The Davis City Council Election was June 6th, 2006. Two seats were available in the election.

The victors were Ruth Asmundson and, in a victory for the student vote, Lamar Heystek. Ms. Asmundson won the most votes. Measure G passed. Jeff Reisig was elected for the Yolo County DA and Joel Butler for the Yolo County Assessor.

See June 2006 Primary Election for information on the exact results.

2006 City Council Elections
Preceded by: 2004 City Council Election
Followed by: 2008 City Council Election


Davis City Council (2 seats)
Ruth Asmundson
Lamar Heystek
Mike Levy
Stan Forbes
Rob Roy


Bob Hagedorn (website) had announced he was running, but pulled out of the race on March 8th.

Students who live in campus-proper (e.g. not Cuarto/Castilian Hall area) cannot register to vote in Davis as UC Davis is not technically a part of the city of Davis.


Candidate Economic Interest Disclosures and Campaign Finance Filings are available from DCN.

Several DCTV Voter Education Programs, including the League of Women Voters City Council Candidate Forum and the Diversity Coalition Forum for Davis City Council and Yolo County District Attorney Candidates are now online as webcasts.

We collectively wrote questions to ask the candidates, as well.

March 20th Candidate Forum

On Monday March 20 the first Candidate Forum was held at 7pm at the Community Chambers.

from left: Rob Roy, Mike Levy, Stan Forbes, Lamar Heystek, Ruth Asmundson

Six preselected and four audience generated questions were answered by the candidates. The short forms of the first six questions and paraphrased summaries of each candidates answers follow:

  1. Do you support the building of the proposed Target store at Second Street.

    RR: Balanced not wanting it with the 270,000 transactions per year. Doesn't like the location proposed.

    ML: Wants to diversify the tax base but think that there needs to be dialog. Store is too large. Not fair to the neighbors.

    SF: Does not support. Breaks Faith with Mace Ranch community. Bad effect on downtown.

    LH: Opposes any Target in or near Davis.

    RA: EIR still in progress. When making this kind of decision considers service impact, neighborhood impact and tax base.

  • University Village and City relationship with University.

    • ML: Only option is to work in collaboration. West Village was predictable given known factors. Focus should be on making the project better.

      SF: University will not risk changes that would require a second EIR given community lawsuits the first time around. Prevent access to Russell. Establish contract for any services provided.

      LH: Prevent access to Russell. Only annex if it pencils out.

      RA: Working on an MOU with the University aimed at mitigation.

      RR: Annexation would be natural given who will be living there.

  • Relationships between City Council and the 27 Commissions.

    • SF: Respects the expertise of the commissions. Suggests listen to them. Increase public speaking at meetings.

      LH: Listen to them and read what they write. Served on 3.

      RA: City Council is seat of ultimate responsibility.

      RR: Listen. Referred to members as most likely experts on topic. HRC listens to voice that hasn't been heard.

      ML: Served on 2, Wife on 1. Council must build on commissions inputs, but decide for itself. Wants earlier involvement with commissions. Need more participation.

  • Fiscal Stability, does the City have a spending problem?

    • LH: Will vote for G because it is the only option presented by the current Council. He would not have put it forward. Audit first, cut if needed.

      RA: State has cut funds to the City. Anticipates a balanced budget this year.

      RR: Does not support G. Says that it is regressive and that it should be based on square footage. Raise development fees. Downtown undergoing revival. Future park should be BMX park to draw X-Games style competition.

      ML: Park tax was 67% of Park budget now is 25%. Value costs. Market the City to wanted retail. Supports G.

      SF: Quoted Dickens, "It was the best of times, it was the worst of times". Voting for G. Full fiscal review needed. Recruit retail.

  • How do you feel about Measure J and its recent use in Measure X?

    • RA: J worked. Need to plan and pursue infill opportunities.

      RR: Strengthen J. There were other options.

      ML: J works, renew it. X failed for many reasons.

      SF: One of the authors of J. Make J permanent now, don't wait.

      LH: Implement the current General Plan. X voted down because of costs, traffic, and housing costs. Make J permanent.

  • Your take on bike and pedestrian traffic.

    • RR: I don't own a car. Bike advocate. Didn't want to narrow 5th street. Doing so would have slowed response times for the fire department.

      ML: Bike paths are good.

      SF: Safety. Traffic Calming needed. Bike bridge over Covell needed.

      LH: Need to be able to cross 5th street from north to south on foot or bike. Would spend money on traffic calming.

      RA: When she goes to a sister city she looks at their bike and pedestrian methods. Educate students, residents and university students on bike safety.

  • How do you feel about district elections or Choice Voting in Davis?

    • SF: Supports district elections.

      LH: Supports district elections. Agreed with Rob's idea of a hybrid of districts and Choice Voting.

      RA: Didn't seem to state an option either way.

      RR: Suggested a hybrid of district elections and Choice Voting.

      ML: Supports Choice Voting.


    You must be logged in to comment on this page. Please log in.

    2006-01-27 02:50:35   I've seen Lamar and Rob do karaoke, but never Ruth or Stan, unless they use cunning disguses and secret stage names. An interesting election indeed. —JaimeRaba

    2006-01-27 08:14:03   I don't know about Stan, but based on what I've observed of Ruth, I don't want her on City Council again. She is grumpy and not very imaginative. —KenjiYamada

    2006-01-30 22:18:36   Davis probably could change its election rule to permit Davis students who have Davis addresses vote regardless of whether they live in Davis territory or not... if they wanted to. —JaimeRaba

    2006-03-10 22:44:28   It would be nice if the candidate websites actually had information on them. The exception being Rob's which has detailed information on it. Michael Levy's is just annoying because he has the most vague statements about his plans for the city. "A balanced budget that supports the services that make Davis special." How incredibly informative!! —JonathonLeathers

    2006-03-21 00:35:12   Favorite quote from March 20 Forum: "BMX bicycles! The wave of the future!" - Rob Roy —SharlaDaly

    • Mine was when the mayor stated that the city shouldn't put all of its baskets in one egg. Classic. - JonathonLeathers

    2006-03-21 14:36:49   I think everyone should vote for both Lamar and Rob; platforms aside, I think it's important to shake up city council and show that elected local government isn't just for a select caste of Davisites. —JaimeRaba

    2006-03-21 23:31:53   Amen to that! —Paul Harms

    2006-03-22 15:59:03   I would like to say that the nature of the question of choice voting messed me up. I think choice voting would be the best option. The argument for district elections is the cost of the campaign but someone can run a cleverly cheap campaign with choice voting and win a seat as the underdog. It is the best form of voting and Davis is too diversely drawn up for district elections to show a distinct difference of candidates coming from different districts. —RobRoy

    2006-04-06 14:16:07   Mike Levy as quoted in the Aggie 4/6/06: "Furthermore, he said he envisions a city where Parent Teacher Associations and Little League programs are staffed by parents." Huh? Last time I checked these private, non-city organizations were ONLY staffed by parents. —SharlaDaly

    2006-04-07 14:34:37   Based on your comments, I assume you're an inquisitive young lady unfamiliar with the harships faced by some Davis families. With both myself and my husband working two jobs trying to get into this overpiced housing market, it means volunteering for any of our kids' activities is a luxury we can ill afford. That's why I would support candidates who can appreciate the plight of rentors, like Lamar, or even Rob. —DavisWikiGnome

    2006-04-07 15:26:41   Let me first say that Ms. Daly is very familiar with Davis as she is a long time resident of the city and is active in the community. She has attended many a City Council meeting in her day. While I agree that Lamar and myself and more concerned with the plight of the renter than any other candidate I do not see Sharla taking a stance on any candidate on the wiki with the exception of her statement on Mike's page of, "If you are happy with the current City Council, this would be the guy to vote for." So yeah, Sharla is very informed. —RobRoy

    "2006-04-12 16:32" Text of letter in Davis Enterprise, 4/07/06:

    Meek and Droop for City Council

    When electing a City Council (or Board of Education), Davis uses rules, namely, plurality-takes-all, that allow seats won to be grossly disproportional to voter support.

    In the Palestinian election of Jan. 25, those rules allowed all five winners in North Gaza to be Hamas candidates even though Hamas received merely 47 percent of the votes there.

    A better system is available. Australia has used it for decades and, locally, the ASUCD uses it. The system has several names, the one I like best being "Meek's procedure" (after Brian Meek, a contemporary English mathematician who, in 1969, ironed out some computational wrinkles). With Meek's procedure, the ballot invites a voter, by marking 1, 2, 3, etc., to rank the candidates — any number of them — in order of preference.

    Here is how candidates will fare if we adopt Meek's procedure:

    • If any candidate is the first choice (or any two candidates are the top two choices or any three candidates are the top three choices) of more than one-third of the voters when two seats are open, or of more than one-quarter of the voters when — two years later — three seats are open, then that candidate (or at least one of those two or three candidates) will win a seat.
    • If any two candidates are the top two choices (or any three candidates are the top three choices) of more than two-thirds of the voters when two seats are open, or of more than one-half of the voters when three seats are open, then no fewer than two of those two or three candidates will be elected.
    • If any three candidates are the top three choices of more than three-quarters of the voters when three seats are open, then all of those three candidates will be elected.

    This relation of seats won to voter support seems appropriate and fair. The relation — known as "Droop proportionality" (after Henry Droop, 1831-84, an English mathematician who provided some key formulas) — is the primary benefit of Meek's procedure. But, in addition, strategic nominating and strategic voting are likely to become both less frequent and less effective.

    —Stephen H. Sosnick

    2006-06-14 17:57:05   No indication how many are Davis votes. —SharlaDaly