Biolab Proposal Splits City, Campus

UC Davis and the city of Davis are at a standoff over a proposed high-security infectious-disease laboratory.

The university wants to build a five-acre complex outfitted to handle the world’s deadliest germs. Some residents and city officials do not.

If the federal government approves the $200-million project, what is now the UC Davis Equestrian Center will become the Western National Center for Biodefense and Emerging Infectious Diseases.

It would be the first so-called Biosafety Level 4 lab in the western United States. There are eight such biocontainment labs, which study Ebola, the West Nile virus and smallpox, east of the Rocky Mountains.

Public health officials say the laboratories are critical to public safety because they allow scientists to develop vaccines and respond to outbreaks more quickly. The biolabs require stringent security measures so terrorists or deranged employees can’t get to pathogens that can wreak mass havoc.

Still, opponents hope the university gets turned down.

Accidents happen, said resident Samantha McCarthy. “These diseases are going to be carried by common carrier. If something gets out, it could be absolutely catastrophic.”

Across Davis, groups have formed, petitions have circulated, and signs have sprung up protesting the project. There was even a unanimous City Council vote against it.

It is normal for people not to want “deadly human pathogens that are airborne” and for which there’s no cure in their neighborhood, said Councilwoman Sue Greenwald. “Not a lot of communities are happy to be the only place with Ebola in town.”

Besides the threat of an accidental outbreak, opponents say there is a high risk that classified bioweapons research would take place at the lab, given the country’s focus on bioterrorism.

“It runs counter to the principles of institutions of public higher education,” said Miriam Wells, a UC Davis anthropology professor who is coordinating faculty opposition.

“We’re not opposed to research that would develop vaccines to these types of germs. But we don’t think this type of research should be done on an undergraduate campus.”

A letter sent to the National Institutes of Health, the deciding agency, by the City Council stated that the proposed facility will “remain an unwelcome project,” regardless of how many informational meetings the university hosts.

Local support is a critical factor in securing the funds from the institutes, which at least six other universities are vying for, UC Davis officials say. They added that they have done several public presentations on the lab and plan to do more, despite what city officials say.

“It’s very difficult for us to accept that no more information helps,” said UC Davis Provost Virginia Hinshaw.

A large part of the community’s outrage may be the result of university officials’ waiting three months after preparing an official proposal to go public with its details.

“They didn’t take this to the people for a reason,” said McCarthy, who is part of the group Stop UC Davis Biolab Now. “They knew it would not get through, so they tried to slide through.”

UC Davis officials stand by their method of presenting the plan to the public.

Marj Dickinson, assistant vice chancellor for government and community relations, said the delay was in large part the result of a series of meetings with public officials “to mine them about what type of questions we should expect from community folks.”

“What we hope is that people want to take the time to get more educated,” Hinshaw said. “We can do it safely.”