Fitch’s Growing Pains: A Critique
In 1994, Mike Fitch was selected for the city Historic Resources Management Commission’s contract to write a book about Davis’ recent history. A public draft has been made available, in print at the Davis branch of the Yolo County library, and on the Internet, at ![[WWW]](http://wikispot.org/wiki/eggheadbeta/img/sycamore-www.png){kind=small}
http://www.city.davis.ca.us/city/parks/histres/30years. It is called Growing Pains: Thirty Years in the History of Davis. It is intended to pick up in 1968, where Davisville ’68 by Joanne Leach Larkey supposedly left off. Chapters include the 1972 election, The UCD Meyer era, Mace Ranch, the Downtown, and various planning issues. This commentary is my look at the strengths, weaknesses and omissions of the draft.
Strengths: This document in its current form is a must read for anyone who cares at all about Davis. The author was driven by a need to give the reader a historical context for understanding how Davis has evolved to our current predicament. It is a valiant effort, a readable well-crafted explanation of the many planning issues that the city has confronted since 1968. Fitch has been at the scene of the crime in various ways, first as the city hall reporter for the Davis Enterprise, and later as a member of the city Project Planning Commission, then the Planning Commission, as well as its representative on the committee to review the Major Projects Financing Plan, so he brings an insiders awareness of why things got decided in certain ways.
Weaknesses:
1. Lack of primary sources: perhaps because he was so close to the scene, Fitch relies almost exclusively on secondary sources, mostly the Davis Enterprise. He emphasizes the council election of 1972 as the watershed for the modern era, but only peripherally quotes council members Joan Poulos, and never quotes Bob Black (whose leadership was so fundamental in the change he is emphasizing). Only Vigfus Asmundson had the wisdom to send Fitch a written statement for reference. It is tragic to have excluded the actual thoughts of the primary actors, as I told Fitch two years ago.
2. Misplaced UCD dynamic: Fitch emphasizes Jim Meyer’s 18-year tenure at the helm of the local UC campus, perhaps because he had access to Meyer’s 1992 oral history transcript. He paints a milquetoast picture from Meyer’s view. Meyer’s administration closely controlled the campus in a period of relative stability following the jovial but crusty Chancellor Emil Mrak’s period of exploding growth and innovation. And, he apparently doesn’t understand that Meyer’s administration was slow to respond to campus issues, and UC President Gardner forced Meyer to resign, bringing in the hyperactive Ted Hullar to shake things up. Also, Fitch makes no reference to Swords and Sandals, the long time UCD Administration/ASUCD secret society that was instrumental in maintaining constructive dialogue between student leaders and the administration, which was exposed in the Aggie in 1994.
3. Innovation: The chapter titled Village Homes should be called “Innovation: Bike Paths, Recycling, Village Homes and Energy Conservation”. Fitch quotes extensively from an analysis by two City of Davis planners, but ignores Mike Corbett’s book, A Better Place to Live, and apparently never even spoke with Judy Corbett, who had every bit as much to do with the vision and design of this extraordinary project.
4. Dedicated to health service: in his description of John H. Jones, M.D., he leaves out that Jones so exemplified personal sacrifice for public good that I invented the John H. Jones Public Health Service award, which we gave to John in 1990. The Yolo County Health Council has since given this annual award to recipients who exemplify Jones’ ideals.
5. Unilateral 1987 General Plan: While Fitch examines the political moves of Frank Ramos and the county to force the development of Mace Ranch, he ignores the power plays of the Davis council majority (Dave Rosenberg, Ann Evans and Mike Corbett) to impose their personal philosophies into the 1987 plan with virtually no public input, which now cause us many problems.
6. City Management: What about the Rosenberg/Evans/Corbett 1989 midnight selection of the less than scrupulous Bob Traverso as city manager ? And the 1990 election of Lois Wolk and defeat of Corbett leading to the replacement of Traverso with the ethical, creative and witty John Meyer ?
7. Financing: the largely excellent chapter on growth and the financing problems of the current general plan ignores the fact that existing residents who represent two-thirds of the population at build out were supposed to pay two-thirds of the cost of the projects. But since the council was unwilling to face the wrath of the voters, new residents carry the burden. Ask anyone in Mace Ranch, South Davis, Aspen, Northstar or Evergreen.
8. News sources: Fitch never once cites the Daily Democrat, the California Aggie, or the Test of Time. Nicola Milich wrote some excellent articles while covering Davis politics for the Democrat. At least two Aggie reporters did such a good job that the Enterprise later hired them.
Greatest Strength: This draft book provides the reader with the historical data for understanding the major forces in Davis politics as it plays out in the rhetoric of letters to the editor and at council meetings. Fitch has done the city a great service and you owe it to yourself to critically read this work so that you understand why people continue to debate growth in Davis.
For ten years, Jon Li wrote a monthly newsletter about local politics called the Test of Time. Jon can be reached at jli@yolo.com.
