Op-ed | The Measure V Voter Guide Deserves a Second Look
- May 19
- 5 min read
By Nathan James Harper April 29, 2026
When my voter guide arrived in the mail, I did what most Davis residents do: I sat down and read it carefully. I have spent months researching Village Farms, reading the EIR, meeting with both the Yes and No sides of the campaign and supporters in person, while engaging with this community online and face to face. So, when I opened the argument against Measure V and read the very first bolded claim, I knew immediately something was wrong.
No on V claims “the cheapest market rate house would be $740,000.” This is factually incorrect. The $740,000 figure in the City report is an average price, not the lowest price. Average and minimum are not the same thing. This number comes from a consultant (BAE Associates) hired by the City of Davis to assess the economic costs and benefits of the project to the City. Their report is clear: the $740,000 figure was not obtained by asking the developer what their expected home sizes and costs were, but rather an average size (1,741 sq. ft.) and cost for other medium density units in Davis. The No campaign either did not understand that distinction or chose to ignore it. When challenged on this, they continued pushing it anyway as fact.
That is not an honest mistake. That is misinformation printed and mailed to every Davis voter.
Here is what the housing plan actually includes:1) 20% of units will be deed-restricted, or capital A affordable- 140 Very-Low Income rental units (under 60% AMI), 140 Low Income rental units (under 80% AMI), 80 Moderate Income homes (restricted for households making 80-120% AMI)2) 70% of homes in the development will be for-sale attached or on small lots- 150+ townhomes and half-plexes starting in the $400,000s (900-1200 sq ft. range), and 850+ modest homes estimated to start in the $500,000s, significantly less than the Davis median resale price of roughly $1 million in 2025. For context, mobile homes in Davis are approaching $300,000. The idea that there will be no homes available under $740,000 is simply not supported by any data.
Why does this matter beyond the numbers? Because if the No on V campaign is willing to misrepresent straightforward data in the official voter guide, Davis residents deserve to scrutinize everything else they are claiming.
And when you do, a pattern arises.
On contamination and PFAS: The No campaign has raised alarm about toxic chemicals and forever chemicals reaching future residents. Here is what the actual science says. Groundwater testing conducted in 2024 showed that all volatile organic compounds previously detected beneath the site in the 1980s and 1990s had completely dissipated, including vinyl chloride. The chemicals the opposition claimed would never go away, did go away entirely.
When a formal complaint was filed by a project opponent with the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board claiming the contamination posed imminent harm to future residents, the agency’s own expert scientists reviewed all available records and responded directly. Their conclusion: “Staff does not believe a risk is posed to the residential and commercial properties proposed for development if the development is connected to the existing City municipal water system.” In fact, every home at Village Farms will rely entirely on Davis municipal water for both potable and landscaping purposes. All existing wells on site will be permanently capped before construction. There is no pathway for future residents to be exposed.
On PFAS specifically, the certified EIR concluded that “substantial evidence exists to conclude that potentially contaminated groundwater from the Old Davis Landfill would not come into contact with the proposed project storm water system.” The No on V campaign response has been a chain of “could, possibly, maybe, might…” scenarios with no actual quantities, no predicted concentrations, and no demonstrated harm.
On traffic: The No campaign claims Village Farms would bring over 15,000 daily car trips causing gridlock and Level of Service F on Covell and Pole Line. What they leave out is that this projection does not account for the tens of millions of dollars in mandatory road and intersection improvements required as a condition of project approval. Once these mandatory street and intersection improvements are made, the Local Transportation Analysis in the EIR is clear: “The implementation of the recommended improvements would improve peak hour operations to acceptable levels at all study intersections.” The opposition’s traffic argument conveniently omits the part of the traffic study data that disproves their claim.
On farmland: The No campaign has raised concerns about the soil borrow site being lost to agriculture permanently. House Agricultural Consultants, a firm with forty years of experience analyzing land suitability including similar excavated sites, concluded that the soil at depth is near identical to what is currently on the surface, and that restoration would not change the area out of productive agricultural use. The concerns about agricultural viability were analyzed by certified organic farmers.
Every major concern raised by the No campaign was subject to years of independent analysis through a 5,000-page EIR certified unanimously by the Davis City Council and accepted by the State of California. When those findings did not support their position, the response was that the EIR itself was inadequate. At some point that stops being skepticism and starts being a refusal to accept any answer that does not confirm what they already decided.
I understand why a development of this size gives people pause. Davis has always been protective of how it grows, and I do not believe that instinct is wrong. But there is a difference between honest opposition and a campaign that opens its voter guide argument with a clearly misrepresented statistic and builds its entire case on concerns that independent experts have already reviewed and resolved.
Village Farms includes 360 permanently deed-restricted affordable units with an irrevocable donation of $6 million and 16 acres of land, the largest affordable housing commitment ever made by a private developer in Davis history. It includes 47 acres of permanently protected habitat, which was identified through the EIR process, the largest habitat donation in Davis history. It completes the Davis bike loop. It gives teachers, local work force, young families, and UC Davis employees a real shot at living in the city where they work with small market rate townhomes starting in the $400,000s range.
Davis has blocked needed housing for decades. The result is a city where mobile homes sell for $300,000 and the median home price is $1 million. Read the EIR. Check the City documents. The traffic study. Pull up the BAE report and find the $740,000 figure yourself. It is all publicly available. The deeper I have dived into this project, the stronger my support has become. Vote Yes on Measure V by June 2nd.
Comments