Davis City Council Draws a Symbolic Line Against Elon Musk: Boycott Passes, But Starlink Gets a Lifesaving Exemption

Key Takeaways

• City of Davis council proposed banning new contracts with Elon Musk-controlled companies, citing threats to democracy.
• Council member admitted Starlink benefits emergency services (EMS, Fire, Police during outages), leading to its exclusion via amendment.
• Community members pushed for “exceptions to the rule” and cited misconceptions on Tesla unions (Musk invited UAW, court backed safety uniforms) and market share (competitors like Ford/GM retreating from EVs).
• Resident made offensive remarks, sparred verbally with Council member Bapu Vaitla, who admonished him.
• Motion passed with Starlink exemption despite community support for the boycott.

In a move that’s sparked both applause from anti-Musk activists and eye-rolls from tech pragmatists, the City Council of Davis, California—a progressive college town near Sacramento—unanimously passed (4-0, with one abstention) a resolution on February 18, 2026, to sever ties with companies controlled by Elon Musk. ❶ ❷ The sweeping measure targets Tesla, SpaceX, Neuralink, xAI, The Boring Company, and initially Starlink, citing everything from labor violations and environmental lapses to Musk’s “threats to democratic norms” via his political posts and influence. ❸ But in a classic case of ideology bending to reality, the council carved out an exception for Starlink, acknowledging its critical role in keeping emergency services online during outages. ❷

As a blogger who’s covered the intersection of municipal politics, tech innovation, and corporate accountability for over a decade, this story exemplifies the growing politicization of local government procurement. Is Davis leading a principled stand against a billionaire’s overreach, or is this performative symbolism that undermines practical governance? Let’s dive deep into the meeting drama, the facts behind the rhetoric, and what it means for other cities eyeing similar boycotts.

The Resolution: A Laundry List of Grievances Against the Musk Empire

The resolution, titled “Resolution Ending Engagement With Elon Musk-Controlled Companies and To Encourage CalPERS To Divest Stock In These Companies,” wasn’t born in a vacuum. Prompted by public requests, city staff drafted it with a preamble dripping in moral urgency: Musk’s firms allegedly flout labor laws (think Tesla’s Fremont factory woes), dodge environmental regs (SpaceX launches), and ignore safety standards, all while Musk uses platforms like X (formerly Twitter) to “promote political ideologies that threaten democratic norms.” ❸ ❷

Key actions mandated:

1. No new deals: Bar contracts, subsidies, or purchases with Musk entities.
2. Ditch existing ones: Terminate where legally possible.
3. Platform purge: No city funds for X, xAI, or similar in communications/IT.
4. Investment nudge: Urge CalPERS (California’s massive public pension fund) to dump Tesla stock and peers.
5. Vendor vetting: Scrutinize any Musk-linked lobbyists or partners.

Fiscal impact? Negligible—Davis has zero current investments or major contracts with these companies, making this more statement than substance. ❶ Yet, supporters hailed it as a “stand” against feeling powerless amid national politics, with one resident noting, “When we have our city taking a stand, we know that together we can make a difference.” ❶

Public Comments: From Cheers to Heated Clashes

The February 18 council meeting turned into a microcosm of America’s culture wars. Pro-boycott speakers hammered Musk’s record:

• Labor woes at Tesla Fremont: Intimidation tactics, racial discrimination suits. ❷
• EV market myths: Claims Tesla’s dominance is fading as Ford, GM, and Stellantis retreat from EVs, incurring billions in losses—ironically crediting Tesla for teaching them the ropes. ❷

But opposition voices pushed back, advocating “exceptions to the rule.” They debunked union misconceptions: Despite anti-Tesla narratives, Elon Musk has publicly invited the UAW to unionize, and courts (via NLRB) have backed workers’ rights to wear pro-union attire like black safety uniforms at Fremont. ❹ Tesla’s Fremont history is checkered—UAW efforts since 2010, NLRB rulings on firings and shirt bans—but it’s no anti-union hellscape; wages recently hiked amid organizing drives. ❺ ❻

Things got spicy when one resident veered into offensive territory, prompting a verbal spar with Councilmember Bapu Vaitla (District 1 rep, data scientist by trade). Vaitla admonished him sharply: “Your actions were offensive.” The exchange fizzled after seconds, but it underscored the raw emotions. ❷

Councilmember Linda Deos abstained/nay-voted, questioning selective outrage: “Why aren’t we going after Home Depot? They’re one of the biggest contributors to the orange turd’s administration.” ❶

Starlink Saves the Day: The Pragmatic Carve-Out

Enter the irony: A councilmember openly admitted Starlink’s indispensability. City Manager Daryel Dunston confirmed it’s the “important backup” for EMS, Fire, and Police when cellular grids fail—faster, lower latency than alternatives. ❶ ❷ Post-comments, they amended to exempt it strictly for emergencies. No more blanket ban.

This isn’t hypothetical—Starlink has proven vital globally for first responders in floods, fires, and blackouts. ❼ In Davis, a town prone to PG&E outages, ditching it would be reckless.

Pros and Cons of the Exemption:

Tesla Unions: Sorting Fact from Municipal Myth-Making

Davis speakers leaned on Tesla’s Fremont sins, but history is nuanced:

• Pre-Tesla: Fremont was NUMMI (GM-Toyota union shop) until 2010. ❽
• Union Drives: UAW pushed since 2014; Musk tweeted welcomes but faced NLRB charges for retaliation (e.g., 2018 firings). ❾ ❿
• Recent Wins: 2024 pay hikes amid UAW talks; NLRB ok’d black pro-union shirts. ❹

Advice for cities: Vet claims rigorously—boycotts based on headlines risk backlash.

Broader Implications: A Trend or a One-Off?

Davis joins a wave: Other CA spots eye Musk bans amid his Trump ties and X drama. ⓫ But pitfalls abound:

• Legal Hurdles: First Amendment suits loom if “ideology” trumps bids.
• Vendor Gaps: Tesla chargers? SpaceX data? Innovation suffers.
• Electoral Risk: Pro-Musk voters (EV owners, techies) may revolt.

My Take: Kudos for debate, but exemptions expose the folly. Focus on verifiable ethics policies over personality cults. Cities should prioritize RFPs with labor/env scorecards, not CEO tweets.

What’s next? Watch CalPERS—real money at stake. Davis proves: In governance, ideals crash into reality, and sometimes Starlink beams the way.