Grand Jury blasts Oakland building services
Arnie Fields must be feeling vindicated. The Alameda County Civil Grand Jury released its 2010-11 final report (PDF) today, and it is none too favorable towards the City of Oakland.
Oakland Building Services
The report includes a lengthy and extremely harsh indictment of Oakland’s Building Services division (PDF):
Building Services’ code enforcement inspectors have aggressively pursued blight and sub-standard properties throughout Oakland as determined by their individual interpretations of the applicable city code. This has led to an inconsistent enforcement program backed by inspectors’ threats of filing large liens on the offering properties. This creates an institutional reluctance to lend on these properties and reluctance by property owners to improve their properties.
…
The Grand Jury found that property owners complained that it is extremely difficult to understand the process for appealing a citation, or to resolve issues with Building Services inspectors. Testimony confirmed there are no standard operating manuals or guidelines for Building Services inspectors. Property owners were frustrated by their inability to speak with inspectors who are only available for short periods of time on an irregular schedule.
The Grand Jury found an atmosphere of hostility and intimidation toward property owners within the Building Services division. When property owners complained, they were sometimes threatened with more fines or, in one case, even loss of their home. Some inspectors inappropriately used their law enforcement authority and their city-issued badges to intimidate property owners. Therefore, the Grand Jury believes that the city of Oakland should reevaluate its policy of granting law enforcement authority and related badges to building inspectors.
The Grand Jury is appalled by the actions of the city of Oakland’s Building Services Division and its impact on property owners of Oakland. The significant contradictions between the testimony of Building Services employees and the testimony of property owners and contractors are disturbing. The division’s practices and its treatment of property owners appear to be a direct reflection of poor management, lack of leadership, and ambiguous policies and procedures.
Their examples make Oakland look pretty bad. Here’s one they give as an illustration of excessive fees. The property was cited for trash and debris:
“Trash and debris, blight” turned out to be children’s toys in the yard. This resulted in fees/fines of over $18k and having to demolish a garage converted to an indoor/outdoor recreation room that had been approved more than 20 years earlier.
Another example, which they cite as “egregious abuse of authority”:
Building inspectors had a warrant for entry to premises for inspection only (not to remove items); they removed and disposed of EVERYTHING in the house and had animal control take the property owner’s dog. Subsequently the city recorded a lien for $30k.
Radio Interoperability
A study of regional emergency communications (PDF), focused mostly on the East Bay Regional Communications System Authority (EBRCSA), a joint powers authority whose goal it is to provide interoperability of radio systems throughout Alameda County and Contra Costa County, in order to allow for coordinated response during disasters, raised some serious concerns about Oakland’s ongoing radio issues:
Focusing on the question of why the city of Oakland has not joined EBRSCA, the current Grand Jury interviewed public safety officials from Oakland and EBRSCA.
…
Unfortunately, based on our research, the current Grand Jury concludes that the goals of cooperation and interoperability are far from being achieved, and progress towards regional interoperability between the city of Oakland and EBRSCA is at a standstill. The delay in finding a joint solution for this issue leaves the lives of officers and the public in continued jeopardy.
and
While investigating interoperability, the Grand Jury became aware of persistent radio communication problems within the city of Oakland (internal operability problems). The Grand Jury requested and received copies of reports of radio problems submitted by police personnel over the past year including reports of dead spots and radio failures. The sheer volume of reported problems from these reports, the CTA study, and from witness testimony can only be described as shocking.
Parking citation system
Not all the news about Oakland was bad. The Grand Jury appeared pleased with the results of an investigation of Oakland’s new parking citation system (PDF), although they had a few recommendations for improvements:
While the new system may not solve all parking citation problems, the Grand Jury is pleased that the city of Oakland’s Parking Bureau is keeping up with new technology. To make the system more effective, it would be valuable to have 100% of those issuing tickets use this electronic system. The Parking Bureau should track performance of the new system carefully to document strengths and weaknesses, continue to train staff on its use, and make adjustments as necessary.
Download the full report here (PDF). It makes for some pretty interesting reading.
Get Updates
Newest Comments
- len raphael: Unconfirmed that MJQ laid off 100 employees today, blaming RDA court case. How much did she and the CC waste in legal fees betting against Jerry’s lawyers?
- ralph: No, Livegreen, Occupy Oakland is doing plenty good. They are the poster children for the new, “This is Your Brain on Dope” Campaign.
- Livegreen: They seem to b determined to shut down Oakland and little else. They’ve forgotten Wall St. I can’t help but think the Officers who were preventing them from breaking in to City Hall could have spent...
- gregory mcconnell: The Occupest disrupted City Hall today. They managed to make it difficult, but not impossible, to go into City Hall. They demanded that people who accosted cops on Wednesday should be released. I was out...
- livegreen: I watched the M-Y mtg last night, & it was painful. Jose is a nice guy, but he has difficulty running a meeting that gets anything done. They debated for about 1 hour whether they should discuss recommendations...
- len raphael: The murder of 5 year old Gabriel Martinez. Got a call from an acquaintance who lives in East O and often gets supper at his family’s taco stand. She asked where she can sign up to help on the recall.
- Ravi: I’m sure that all of those Quan diehards (“a recall would be a waste of time and too expensive”) are very gratified that this lovely and deserving woman is having such a good time. No doubt they prefer...
- len raphael: JQ “”I’m actually having a lot of fun,” she said after rehashing many of the lower moments from her first year in office.” “http://www.insidebayare a.com/news/ci_19651889R...
- Ravi: And regarding police reform and the crime thing, Judge Henderson could decide to put OPD under Federal jurisdiction because the terms of the NSA haven’t been fulfilled by the City Administration. Those folks in City...
- len raphael: Harbinger of things to come to the City Council when they eventually have to make similar decisions. But they won’t. The Fed bankruptcy judge will do it for them.
- livegreen: Yeah, but OUSD has to do something. There are way too many schools for the school population. There’s simply no choice. At least they’re willing to make the tough decisions. Unlike the City of...
- len raphael: Are those school board recalls entirely over the school closing decisions? Different groups or one umbrella?
- Ravi: Two recall petitions for Quan; five recall petitions for five school board members.
- len raphael: City says there are now 7 concurrent recall petitions. Not clear how many are for Quan and how many for Council Members. Direct democracy at work.
- Ravi: Can the Oakland City Council lead? Nope, nor can the Mayor. It’s up to the citizens, who are deeply divided and have been for a very long time.
- len raphael: Oakland Local is the only on or offline general circulation media that shows understanding of the depths of our fiscal situation and understands that it’s causes precede the real estate crash. One of these...
- Mkilian: Related to the Cal Supremes haircut to Oakland with respect to RDA and the immediate need for a “fiscal operations plan” is another issue put forth in Oakland’s internet newspaper, Oakland Local, is...
222 Responses to “Grand Jury blasts Oakland building services”
Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All
June 27th, 2011 at 3:19 pm
The Grand Jury went real easy on Building Services…….This is just the tip of the iceburg.
June 27th, 2011 at 6:36 pm
I read the section of the report dealing with the blight enforcement and even though the report uses a measured, tempered tone, it made me sick. I had heard about the allegations before, but I could never believe that things were that bad. Even after everything I have witnessed with my own eyes, about the level of incompetence and corruption that exists in City government, I just couldn’t believe that this was going on. I mean, it really sounds like something you might find in Iran or Myanmar or something like that. And yet, it is going on right here in Oakland. And despite the fact that the people complaining about were making plenty of noise, there was never any press coverage. (I personally recommended to the complainants that they try to get media coverage at the time, but to be honest, I didn’t believe this stuff could be true. Maybe the reporters didn’t either).
And obviously, these problems have been going on a long time, and the City Council, and our current Mayor, predictably, did nothing. They should all be ashamed of themselves. Really, really, really ashamed.
Now, I have little sympathy for slobs who don’t mow their lawns and have garbage lying around and basically leave their homes is a state of decrepitude. But even I, with my limited sympathy, think that the system that has been operating is appalling. I mean, murder suspects get more due process than people with peeling paint! How can that possibly be justified?
One of the things that struck me was that the Grand Jury identified one of the main problems being a lack of policies and procedures. That didn’t surprise me. Oakland has no policies or procedures for anything. Including compliance with the Public Records Act. And the proof is in the pudding. Chaos, disorganization, waste, arbitrariness, corruption etc. Hopefully Deanna Santana will start reading this blog and realize she has her work cut out for her. And hopefully a mainstream reporter will take this report and go to town with it.
June 27th, 2011 at 8:32 pm
I sat in on a small part of a blight appeal hearing and was really mystified by the process. On the one hand, I have complained about blighted buildings, and they’ve gone on being blighted for quite long periods, but on the other hand, in the same nearby area, a perfectly reusable structure has been knocked down in response to blight issues, rather than restored or rehabbed or sold. Somehow the system does seem out of kilter.
June 27th, 2011 at 8:53 pm
MarleenLee,
It IS that bad. And reporters knew. MANY REPORTERS KNEW and ignored it or more likely, as you say, didn’t believe it. You can’t imagine how hard everyone tried to get the press involved. Zero, zip, and zilch. And I know for a fact that Quan was informed about this before the election, in the hopes that, were she elected, she would at least know about it. But instead you watch the CC meeting and Walter Cohen and Lindheim basically touting all the money CEDA is bringing in for the city and everyone just happy as clams. This is illegal. Even Lindheim is aware, according to a comment he made at one meeting, that their intake from fees and penalties can’t exceed their costs. Really, it’s no different, ethically speaking, from the council deciding not to cut street sweeping because it brings in a few more million in citations than it costs to run the program. It’s just that it’s in the state constitution that building depts exist to serve the citizens, not the other way around, and are forbidden by law from being profit centers. Street sweeping shouldn’t be a profit center, either. But Oakland is willing to pimp and embrace all sources of profit.
You want to talk about blight, and people who don’t maintain their lawns? Bosh. People were getting cited for blight all over town who had, like, one slightly overgrown rosebush. And charged fees in the thousands and then penalties on top of that for being late even though they got the notice after the deadline etc. etc. etc.
These thugs deserved to be handcuffed and thrown in jail.
June 27th, 2011 at 9:03 pm
If building services actually made progress with blight abatement, They would not have an excuse to continue with predatory code enforcement. We have way to big a building services staff. Big enough to repair earthquake damage, firestorm damage and support a building boom. lacking these sources of revenue, they have resorted to predatory code enforcement and even a strong arm robbery as documented in the Grand Jury report. A staff reduction of 50% or more is needed.
June 27th, 2011 at 9:08 pm
FloodedByCEDA,
As noted in the report (and as you clearly know), the actions of CEDA actually REDUCE blight abatement by making their victims poorer and thus less able to afford needed repairs, and also by placing official threats of liens on properties, making the properties seem encumbered and scaring banks away from loaning to the owners for any repairs. They do the opposite of their job.
June 27th, 2011 at 10:11 pm
We the readers of ABO are not blameless here.
Months ago, when floodedbyceda tried to get our collective attention we dismissed the postings as paranoid rants because her posts and website documents were disorganized, messy, and poorly written, but mostly because we were so sure the City and it’s employees couldn’t be so stupid or so greedy to do such grossly abusive and probably illegal stuff.
And if they did, of course a simple complaint to the City Auditor would quickly put an end to abuses.
We didn’t take the time to read the documents she posted. While they didn’t fully support her allegations, they certainly appeared to be indicative of shady stuff going on.
We owe her an apology.
-len raphael, temescal
June 27th, 2011 at 10:16 pm
Alert readers of local news may recall that the FBI has visited the building dept. and removed records having to do with inspections. Has anyone heard anything more about that part of this story? Presumably the grand jury is working parallel to the federal effort, basing its work on similar evidence, but separately? If so, there could yet be another shoe to drop.
June 27th, 2011 at 11:08 pm
No confirmation, but my understanding is that Sanjiv’s piece tying FBI investigation to the CEDA grand jury investigation was not accurate.
Wouldn’t it have been local police, not FBI because it’s not a Federal grand jury?
Flooded?
-len raphael, temescal
June 27th, 2011 at 11:16 pm
The admitedly bogus $48,000 liens Building services has filed on my property has had no effect on the sewage and storm water being directed into my basement by a neighbor, Thus my handel “FloodedByCEDA”.
(The neighboring property diverting the sewage and storm water is related to a Building services supervisor who’s conduct the Grand Jury describes as egregous and is therfore exempt from Oakland Municipal code 8.24.020 E 1 )
June 27th, 2011 at 11:34 pm
The rumor I heard was the State Atty. general was removing records and computers. I’m not sure. Hopefully plenty of shoes are about to drop. A prosecutor might call building services a target rich environment.
June 27th, 2011 at 11:35 pm
As MarleenLee said,
“And obviously, these problems have been going on a long time, and the City Council, and our current Mayor, predictably, did nothing. They should all be ashamed of themselves. Really, really, really ashamed.”
Reminds me of another article Chip Johnson wrote recently —> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/06/24/BA0C1K1U4O.DTL
Now that the Grand Jury report is here, I hope voters in Oakland think twice about who they vote for in our next election…
June 28th, 2011 at 6:49 am
I am Max’s utter lack of surprise.
Who’s going to get fired over this? Nobody, right?
June 28th, 2011 at 7:20 am
@LeavingOakland, Chip was informed about the CEDA corruption and was given details and evidence, as were three other big-name reporters, including ones for BANG, the Xpres, and the Wall St. Journal.
As for “thinking of who they vote for in the next election,” I doubt it. It seems that NOTHING will get these apathetic, pollyana-ish Oakland voters to get out of their state of denial. They’ll just bury their heads in the sand again.
@Max, nobody will get fired, but hopefully people will go to jail. This investigation is now, thank god, not only in Oakland’s hands any more, as I hear it.
@Len, We owe a big debt to FloodedByCeda, who basically did this entire investigation. If you read the grand jury report in detail, almost nothing in it is not already detailed in AuditOaklandCEDA.com. The grand jury just gives the info the stamp of approval.
June 28th, 2011 at 7:21 am
I am currently reading a book entitled “The Warmth of Other Suns” by Isabel Wilkerson. It is about the “Great Migration” of blacks from the southern states moving north and west over the course of much of the last century. Amongst other things, the book vividly illustrates the unbelievable hardship that blacks endured in the south due, in part, to the enforcement of Jim Crow laws, which ranged from ridiculous to downright unfathomable. The uneasy feeling of shame and loss I get while reading this book is the exact same feeling I got while reading this post. Truly disgusting.
June 28th, 2011 at 7:28 am
Did you have a chance to see Isabel Wilkerson when she spoke at AAMLO, Patrick?
June 28th, 2011 at 7:53 am
I saw your post on that V, & it looked very interesting. I tried to make it but unfortunately could not…
June 28th, 2011 at 8:03 am
Zero and Flooded, Appreciate yr hard work on this. Did CEDA target some neighborhoods over others? Was it concentrated or across many parts of the city?
Also, is this related to the Public Ethics complaint you mentioned a while back? If memory serves me correctly, Michael Killian filed it, a CEDA employee was related to a contractor doing the city contracted work, and she quit.
If that summary is accurate, what were the results of the Public Ethics complaint?
It certainly looks like there are other shoes to drop. Or should be…
June 28th, 2011 at 8:05 am
@Len, I forgot to mention your comment about a “simple complaint” to the city auditor putting an end to the mess. Ruby was informed on countless occasions and in excruciating detail by Flooded and colleagues and failed to act. These encounters, I think, are documented on AuditOaklandCEDA, whose moniker I think is a reference to the ACTUAL auditor not doing her job. But you’d have to ask Flooded about that.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:08 am
both public ethics complaints have been pretty much ignored and droped as have several complaints to the city auditor.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:10 am
@livegreen, I played just a very, very small part in this. Flooded deserves the lion’s share of the credit. I was a fellow CEDA victim and got involved to a very small extent – just enough to see what was going on, and see all the hard evidence that Flooded had collected, and to make me boiling mad. So Flooded is the authority here and will correct me if I misstate anything. AFAIK, West Oakland suffered the brunt of the extortion. But recently North Oakland (including Rockridge) has taken a beating on the false blight complaints for “overgrown” plants. Fellow CEDA victim Bob Brokl has written about this on several blogs and in an editorial for the Rockridge News. But what we suffered was small potatoes compared to the West Oaklanders, some of whom had liens in the hundreds of thousands for minor or nonexistent problems, were threatened with having their houses torn down for nothing, were blackmailed by inspectors, etc.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:11 am
p.s. I’m using past tense, but of course this is still going on until someone, or some entity, does something to stop these thugs. They got away with it after the former grand jury report. Let’s not let them get away with it again.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:39 am
Alas, V, I did not get to see her due to work constraints. Had I read the book prior to her speaking engagement, I would have called in sick or something. Her book is truly amazing.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:49 am
Correction: AuditOaklandCEDA, and the vast majority of the work on this, were done by RedWithCypress (if I remember the handle correctly) and family.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:53 am
CREDITS: The Grand Jury should be commended for taking the complaints seriously. Thanks should go to my partners in the project (my husband, Gwillym Martin, of course) and Andrew Vincent, who invested his own time and money deposing the former inspections manager and her staff. We used those depositions and the thousands of pages of public records we acquired to validate our inferences and generate the allegations. Andy and I did the mass mailing together (good times!).
In response to Naomi’s comments regarding her attendance at my appeal hearing, that was not for blight. The accusation is that my Victorian duplex is “illegal” because it has a 1st floor apartment that was created around 1906. An inspector created the allegation after he parked in front of my house and demanded I give him cash or he would create a problem for me. Of course, I said no and the rest is history. The former inspections manager backed him up by issuing a demolition order for our HOME that still stands. I will make all the transcripts available via my site, for all you Twilight Zone lovers.
Incidentally, the hearing officer has still not issued a final determination in spite of his having our final brief since May 5th. Our controversy started in March 2008 and caused us to use every penny of our savings and retirement by January 2010, and that JUST on trying to get an appeal hearing. We had four hearings between January 2010 and March 2011 and submitted sufficient evidence to prove the unit has existed for more than 100 years. The hearing officer may have a conflict of interest he failed to report, a client who has had about 15 bogus complaints over the past 15 years, including “tour bus parked in front of house.”
Our truck was arsoned on February 10, 2011, towed as evidence by OPD, and destroyed on the day of our final hearing in March, having never been inspected by the arson investigator (who is also the VP of the police officers’ union). We received a bill for $1555 the other day for towing and storage. There were four eye-witnesses and three angles of video showing the arson taking place. What’s so ironic is that the city attorney’s office had already engaged a PI (thank you, John Russo) in response to my whistleblower complaint alleging corruption in the city auditor’s office, building services, and the city attorney’s office, too. I had alleged retaliation against me. As the city attorney’s office put it to me in more or less these words, “We represent the corrupt people so there’s not much we can do for you.” But the PI said, “There is criminal activity and the CAO must reach out to the DA,” which is exactly what happened next. (More thanks, Russo!)
Oakland, be appalled and demand change. And you all, here on Oakland Local, be aware that there are victims all around you who are broken inside because of this. Broken homes, broken families, broken dreams, broken lives and nothing less.
Building Services victims have been treated like kooks and crazies just like they do to complaining citizens in China. The victims will NOT come forward to the public under current circumstances.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:30 am
In the meantime, if anyone has anything to do with a blight inspection, I’d suggest a) having a third-party witness attend any meetings or inspections, and b) audio- or video-taping any such inspection or meeting, in the open, where everyone can see that the proceedings will be documented.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:37 am
Further questions:
-What IS the point of an ethics commission, if they don’t do anything?
-Were any City Council members contacted about this, and what was their response to their constituents?
June 28th, 2011 at 9:38 am
Better yet, don’t allow them on your property. No property owner has to allow anyone to inspect their property without a search warrant. And that would force the inspector to testify to a judge that there are health and safety concerns. NO TRESPASSING is the way to go. And everything else Naomi suggested, too.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:41 am
Yes, council is aware. Nadel and Brunner have consistent track records of using building services like their pack of hounds. I published a list of their perpetrations on my site a while back, but didn’t do more to show how they are in cahoots. Cahoots cahoots cahoots. Nadel caused her neighbor to lose his house over a 1st floor apartment. They like the money too much.
June 28th, 2011 at 10:22 am
Audit Oakland – whatever happened with your lawsuit against Dan Lindheim?
LG: your question illustrates why I support the proposed budget cuts to decimate the Public Ethics Executive Director’s office. The purpose of the PEC is to serve as a windmill for angry citizens to tilt at. That’s all. The ED (who is leaving at the end of this week, thank goodness) appeared to view his job to be to write reports in such a way as to avoid actually having to find ethics violations. I mean, he knew which side his bread was buttered on. His boss was the guy overseeing all of this corruption! You do the math.
June 28th, 2011 at 10:34 am
Also, beware if your neighbors are having their property inspected. Years ago we had some work done with a permit, inspector came out and signed off on the permit, then ran around and cited our neighbors. One neighbor was cited for someone else’s garbage can left in front of their house by Waste Management, another neighbor had a “overgrown” bush at the end of their driveway about 40 ft away from the public sidewalk, another had some daffodils in their front yard. Back then I thought it was just one rogue inspector harassing almost every single person on the street because they had nothing better to do. Now I know better.
Mind you, all of these complaints, the inspector never set foot on private property.
Whenever I see our neighbors having inspections done now, I always stand out on the front lawn and give the inspector a glare that says, “Don’t you even LOOK at my property without a warrant!”
Maybe I should invest in some “No Trespassing” signs…
June 28th, 2011 at 10:41 am
LeavingOakland, Don’t you know that daffodils are illegal in Oakland and constitute blight? It’s in the muni code.
June 28th, 2011 at 11:04 am
The shame is, we do need some reasonable, manageable enforcement system. There are businesses like motels housing drug dealers, empty bank forclosures, and illegal construction dumping that need to be addressed.
So the overbearing nature and misguided target of Inspectors on innocent home owners ends up detracting from even the beneficial sides of blight and code enforcement.
Then there are properties like the Parkway Theatre which sit empty, deteriorating, and attracting graffiti. Though not the worst in blight, it is getting there, and seems to be an example of an “in between” situation. Shouldn’t code/blight enforcement have a middle ground, which comes before thousands of $ in fines? (Or if it does, is it using it?)
The double shame for the City and citizens is, besides the offenses against innocent homeowners, is the lack of productive use that, managed reasonably, could benefit us all…
June 28th, 2011 at 11:16 am
So what’s the interest in Elected Officials not addressing these issues? Is it only to help the budget, or are there some other tie-ins?
Also, why would they appoint a CEDA Director who (just reading headlines on your site) appears to have conflicts of interest both through his wife and also his previous employers?
June 28th, 2011 at 11:33 am
livegreen, As they say about the economy, “It’s the budget, stupid.” Audit Oakland CEDA’s husband’s lawsuit accuses CEDA of transferring millions to Oakland’s general fund, in violation of state law. That law says that a city building dept must be essentially its own economy – in contrast to Lindheim’s statement at one CC meeting, wherein he said that the entire city of Oakland, including CEDA, can be treated as a “single enterprise.” Wrong. CEDA is not allowed to transfer funds to the city. CEDA must take in only as much as its actual costs and can’t be used as a profit center for Oakland, bolstering the budget on the backs of extorted citizens, as it has been doing.
But the council evidently has no problem with this. After all, they had no problem with cutting street sweeping until they learned that street sweeping brings in double in fines what it costs to run. Although not illegal, I think this is the same thing morally as a building dept. that illegally becomes a profit center for the city.
I’m not sure how many elected officials knew about the CEDA corruption overall, or about whether their transfers to the general fund were illegal. I know some did. Watching and hearing JB at a recent council meeting, she seemed absolutely clueless about which fund was which (CEDA vs. GPF and state law).
But I do believe that this kind of thinking – that a dept. that should (and in this case, is required by law to) exist to serve the citizens can instead become a profit center using fines and penalties and fees – seems endemic to the council as a whole. It doesn’t seem to bother them.
June 28th, 2011 at 12:17 pm
City responds to Grand Jury report
http://www2.oaklandnet.com/OAK030001
June 28th, 2011 at 12:23 pm
This statement in the City’s response is BS:
“The City is also reviewing its fee structure, recognizing the challenge of funding code enforcement without subsidies from the General Fund.’
THIS IS BACKWARDS! It’s CEDA that is providing the CITY with funds! “Funding code enforcement” takes just a small fraction of what CEDA generates in fees and fines. That extra money is going TO the General Fund, not FROM IT. That is precisely the issue. They’re obfuscating.
June 28th, 2011 at 1:13 pm
It is not the first time Ive heard somebody refer to Jane Bruner as clueless, or words to that effect.
June 28th, 2011 at 1:33 pm
Dear City Administrators office,
Your response is not good enough. The Building Services Department has been acting like a predatory lender. Nepotism, cronyism and direct conflicts of interest are pervasive in CEDA from Walter Cohen and Ray Derania themselves all the way down to the lowly administrative assistant [name redacted - V]. Chip Johnson nailed it when he called for a criminal investigation. Nothing less will do.
For years, City Council members were told by almost all victims individually and they all acted like it was the first time they have heard of this. When victims compared notes facilitated by AuditOaklandCeda we were astounded to find out how their representatives pretended not to be aware of the situation. So, the fact is that all the Council members have been aware of these issues for ages as well as the City Auditors office as well as the Public Ethics Commission (Dan Parnell and company) and all pathetically were complacent and actually enabling the problems. Lets not forget about the bad apples on the planning commission either.
Oaklanders deserve a thorough house cleaning. Nothing less will do.
Quan you should start remember about your campaign promise to eliminate “pay to play in Oakland”
Walter and Ray, you should immediately resign! Shame on you this happened on your watch and is the only way for you to save what little reputation you still have. I am sure you Walter Cohen, could find a cozy spot on PPD (cronies) or maybe Agis Board of Directors after all your favors.
Russo, Morally Corrupt is good but CEDA is morally bankrupt.
June 28th, 2011 at 2:58 pm
Hey, folks. Obviously this is a very upsetting issue to many people, and rightfully so.
However, this blog is not a place where we go around calling city staff criminals by name without corroboration or evidence. I feel like department heads and directors to some degree sign up for scrutiny, criticism, and name-calling when they agree to the job. Sometimes it’s warranted, sometimes it couldn’t be further from the case. But it’s part of the deal you agree to when you’re in charge.
Administrative assistants, on the other hand, are not fair game. Please, folks, try to focus your comments on the problem in general, which is clearly widespread, and leave individual staff members out of it.
June 28th, 2011 at 3:18 pm
V, you wrote: “I feel like department heads and directors to some degree sign up for scrutiny, criticism, and name-calling when they agree to the job. Sometimes it’s warranted, sometimes it couldn’t be further from the case. But it’s part of the deal you agree to when you’re in charge. Administrative assistants, on the other hand, are not fair game.”
I couldn’t agree more. Public officials put themselves in the public eye. We’re talking about the big game, not administrative assistants. Dept heads. The bigwigs in charge, many of whom are already defendants in a civil suit. The allegations (at least, the civil ones) against Lindheim et al are already public information.
So I’m not sure what you’re talking about. Did I miss something? Did someone attack administrative assistants?
Respectfully,
ZT
June 28th, 2011 at 3:19 pm
Yes. In the comment above the one I just left. I redacted the name of the employee.
June 28th, 2011 at 3:25 pm
OK, I see, V.
June 28th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Dear Vsmooth,
The one I mentioned in the post is absolutely a bad apple and part of it
June 28th, 2011 at 5:16 pm
Do the crime do the time.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:03 pm
This was the perfect storm resulting from a City living beyond it’s means, CEDA management and employees trying to maintain real estate boom staffing levels and their jobs, a few greedy manager(s) and employee(s) who want to dip their hands in the revenue stream, and a public that is po’d by blight in the real estate melt down.
The use of the Redevelopment Agency funds by the City as a defacto part of the General Fund but without those pesky residents asking questions, is part of the institutional corruption.
If it’s ok to sell mothballed real estate to the RDA, shift a big part of CEDA staff overhead to RDA, direct RDA to make loans to politically favored projects, you’re well on the slippery slope leading to using fines to replace declining tax revenue.
A combo of institutional and personal corruption.
June 28th, 2011 at 8:08 pm
Reminds me of a post of mine a while ago where I was protesting cuts in the City Auditor’s Office. I was predicting that in tough economic times there were be more city employee malfeasance, so we’d need more not less internal audit staffing.
I failed to see how economic hard times encourages City organizational level abuse of power.
More auditors wouldn’t have helped when the corruption is institutional.
Had a biz school prof who would say that every organization’s first goal is collecting as many resources as possible to thrive and survive.
Serving the residents comes several notches under that.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:14 pm
I’d like to echo livegreen’s question: “Were any City Council members contacted about this, and what was their response to their constituents?”
I’ve heard some interesting stories on this topic, but I’d rather hear them directly from the horse’s mouth, rather than repeating hearsay. So has anyone reading here asked their Council member about this issue?
June 28th, 2011 at 9:24 pm
Len, And individual employees, apparently without a full-time work load, using city paid time, and city vehicles (truck parked/hidden around the corner) to be out in the public, drumming up clients for their own side family business.
Then weeks later doing the actual work, on a non-furlough week day.
( I suppose that person might have been on a “sick” day, or chosen vacation day, or some such allowable day to be off their regular 5 day work week)
BTW, they did use their own private equipment in doing the actual work.
But given that the marketing of their services was done on a day they were working and using a city vehicle, city fuel, and full city pay, it makes me wonder what their status was on the day they did the side work.
I suspect their are many, perhaps the majority of Community Economic Development Agency (CEDA) workers, who are only doing tasks that would normally utilize half a day or less of paid city employment.
Hundreds of employees at 50% productivity.
My example, from direct observation, is only anecdotal, but clearly indicative of lack of oversight and lack of a full time work load.
June 28th, 2011 at 9:24 pm
My city councilors staff pointed out “it is VERY inconvienent for us when you keep asking for our help” (Carletta Starks)…….So I complained to the Grand Jury. I also encouraged A LOT of others to complain to the Grand Jury.
June 29th, 2011 at 5:37 am
I am all for blight and code enforcement, but one that is legal, transparent, and is applied across the board in a reasonable fashion that encourages voluntary compliance. Clearly, the City of Oakland’s is not and has been seriously abused and misused by its staff.
The findings of the Grand Jury are but one of the reasons I am strongly opposed to any additional increases in Jean Quan’s parcel tax or other revenue generating measures as a way to address the budget deficit. Why should residents of Oakland give more money to the City of Oakland when it is so poorly managed, lacking controls, policies, guidance and regulations.
Time and time again I have needed a City service, have asked for clarification from staff and managers on written City processes, protocols, policies, and guidance and almost without doubt the City has not been able to produce it–even when handed a Public Records Act Request.. Consequently, I have gotten multiple people telling me very different things. This goes well beyond CEDA. The new City Manager should take heed and do some serious house cleaning. Mayor Quan should take heed and do some serious house cleaning and it should not stop with CEDA.
Remember–Oakland City employees, even with the recent labor concessions, are among the highest paid public employees by classification in the state if not the country. And this is what we get—a Banana Repbublic.
June 29th, 2011 at 6:19 am
Quoted from the Grand Jury Report
“Information/Communication/Data Management
Building Services’ data base is inadequate and fails to track various records
associated with notifying homeowners for violations, inspections, upgrades,
permits, appeals, etc., unless information is manually input by individual
inspectors. The city imposes a 14.75% records management and technology
enhancement fee to all property owners who receive violations, but it does not
appear that this fee has resulted in an effective Building Services computer
system.
The Grand Jury learned that the computer system currently being used by
Building Services to input notes on cases is nearly 30 years old; there are
different systems that are not coordinated and do not function together; and
there is no central access to a file for either inspectors or the property owners. In
addition, the city stated it does not have a tracking system for appeals and cannot
provide any information on them.”
The city already spent millions on contracts to upgrade their computer system.
See my posts 14 thru 17 in the How can Oakland improve access to public records thread
FloodedByCEDA Says:
January 28th, 2011 at 2:40 pm
We already paid $2,800,000 for public internet access to the Permit Tracking System. http://clerkwebsvr1.oaklandnet.com/attachments/11199.pdf
A small part of that database was accessable to the public for a while. Then it became password protected.
http://cedaonline.oaklandnet.com/onlineservices/CEDADocuments/index.htm
It is now avaliable without password again.
15.15FloodedByCEDA Says:
January 30th, 2011 at 4:57 pm
Oakland Agency Selects Municipal Software’s CityView for Permitting, Code Enforcement
Victoria, British Columbia, September 23rd, 2005-Municipal Software (TSX-V:MSZ) is pleased to announce that the City of Oakland’s (Calif.) Community and Economic Development Agency (CEDA) has selected the company to provide an integrated permitting and code enforcement tracking system (PCETS) for the City. Oakland will use CityView’s Application Builder to develop new applications to streamline numerous services.
According to Claudia Cappio, the City’s Development Director, “CityView sets the foundation for us to offer a wider variety of services to staff and citizens. Once implemented, we will be able to share information online with citizens and contractors and allow our field staff to work more efficiently via remote access.”
http://www.municipalsoftware.com/news_and_events/news/businessnewsarchive/news-05Sep22Oakland.php
16.16FloodedByCEDA Says:
January 30th, 2011 at 5:19 pm
The new system will replace the current manual system, provide 24-hour on-line access
to information and forms, and interface with the County Assessor/Recorder databases
for accurate ownership data. Using the system’s self-service feature, constituents will be
able to track the status of inspections, apply for land development and building permits,
look up contracts and buildings plans as well as request and print official documents.
http://www.imagesourceinc.com/wcms/groups/public/@is/@news/documents/press_release/wcmsp_000395.pdf
17.17FloodedByCEDA Says:
January 30th, 2011 at 5:41 pm
And here is a 3.6 Million contract for public access we never got.
http://clerkwebsvr1.oaklandnet.com/attachments/10892.pdf
June 29th, 2011 at 6:59 am
Appears that CEDA abuses targeted home owners instead of more banks and multiple property owners. Wanted to avoid owners who could afford lawyers.
MC and FBC, could you post copies of any emails/letters/memos of communication with the City Auditor’s dept?
-len raphael, temescal
June 29th, 2011 at 7:10 am
@Flooded, When I asked the CEDA inspector if he would send me a confirmation that my alleged “blight” (which I contested ever existed) case had been closed, he said, “We don’t do that. It would be too much trouble if we had to do that for everyone.” This despite the fact that is was not “too much trouble” for them to send me a certified letter announcing that I had “blight” (and not, by the way, in any way describing the problem – simply referring to the muni code section). Later he said I could come and “look in the computer” if I wanted to see if my “blight” was “abated.” (They never close or dismiss a case; just “abate” it and it stays open forever, for inspectors to reopen or add onto it or modify it as they please. Plenty of cases of that.) But when I came down to “look in the computer,” the clerk said I couldnt’ do that, it wasn’t open to the public, and “Who said you could look in the computer?” When I went into the office with the actual CEDA cashier and clerk and asked if they had a record of my case, including my elaborately and painstakingly put-together appeal (of a plant that stuck out a couple of inches being blight), she couldn’t find any record of it. She told me that since my case was marked “abated” my appeal had “probably been thrown into the trash” and laughed. The bad culture does extend all the way down to the admins at CEDA.
@Len, I agree they target homeowners less likely to be able to defend themselves. Although IANAL I jumped so quickly to defend myself, documenting everything, sending everything to them certified mail, etc., that I think they got scared and backed off.
June 29th, 2011 at 7:14 am
@Flooded, Just to clarify your posts about the new, wonderful computer system, these are articles from 2005, right? Not current statements by CEDA about their (again) promised new system, in response to the Grand Jury report.
I’d say that NOTHING they say from hereon in response to the report should be taken at face value. Obviously, since they’ve promised stuff like this before and didn’t deliver, they cannot be trusted as far as their fat asses can be thrown. Someone needs to be appointed to keep watch over them. Perhaps a judge?
I’ve got it. What they need is a compliance plan. And at every step, they need to be made to pay.
June 29th, 2011 at 7:18 am
This note acknowledges that your email dated May 5, 2011 has been received by the Office of the City Auditor. The issues you have raised will be reviewed, and if warranted, the appropriate action will be taken. Please understand that due to the number of reports we receive, our review may take some time.
In order to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of the investigative process, the Office of the City Auditor does not provide updates regarding the status of reports or of any resulting enforcement action.
In the future, please submit reports through our third party hotline provider, EthicsPoint. EthicsPoint operates the City Auditor’s confidential Fraud, Waste and Abuse Prevention Hotline which is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.
The purpose of the Fraud, Waste and Abuse Prevention Hotline is to report claims of fraud, waste and abuse in our city government. You can provide your report directly to a trained independent intake specialist by calling 888-329-6390 or by completing the report on-line at http://www.oaklandauditor.com. All reports received through the Fraud, Waste and Abuse Prevention Hotline are reviewed by my office and appropriate action taken. Files can be easily uploaded to your report.
As your elected City Auditor, I am committed to ensuring accountability and integrity in our government. Our efforts toward that end are assisted through citizen and employee alerts such as yours.
Sincerely,
Courtney A. Ruby, CPA, CFE
City Auditor
June 29th, 2011 at 7:26 am
ZeroTech, My point is, We already paid MILLIONS in 2005 for this wonderfull new computer system and never got it.
Thanks, Flooded
June 29th, 2011 at 7:30 am
“Someone needs to be appointed to keep watch over them. Perhaps a judge? ”
How about an injunction for the gang at 250 frank ogawa plaza.
June 29th, 2011 at 7:33 am
Flooded, Thanks for the clarification.
June 29th, 2011 at 7:35 am
Flooded, Re gang injunction, that’s funny. But the more I think about it, the more I love the idea of a “compliance plan” that CEDA must follow. Let them see how it feels.
June 29th, 2011 at 9:12 am
Line one of Ceda complaince plan,
1) Immediately Post a compliance bond of 24 million
2)Immediately Pay back all so called “Prospective Liens”
3)Within 2 days, Pay back all punitive fines
4)Within 2 days, Pay back all Fees
5)Within 2 days Pay back all assessments
6)Immediately – Fire Walter Cohen
7)Immediately – Fire Ray
8)Within 7 days, Put PTS online
9)Immediately – Fire all Inspection managers and supervisors (even the acting supervisors)
10)Immediately – Fire all Code enforcement inspectors
11)Immediately – Turn over all CEDA operations to Alameda County
12)City Auditor’s office must do a review of every whistleblower report involving CEDA and provide details and workpapers to Alameda County Criminal Grand Jury
June 29th, 2011 at 9:23 am
[Comment redacted. I said no. We don't attack individual staff here and we definitely do not go around explicitly accusing them of crimes. Don't do it again. - V]
June 29th, 2011 at 9:32 am
@leaving oakland
Nancy Nadel’s response is on my web site. She wrote to me in 2009 that it was an implementation problem, her hands were tied, etc. But in fact, she is a major perpetrator of complaints.
I spoke with Larry Reid in person yesterday. He indicated he would be discussing the recommendations with council, but didn’t offer any opinions on the report.
Courtney Ruby continues to refuse to communicate with me. I also reached out to the new administrator and the mayor’s office. No phone calls yet.
I must say, many of you are commenting on something you have never touched with your own hands, luckily.
As for my records requests, I was told that I am inconveniencing every other constituent so they have stopped processing my requests.
June 29th, 2011 at 9:37 am
10/16/2010
Dear Michelle,
After careful evaluation, it has been determined that the information you provided in your previous emails do not warrant a meeting as they relate to an existing Fraud, Waste + Abuse claim, as well as involves pending litigation with the City.
1). If a matter involves pending litigation, you should direct your questions to the City Attorney’s Office.
2). If you have new information to share with the City Auditor that has not been previously reported, all such information must be reported through the City Auditor’s Fraud, Waste and Abuse Prevention Program (FW+A) Hotline. Please provide this information by calling 888-329-6390 or by completing the report on-line at http://www.oaklandcityauditor.com.
3). If you feel you have additional information or documentation relevant to a previous FW+A report, please provide this additional information by calling 888-329-6390 or by completing the report on-line at http://www.oaklandcityauditor.com.
All reports received through the FW+A Hotline are reviewed, and if warranted, the appropriate action is taken. In order to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of the investigative process, the Office of the City Auditor does not provide updates regarding the status of complaints or of any resulting enforcement action.
The City Auditor’s confidential FW+A Hotline is available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. When using the hotline please make a note of your Report Key and the password you create so you can check back on your EthicsPoint report for questions or comments from our Office.
Best,
Joe
Joseph D. Macaluso, M.P.A.
Executive Assistant to the City Auditor
Office of the City Auditor
1 Frank H. Ogawa Plaza
Oakland, CA 94612
(510) 238-3379 OFFICE
(510) 238-7640 FAX
June 29th, 2011 at 9:51 am
[Redacted again. Audit Oakland CEDA, if you want to comment here, you need to abide me my rules. I said no, and I really do not like having to repeat myself. I give my commenters extremely wide latitude to speak their minds, and it is an exceptionally rare occasion when I feel compelled to step in and moderate a comment. But I draw the line at slander. Drop it. - V]
June 29th, 2011 at 9:55 am
Also, one last note @ V, it is utterly disrespectful of you to delete my comments. Two years of my life dedicated to nothing but uncovering the truth so that victims of building services, who are so much more harmed than any post here could possibly convey, and your site now has the opportunity to discuss these issues thanks to *my* work and Flooded’s work. I don’t love all the opinions I’m reading, but this is the necessary outcome of beating the bushes.
I do not use ad hominem or abusive language so I would appreciate it if you have a criticism of my comments that you criticize the comment and not censor me.
June 29th, 2011 at 10:08 am
[Redacted again. I am quickly losing my patience with this. If this happens one more time, Audit Oakland CEDA, you will lose the privilege of being permitted to leave comments on this blog. - V]
June 29th, 2011 at 10:52 am
Recent news links are close to a year old. Glitch in system?
June 29th, 2011 at 11:42 am
Audit, This is V’s blog, and she’s been ltg you post on it, undoubtedly because of the value of your hard work. For both these reasons, please defer to what she requests you do to continue posting.
Further to this, please don’t overwhelm us with too many posts. We’re all busy and we need time to digest and then take action.
The question now is, how DO we take action, with what % of the synthesized info? The three suggestions I would have is Posting on community list serves, writing to City Councilpeople, speaking up at the appropriate City Council meetings (including in Committee).
Any steps have to be measured and consistent, and allow time for elected officials to react and take action.
If Larry Reid says he’s doing something, give him some time before following up. Accept his word, until you know differently. If you act from the beginning like he’s not, you’ll overwhelm him and lose him from the beginning and he simply won’t be able to keep track of the matter.
I realize this is difficult when you’re making progress after years of getting turned down. But please please pace yourself, for all these reasons and others…
June 29th, 2011 at 11:47 am
Ugh, again? That’s the fourth time at least in the last week. It seems to fix itself eventually every time, but it looks like I’m going to have to find a new solution for the news feed.
Thanks, livegreen.
June 29th, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Audit Oakland CEDA has had the gag put on her, here and elsewhere, for so long that she is bursting at the seams. I would plead to V to give her more than a little slack here to make up for that past treatment. Give her free reign, maybe just for day? She deserves that IMO. The Grand Jury’s information came almost 100% from her, either directly, or indirectly in the form of steering other CEDA victims to them. She has worked tirelessly on this for a long, long time. For a long, long time, people refused to believe her or listen to her, and people made fun of her and the other CEDA victims who posted here. Now let her have her moment in the sun. She is a true hero. My two cents.
Respectfully,
ZT
June 29th, 2011 at 1:01 pm
I live in a neighborhood that is subject to serious blighted conditions. If it weren’t for Code Compliance, we’d be living in a toilet.
I look forward to a complete investigation of the charges made by the Grand Jury. However, I will continue to contact Code Compliance about properties that are neglected. Blight is a magnet for crime and we have enough crime around here as it is.
The one criticism I have had of Code Compliance is not being aggressive enough in this area. A few years ago, I was told by the former Building Services manager, a supervisor, and an inspector on three separate and unrelated occasions. that strict compliance in my district was strongly discouraged by our council rep. I don’t know if what they said is true but that is what they told me. Based on these comments, my feeling is that code compliance can be potentially used for all kinds of political and nefarious reasons.
The last bad experience I had with Code Compliance was an inspector who claimed there was were no actionable conditions on a house despite a boarded up window, a pile of junk behind the house visible from the driveway (and partiallly visible from the street), and car parts littering the driveway. I sent pictures to the supervisor requesting an explanation for how what was in the picture was not actionable. See previous paragraph.
If Code Compliance inspectors are breaking the law, then nail them. If there are no guidelines for compliance, then nail the City. However, I am not one bit sympathetic to slum property owners, absent or not, who don’t take care of their property then whine about getting nailed by the City. I have no intention of living with junk/furniture/appliances stored on people’s property in open view, garabage cans stored perpetually at the curb and are overturned and/or become tagged by bangers, inoperable cars in driveways and on front lawns, overgrown grass that becomes a fire hazard (especially around July 4), and broken windows.
June 29th, 2011 at 1:50 pm
Annoyed, I think we really are on the same page here. Code enforcement is too busy harassing people who have daffodils or kids toys in their front yards, or going after the owners who are trying to fix their properties and hitting them with fines and liens so they can’t afford to do so. And the areas that really need the help, where the owners really don’t care and aren’t trying to fix their property? Too many political connections and/or no money in it for code enforcement, so nothing gets done.
Oakland code enforcement is clearly incapable of getting the job done, and the City Council and Mayor are clearly incapable of cleaning up code enforcement (Don’t tell me they don’t know, the grand jury had a report similar to this one about 10 years ago, which the then-president of the City Council, De La Fuente, responded to. And as Chip Johnson’s column pointed out last Thursday, we haven’t had much turn over in the City Council lately).
I say we let the county take over our building department. Then maybe I’ll give a second thought to buying a foreclosed and trashed property in Oakland and fixing it up. But right now, I know that if I were to buy a blighted foreclosure, I’d be paying more in fines to the city for simply owning it than it would cost to fix it.
We don’t have a blight problem here, we have a code enforcement problem, and one of the symptoms is blight.
June 29th, 2011 at 2:32 pm
Leaving Oakland,
I bought a foreclosure in West. It has always been my dream restore a Victorian. What you described in your last post is exactly what happened to me. Now the property just sits in the same dam condition it was in and my 100k nest egg to clean it up was spent on attorney fees. This is why Oakland looks like crap.
June 29th, 2011 at 3:06 pm
@annoyed, You are right that CEDA errs on both sides of the fence (no pun intended). They severely penalize people for things that are not blight (daffodils, a large rose bush), but they also sometimes fail to act on things are are clearly blight (a neighbor near here whose yard was covered in dog feces for three years). But mainly, they fail at their jobs by being overzealous. They’re like an immune system gone awry, with unbridled white cells causing great harm to the body while actual infections go unchecked. CEDA in its current state is like a cancer upon Oakland, or like a terrible autoimmune disease. They’re supposed to be cleaning up messes. Instead they’re causing harm to functioning organs.
June 29th, 2011 at 4:09 pm
So I’m tired of biting my tongue to keep from complaining, why not focus on what we can do about this? We’ve got some pretty good momentum going, thanks to the work that everyone put into getting the Grand Jury interested, the Grand Jury itself and their report, the post and comments here, and now Chip Johnson’s article: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/06/27/BAQ91K3C69.DTL
So what to do from here? I have a few ideas:
1. I’ve noticed that Chip Johnson’s article from 6/28 has been shared on facebook more than most of his other articles in the past month or so. Yes, I’ve been busy encouraging my friends to share it, as I’m sure other people have been as well. So anyone with facebook and/or twitter, share this. And comment on it too. The more attention that article gets, the more likely Chip is to continue writing about this, and maybe get the Chronicle to take more interest in this story, not to mention other newspapers and media outlets.
2. Writing letters to our local newspapers. Mention Chip’s article, along with the grand jury report. For the Oakland Tribune especially, I’m planning on writing to them and asking why I’m getting my important Oakland news from a San Francisco paper, why aren’t they covering this?
3. I’ll second livegreen’s suggestion to post to community listserves, but I’m not holding my breath for my own neighborhood. I posted about this on Monday night on my own neighborhood listserve with a link to the report and the SF Gate article and haven’t heard a peep. Then again, my neighbors tend to think Jean Quan is Oakland’s very own Obama and they can just stick their heads in the sand and she’ll fix everything. I hope other people have better luck with their own neighborhoods…
4. Another one of livegreen’s suggestions, writing to City Councilmembers. And maybe publishing their responses online? Let our local newspapers know how the City Council is responding to its constituents?
5. Once again, I’ll echo livegreen, attending City Council meetings and committee meetings. Bring copies of the SF Gate article and the grand jury report, just in case any of the attendees wants more info.
Anyone else want to add ideas to the list?
June 29th, 2011 at 4:16 pm
I informed BANG’s investigative reporter (cctimes) last year. As usual, zero response. The media may be more interested now, after the Grand Jury lent this issue its imprimateur.
However, media shmedia. what I’m afraid of is that this whole thing will die down eventually. People don’t stay focused long on things. We need to get law enforcement involved before these CEDA thugs go even further off the deep end. Don’t let them get away with the city’s “response,” much of which actually consists of indirection (e.g., the implication that CEDA can’t get by without “funding” from the general fund when actually it’s the opposite – the general fund is illegally benefitting by the transfer of funds from CEDA).
City councilmembers have known for a long time. Zip and zilch. The mayoral candidates all knew because Audit Oakland CEDA spent hours briefing every one of them before the election – Quan knows, and knew. Ruby knew. Parnell (ethics commission) knows and knew. The problem is not informing people. The problem is getting people to act. The only entity that is acting on the information is the non-Oakland entity: the Alameda County Grand Jury.
I’m convinced that the only real action will come from outside the city. Don’t let them keep this within the (corrupt) Oakland family. Nothing will change. The only hope is if the DA’s office gets involved now, or possibly some federal entity.
June 29th, 2011 at 4:23 pm
Is there any sign of life from the Trib on the story?
June 29th, 2011 at 4:40 pm
Good question. Ask Audit Oakland CEDA about some mysterious payments. Probably have to ask her offline.
June 29th, 2011 at 6:07 pm
All I know is that Code Compliance is a god-send in this neighborhood. I want more, not less enforcement.
Whatever.
June 29th, 2011 at 6:17 pm
@annoyed, You seem to be the only one.
June 29th, 2011 at 6:58 pm
http://californiafaceoffmovement.blogspot.com/
June 29th, 2011 at 7:07 pm
http://www.straighttalknews.org/uploads/FEES_IN_EXCESS_OF_COST_wpd.pdf
June 29th, 2011 at 7:08 pm
Meddling can be such fun, raves CEDA Director Cohen
December 30, 2010
In an e-mail exchange between Director of Building Services Raymond Derania and Walter Cohen, Derania boasts that Building Services heavy-handed treatment is routine.
Neighbor A complains to Public Works that the sidewalk median strip vegetation (flowers) maintained by Neighbor B is encroaching onto the public right-of-way, forcing him to navigate his stroller around the offending area. Neighbor B complies with Building Services’ request and cuts back vegetation several inches from the sidewalk. Nonetheless, Building Services staff fine Neighbor B $1300 because of a second complaint filed by Neighbor A a year later. Neighbor B filed an appeal with Building Services. The appeal was denied (ILLEGAL DETERMINATION) by Rich Fielding on the basis that the alleged overgrowth had existed in the past. Complaint abated; owner fined nonetheless. ?????
Derania: “For the new administration, would you consider turning-over a new leaf and just letting us handle stuff? This is routine. If transgressors are turned-back to us, it’s surprising how quickly they see-the-light and get with the program (even though it costs them some money sometimes).”
Cohen: “Well!…. If you insist… meddling can be such fun! But OK.”
Walter, do you mean meddling in peoples’ lives or meddling with the heavy-handed practices of Building Services?
See actual email click here:
http://www.auditoaklandceda.com/web_docume…
June 29th, 2011 at 7:10 pm
We don’t have a blight problem here, we have a code enforcement problem, and one of the symptoms is blight.
June 29th, 2011 at 7:15 pm
Shame on you Nadel for not listening to those with whom you are supposed to represent!
According to City of Oakland Council Member Nancy Nadel “These complaints are on implementation rather than policy…”
Implement
1 : carry out, accomplish; especially: to give practical effect to and ensure actual fulfillment through concrete measures
In response to a well-substantiated, direct complaint about abuse of authority by CEDA staff from a West Oakland constituent, Nancy Nadel responded blithely by forwarding the complaint to Dan Lindheim and Walter Cohen via e-mail with these sixteen words and not a word more, “These complaints are on implementation rather than on policy so I am referring them to you.”
Fact:
CEDA Building Services and Code Enforcement operate under a set of rules that does not conform with local, State, or Federal rules.
Fact:
Every day, illegal liens are placed against property owners’ properties as Special Assessments, forcing property owners to the brink of foreclosure and often over the edge.
Fact:
If you are a West Oaklander who has a complaint against the City of Oakland CEDA Building Services or Code Enforcement your complaint will not be addressed by Council Member Nancy Nadel; contact Audit Oakland CEDA.
see the actual email link below
http://auditoaklandceda.com/web_images/scan0001.jpg
June 29th, 2011 at 7:16 pm
[Redacted again. I am quickly losing my patience with this. If this happens one more time, Audit Oakland CEDA, you will lose the privilege of being permitted to leave comments on this blog. - V]
Don’t you all want to know what she redacted and judge for yourselves whether I broke the precious rules.
The precious rules you are promulgating are not appropriate to free and open discourse and certainly not to the democratic process of self-auditing that constituencies perform routinely when they discuss the performance of various staff at all levels who directly influence their lives.
Badgering is a typical behavior of city employees at all levels.
June 29th, 2011 at 7:25 pm
I encourage everyone to write a letter to the editor of the Trib. Tell them is is amazing that they didn’t do a story on this. link is below:
http://www.insidebayarea.com/feedback/tribune
June 29th, 2011 at 7:26 pm
Payments to the trib are in the general ledger for fund 2415 (as are payments for tamales).
i imagine they do a lot of postings for public notice. i didn’t research the journal entries for supporting documentation. i assumed that no matter what the city is paying for the trib doesn’t want to risk losing that period.
my effort is to submit a non-fiction book proposal to as many literary agents as possible. my deadline for completion of the proposal is tomorrow, the day I thought the report would be released.
The Pitch:
When an idealistic couple moves to a historic duplex in a run-down part of Oakland, they are shaken down by a city building inspector. Little do they suspect the building department is being controlled by a family-operated waste removal company that uses building department thugs to generate business, even forcing people from their homes. The city cover-up and retaliation that follow compel the wife to uncover the truth and bring down the matron-boss.
This is the true story.
June 29th, 2011 at 7:51 pm
Crickets.
June 29th, 2011 at 8:20 pm
AOC,
Who’s going to play you in the movie?
June 29th, 2011 at 8:34 pm
Dear people, If V were sued for remarks made on her blog (whether they end up proven slanderous or not) she could be liable for all kinds of trouble and enormous expense. I don’t always agree with V or with others who post here, but I value the space she has created for discussion. If we want such an outlet to persist, we must play by the rules. If anyone wants to make direct accusations by name, just do it on your own blog or site–it is unethical to put a third party, in this case a generous host, at risk.
June 29th, 2011 at 8:52 pm
January 4, 2011 CEDA Building Services Principal Inspection Supervisor Richard Fielding states public hearings are NOT an option for property owners who submit Code Violation Appeals to Building Services.
“You can have an office meeting.”
Richard Fielding renders his interpretation of OMC here, describing the owners’ right to appeal alleged building services violations.
Click here to see Exhibit 3.
Click the quoted text to read the entire deposition.
9 Q. Are you saying there’s no mechanism for an
10 appeal hearing once an owner files a notice of appeal of
11 the type that’s marked here as Exhibit 3?
12 MR. VOSE: Objection, vague.
13 THE WITNESS: The key phrase that I’m asking
14 for you to clarify is “hearing.” Did you want to know
15 if there’s a mechanism to review the appeal?
16 MR. CLAASSEN: Yeah.
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, there’s a mechanism. Are
18 you asking is there a hearing?
19 MR. CLAASSEN: Q. I am asking whether there’s
20 a hearing.
21 A. No, there is not.
22 Q. And you can’t have a hearing from this type of
23 appeal, can you?
24 A. You can have an office meeting.
Dear Naomi,
V is not responsible legally for things others post on her blog. As for the rest of you bloggers, defamation of character insurance costs about 30 dollars a year and is and endorsement to your homeowners policy. I am an expert in this area and can tell you that for defamation and liable, you must prove that the blogger knew the information was false and posted anyway. So as long as you have support for your comments and believe them to be true you are safe.
June 29th, 2011 at 8:58 pm
What I said, and will repeat, is that even if a claim has no merit, it can still be expensive to defend against it. Let’s not put V in that position. She is not a big company with money for insurance etc. She is one hardworking person doing this on her own, trying to do a good thing. Please do not put her at risk.
June 29th, 2011 at 9:03 pm
Naomi,
Not really. V has a safe harbor per the Digital Millenium Copyright Act. “No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.” 47 U.S.C. § 230. We are all responsible for our own postings. Not V.
http://www.eff.org/issues/bloggers/legal/liability/230
June 29th, 2011 at 9:05 pm
Posts crossed. To Naomi’s second post: Anyone running a blog is surely aware of this law, and any suit against V for an item someone else posted would be thrown out of court amongst much guffaws.
July 1st, 2011 at 7:31 am
The other day I received an email with a question that I would like to share: “Isn’t it weird that the CEDA scandal is getting so little media coverage?” For media coverage I would substitute public outrage.
Oakland is suppose to be a liberal, an enlightened city, and here we have thousands of victims who in some cases have lost their homes because of the abuse of governmental authority by Oakland’s Inspection Services Department and and no one wants to step forward but the usual suspects to protest.
Any comments!!!
July 1st, 2011 at 9:12 am
MKillian, I’m surprised that you’re surprised, given the absolute lack of interest by all the major media upon being given this information, in detail, at several points in time ranging from 6 months to a year ago. You yourself filed two complaints with the ethics commission. Zilch. Ruby was handed complaints several times. Zilch. Quan (as you very well know) was briefed by Audit Oakland CEDA months before the election, in excruciating detail, and not a peep out of her. We are living in a mad, mad world, where you and I are outraged and the majority seems to be able to just slough it off. And this is exactly what I worried about as soon as the news finally came out. There’s be some outrage at the beginning, the city would issue some bullshit statement (which it did) to get them off the hook, and that would be the end of it. No. This has to be taken on outside of Oakland. I hope that is happening.
July 1st, 2011 at 9:30 am
MKillian – in order for people to protest, they need to be aware. And without media coverage, they will likely not be aware. But regardless, I agree that the apathy out there is pretty deafening. But it is deafening on so many other issues as well. Unless the problem affects people’s own individual little slice of the pie, they really couldn’t care less. Apparently. Parking meter increases? Elimination of libraries? They come out in droves. Bribery and extortion of unempowered people living in marginal areas? Barely a peep.
July 1st, 2011 at 9:36 am
MarleenLee, I live in a distinctly non-marginal area and people on my block were cited falsely for blight. I organized people and got it taken care of and saved some of their asses in the process, but for the most part, all I got (like Audit Oakland CEDA got for her efforts to inform) was flak from people tellig me I was detracting from their quality of life by informing them about what was going on. It’s a shoot-the-messenger mentality. Or stick-your-head-in-the-sand. Choose your metaphor.
Pages: [1] 2 3 » Show All