I love Desley Brooks!
Except when I don’t, of course. Desley Brooks makes me really mad sometimes (I strongly disagree with her positions regarding the Equal Access Ordinance, for example), but I really, really, really love that she consistently questions implementation and feasibility of the proposals that come before the Council to a degree that no one else on the Council does. She rocks! The proposal heard last night (resolution passed by consensus, but whether we actually do it or not will be decided during budget discussions) for a program authorizing the City Attorney’s office to prosecute infractions and misdemeanors (PDF!) is an issue that really deserves a long post of its own, and something I’ve been meaning to write about for a year now (Seriously! I found one of my old notebooks the other day, and I was reading one of my “blogs to write” lists from last summer, and this topic was on it with like three stars next to it.) and I will definitely do it post-election.
For now, you can read the staff report (PDF!), and I’ll just say that, having watched the discussion of this at Public Safety and Council, this program may be a great idea, but it really just isn’t ready at all right now, and we have no sense of how it’s going to work. Given that, it would be irresponsible to spend over $800,000 funding it at this time.
There was a decent discussion on the item last night, which made me happy. As usual, the quality and reasonableness of Councilmembers’ comments varied widely, but Desley Brooks was perfect and awesome, said exactly what I would have said if I was sitting on that dais, and I just have to share it now:
For those who don’t want to watch the whole video, here’s the highlights:
What we’ve been told by representatives of the DA’s office at numerous neighborhood crime prevention council meetings is that certain cases just aren’t being charged in Oakland. So if we’re using existing resources and a part of why they weren’t charging certain types of cases in Oakland was lack of resources, how does this program then fit in?
and
We’re going to say that we’ll put the money forward to have these attorneys prosecute these cases, but if we don’t have judges, then the program’s not going to work. And I don’t want to sell the public a bill of goods about what we’re going to do only to say that there aren’t sufficient resources there.
Will this program work? How is it going to work? What is the timeframe in which we expect this to happen? How will whatever program we fund or whatever ordinance we approve actually make a difference in people’s lives? These are the questions that the Council needs to be asking all the time. Real leadership demands more than good intentions, and real progress will never be made if we do not constantly keep our eye on implementation. Implementation! That’s basically the entire point of this blog.
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...
6 Responses to “I love Desley Brooks!”
May 21st, 2008 at 1:27 pm
But more importantly, does Desley Brooks think she can hoop?
May 21st, 2008 at 8:00 pm
Desley Brooks’ proposal to effectively ban RV’s from Oakland late last year was misguided. Speaking of implementation, can you imagine the cost of such an undertaking? And all the cops that wouldn’t be out busting pushers like they ought to be? This is sort of on the level of eliminating plastic bags from Oakland–the politics of pet peeves. So I don’t know. Following the proposal kind of soured me on her.
May 21st, 2008 at 8:36 pm
That was indeed silly. Cops talked about that with the same kind of sarcasm they had about the valentines day flower sting. At the same time, one cop, who used to be a police union leader, and who guards council chambers sometimes told me he likes desley.
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:27 pm
How are we going to get public defenders? I assume the accused will demand them. If we get judges – how about court room? If convicted – what happens? As I understand, diversionary programs, jails and prisons are over-filled . I’m not against the idea of prosecuting smaller offences – but let’s look at the whole picture.
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Exactly!
May 23rd, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Hmm. I thought I had left a comment on this post a few days ago responding to Californio and Max, but apparently not. Anyway, if I wrote off Councilmembers for one bad vote or proposal, or a dozen, or two dozen, and so on, I would hate them all forever. There’s no point. I give credit where credit is due, and criticize when criticism is appropriate, and while I have a number of major problems with Desley Brooks, consistently raising questions about implementation at Council meetings is something she’s really good at, and I really appreciate that.