners through city, nonprofit, or resident ownership of park sites, to control rental costs and property maintenance.
b. Support and encourage quality manufactured housing. Investigate state restrictions.
c. Encourage increased densities in Davis in order to facilitate greater affordability without sprawl (e.g., row houses, townhouses, second story apartments over businesses).
d. Maintain original neighborhood density by encouraging shared housing and conversion of surplus rooms to accessory apartments (granny flats).

2) Support: The principle of inclusionary housing to provide for a range of housing costs within each subdivision; The responsibility for providing affordable housing and general community benefits should be shared by all city residents. Regularly review current needs for continuing targeting of resources to moderate, low and very low income households.

Objectives:

a. Investigate establishment of a unitary inclusionary ordinance - one which does not differentiate between rental and ownership housing. Total percentage requirement could be reduced, as long as percentage targeted to low- and very low- income remains the same or increases, if supported by housing needs analysis.
b. Support financial or legal incentives to encourage production of smaller dwelling units, such as basing impact fees on number of bedrooms, not units.
c. Support ways of spreading responsibility for implementing city policies with communitywide benefit more evenly among recent and long-term residents.
d. Promote the idea of "partial" sweat equity housing, where the shell of the house is built by the developer, and the homeowner does the rest.
e. When dedicating land for affordable housing specific lots should be transferred to the city early in the development process, to avoid or minimize neighborhood opposition to affordable housing.

3) Support: Use of development agreements between the City and developers as a vehicle for long-range planning. Adequate public participation must be provided for in both the planning process and the implementation of the agreements.

4) Support: Development of state and federal subsidized low-income housing, including subsidized rentals and permanently affordable units. Support mechanisms to keep housing affordable over time or to assure the return of housing subsidies to the city affordable housing fund at time of sale.

Objectives:

a. Support periodic review by the City of the need to subsidize, very low, low and moderate income housing and allocate limited resources to households with the greatest needs,
b. Support city investigation into shared-equity recapture mechanisms in which the city, the homeowner, and other financial partners, share any change in equity derived from the sale of an affordable home.
c. Support second units, or "granny flats", offer workshops on procedures, costs and designs, and establish a revolving loan fund which allows homeowners to make the necessary structural changes at low costs.
d. Support city research into local investment opportunities, including tax credit pools and land trusts, to produce affordable housing in return for tax benefits.

5) Support: Increased on-campus housing provided by the University of California-Davis for its students.

Objective:

a. Urge the University of California, Davis in its Long-Range Development Plan, to provide inclusionary space for a community of living groups on campus.

DAVIS WATER (pre 1995)

Support: Protection of the current supply of good quality water for the City of Davis. The study of supplemental water sources and conservation practices is advocated.

Support: Development of a long-range water management policy with opportunity for public review and comment.

Support: Participation by the City of Davis in County and regional planning for future city water supplies with opportunity for citizen participation in planning and review.

Yolo County

Support of policies that promote efficient structures, administration, and financing. (pre- 1995)

PLANNING (pre-1995)

Support: Long-range planning by Yolo County.

Objectives:

a. A professionally staffed and adequately financed planning department
b. Conformance to the County General Plan, with periodic review. Zoning ordinances must comply with the plan.
c. Performance standards for industrial zoning as well as broad new design positions.
d. Participation in regional planning

Support:. Orderly and contiguous development of urban areas.

Objectives:

a. Preparation and adoption of a long-range capital improvements' program.
b. Support greenbelts and open space.
c. Encouragement of agricultural preserves through implementation of provisions of the California Land Conservation Act of 1965.
d. Coordinated regional rail and bus transportation system with a centralized planning body.
e. Encouragement of inter community bike routes through implementation of the Yolo County Bikeway Plan (February 1992 draft proposal).

SOCIAL SERVICES (pre- 1995)

Support: Programs that provide the Department of Social Services with the tools and financing to promote the rehabilitation of recipients and the prevention of problems. Objectives:
a. Personnel and administrative policies aimed at securing and keeping the best possible staff for the Department of Social Services including: salaries competitive with neighboring counties; educational leave positions and in-service training; use of volunteers and case aides; increase of clerical assistance to eligibility and case workers to lighten their work load; and a constant effort to raise morale of entire staff.
b. Services for recipients including: day care centers for low income families; food stamps for all eligible applicants; and simplification of the application process. Monitoring changes in eligibility requirements.
c. Accessibility to services through decentralized offices of Department of Social Services in Yolo County.
Support: Determination of money to be given to recipients of General Assistance by comparison with carefully chosen neighboring counties, subject to periodic review to consider changing costs of living; discontinuation of the placing of liens on homes of those eligible for General Assistance.

Support. A coordinated program of County services by the Health Service Agency, the Probation Department, the school and private agencies.

COUNTY LIBRARY (pre-1995)

Support: Adequate financing to maintain and extend library services for a growing population.

PARKS AND RECREATION (pre-1995)

Support: The County General Plan for Parks and Recreation. Objectives:
a. Action by Yolo County in the field of regional countywide parks and recreational facilities.
b. Citizen participation in planning.
c. A balanced diversified program
d. Coordination of public and private development plans.
e. Adequate financing to maintain and extend services for a growing population; investigation of all sources of revenue for parks and recreation; and encouragement of participation by private groups and individuals.

JUVENILE JUSTICE: THE JUVENILE DELINQUENT AND THE PRE- DELINQUENT (pre-1995)

Support: Programs of counseling and guidance for first-time juvenile offenders and for their parents as a primary alternative to the legal processes involving arrest, detention, and court hearings. Effective implementation of both Juvenile Justice positions depends on adequate funding. Objectives:
a. Effective cooperation and coordination of agencies within the county (public, quasi-public, and private) which serve juveniles, in order to provide a greater scope of resources and alternatives and a higher degree of service to children who need it.
b. Availability of diversionary programs of counseling and guidance based on countywide guidelines to ensure quality, yet to permit flexibility of these services.
c. Utilization of current research studies on correction and rehabilitation techniques applicable to the delinquent and pre-delinquent juvenile.
d. Housing facilities of various types, including group homes, to meet the needs of pre-delinquent (601) and delinquent (602) juveniles with support services including counseling, crisis resolution, and other appropriate specialized services.
Support: A well-trained and adequate staff of probation officers as essential to the administration of juvenile justice.

JUVENILE JUSTICE: NEGLECTED. ABUSED. DEPRIVED JUVENILES (pre-1995)

Support: The development of additional programs to provide more alternatives in serving children in this category and support of measures that would improve and expand the existing programs of the Child Protective Service. Objectives:
a. Strengthening the foster home program by frequent evaluation, in-service training, and guidance programs for foster parents.
b. Support local group homes for juveniles in this category as a supplement to the foster home programs.
c. Provision of homemaker service for families in a crisis situation as well as for families in need of guidance and training in homemaking skills.

HEALTH CARE (for the elderly) (update proposed 1995)

Support: adequate, quality health care for all residents who use county financed health care.

Support: Initiation by the county of long range planning and action to provide the elements in the health care continuum, including: day health care centers, hospice programs, expansion and coordination of transportation and restoration of coordination of services (formerly Eldercare).

Support: Adequate record keeping by the county to insure the availability of necessary statistics for identifying needs for new and existing programs.

Support: Participation in planning by citizens who are educated on the needs of the elderly, who will act as advocates for the rights of the elderly, and who will observe and monitor governmental agencies that deal with the elderly, such as the Commission on Aging.

CACHE CREEK WATER (pre-1995)

Support: Prudent management of water resources both surface and underground to ensure quantity and quality of water in the Cache Creek watershed, one of Yolo County's major sources of ground water. Objectives:
a. Communications: Improved communications and coordination among water agencies to resolve water issue problems.
b. Water supply:
Continued recharge of ground water from Cache Creek. On-going monitoring and study of chemicals, including boron in the water supply.
Protection of the aquifer is our highest priority. All activities including mining must establish through an Environmental Impact Report that they will not endanger the aquifer. Each new mining area must have site specific EIR before permits are issued. Funding for this process and monitoring to maintain Environmental Impact Standards should be borne by the industry involved.
c. Pollution
Control release of effluent upstream on Cache Creek or its tributaries; i.e., Clear Lake communities. Monitoring, testing and enforcement of regulations regarding release of contaminants in ground water, i.e., agricultural, industrial and commercial uses and septic tanks
Strong monitoring and testing for chemicals in water run-off from mining operations, including Homestake.
Support: Erosion and Flooding: a policy that preserves farmlands from erosion and flooding. Support: Riparian and Wildlife. Effective planning to conserve wildlife sanctuaries along Cache Creek. Objectives:
a. Gravel reclamation plans that include provisions for riparian and wildlife preservation.

YOLO COUNTY WATER RESOURCES (pre-1995)

Support: Measures to ensure future quality and quantity of surface and ground water in Yolo County for agricultural, urban and environmental uses.

Objectives:

a. Initiation by Yolo County of strong interagency cooperation for the purposes of:
1. Protection of county surface and ground water resources based on a county water management policy.
2. Coordinated data collection and analysis, including but not limited to: subsidence, compaction, quality and quantity of supply, pollution and ground water recharge. All information should be made available to the public.
3. Development of a Yolo Count ground water management plan involving all surface and ground water users: agricultural, urban, industrial, environmental, private and public.
b. Requirement of an environmental impact report which identifies environmental, hydrogeologic, economic and third party effects, as well as mitigation measures, prior to evaluating proposals for short or long-term transfers of water into or out of the county.
c. Involvement of the Board of Supervisors in evaluation and permitting of exports (transfers).
d. Requirement that agreements establish responsibilities for third party effects in the county prior to any transfers of water out of the county.
e. Yolo County Injection Wells.
Support the county ordinance providing regulations on injection wells in Yolo County in addition to the regulations established by the State Division of Oil and Gas (DOG). Such an ordinance and accompanying regulations should provide for citizen input; offer maximum protection to the county's underground aquifers; and contain strong provisions to protect the health, safety, and welfare of county residents. The permitting process shall provide that the CEQA requirements be followed to ensure site specific EIRs and that alternatives be considered. All costs of administering the ordinance and accompanying regulations shall be born by the injection well operators and/or the responsible authority.

DAVIS JOINT UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT

Support: Measures to involve the public at significant points in the budget process, particularly in the setting of priorities. (pre-1995)

Support: A balanced district budget with financing at a level adequate to meet educational needs in Davis.

BUDGET/BUDGET PROCESS (pre-1995)

Objectives:
a. Early publication of and adherence to a budget activities' calendar which is well publicized throughout the community and which allows opportunities for formal public input through channels such as public hearings and advisory committees.
b. A district policy requiring ongoing school-based and district-wide citizen advisory committees which review priorities annually. Such committees shall represent all segments of the community.
c. Early, well publicized public hearings as part of the priority-setting process and on other significant issues affecting the budget.
d. Effective use of the local press and district and school newsletters to inform the public on such matters as current policies, policy changes, agendas of board meetings and hearings, and school board proceedings.
e. A budget document that is understandable to the community. Such a document should include detailed explanation of the numbers, presented in graphic and narrative form; comparisons with previous budgeted and actual figures; and descriptions of programs with greater effort made to reflect the true costs of programs
f. Determination of class size based on educational policies, (not as a means of balancing the budget).
g. Extended cooperation between the school district and other governmental agencies in bearing the costs of such activities as recreation, maintenance, and transportation.
h. Support of the local tax as a legitimate tool for balancing the budget (such support is not to be construed as a blanket endorsement of all local taxes; each must be considered on the merits of the specific issues and requires general membership understanding and agreement)

Note: Many State League positions on education are vertical and may be used at the local level. Consult your State Position folder under the section titled: Education.