Joe Tuman doesn’t know Jack
Recently, my mother came to Oakland to visit me for the weekend. One of the things my mom likes to do when she visits is to suggest that we drive around neighborhoods where I might be interested in living, and see the houses for sale.
Inevitably, this lasts maybe half an hour, at which point she decides that the neighborhoods I have selected aren’t very nice, and that she would rather drive around and look at prettier, bigger, better maintained houses on adorable tree-lined streets. So then we go drive around like, Crocker Highlands or something as she relays a bunch of elaborate career strategies she has thought of for me (most of which involve changing careers) that would allow me to buy one of them someday.
Joe Tuman
Anyway. So we did our little tour, and as she admired the houses, I entertainment myself by counting lawn signs. I found myself surprised by the number of Joe Tuman signs. It was striking enough that even my mother asked about it. She’s all “So who is this guy Joe? I don’t think you’ve mentioned him before.” And I’m all “Oh, that’s cause he has no chance and is not worth mentioning.” And she’s like “Well, he seems popular.” And I’m like “Wev, this his his neighborhood.”
But she does have a point. I am increasingly surprised to hear so many people tell me how much they like Joe Tuman or how they’re considering voting for Tuman and how he has all these great plans for Oakland.
Um…he doesn’t. He’s a charlatan, folks. You’ve all been hoodwinked. He doesn’t know anything.
Plain talk
So. My first introduction to Joe Tuman was at a forum last July. He had announced he was running like two days before, and the only things I knew about him were from on his website, which wasn’t much. I don’t watch the TV news, so his job as a political analyst meant nothing to me. So I went to the forum genuinely curious about what this guy’s deal was.
The first question was about decriminalizing sexually exploited minors. You can listen to his response below:
He started out with this condescending line about how he was going to speak in “plain language”, as though the audience was too stupid to understand what anyone of the other candidates had said. This, in light of all the other problems I have with him, is probably a minor issue. But it drives me fucking nuts. In forum after forum, and in his answers to the Make Oakland Better Now! Questionnaire (PDF), like, every third answer starts out with him insulting either the audience or the questioner.
For some reason, a lot of people hear this and think that he must know what he’s talking about. Don’t fall for this, folks. It is a rhetorical trick. And a cheap one at that. You tell everyone you’re the smartest person in the room, and then you proceed to say something completely inane and hope people don’t notice. I think it’s awful.
Anyway. So he did that thing, like he always does, and then he totally failed to answer the question, talking only about enforcement on the consumer end and saying not one single word about how we should deal with these kids. Then, he went into this whole thing about how, as Mayor, he would reform the foster care system. Ooo-kay. Plan talk. I mean, yeah. If by “plain,” you mean “clueless.” Because, of course, the City does not run the foster care system and therefore it is not within the Mayor’s jurisdiction to change how children coming out of that system are dealt with, which I’m pretty sure dude knows absolutely nothing about anyway.
So that’s when I decided I didn’t like Joe Tuman — about 10 minutes after I first saw him. Then, of course, I went to more forums and read all the answers to questions on his website and read his Make Oakland Better Now! questionnaire (PDF), and the more I hear from this guy, the more obvious it is that he is just completely out of it. Yet, for some bizarre reason, people talk about him as if he’s some kind of expert on Oakland. The time has come to put that notion out of its misery.
So, besides not knowing that the County, not the City runs the foster care system, what else is Joe Tuman clueless about? Let me count the ways.
Funding the police force
First, there is his ridiculous police plan he is so freaking proud of. If you haven’t been to any forums or read it anywhere, his plan is basically that he is going to offer older officers early retirement and then hire them back part-time as annuitants where they are only paid salary and not benefits. He will then use the savings from those retirements to hire more new officers (we’ll have 1200 total!) who have a drastically cheaper compensation package. And he’s going to have them pay into their pensions. Here’s him talking about it at a forum:
So first of all, everyone, including the OPOA, agrees about the pension contribution. The only dispute is what they should get in exchange (they want a no-layoff guarantee). There is also widespread agreement that we are going to have to go to some sort of two-tier system. So on those points, he’s just with everyone else.
Which leaves us with this early retirement plan as the only difference. Now, the City already did a Golden Handshake program for non-sworn employees, and so if you were paying attention during the like six months of debate on this issue a couple of years ago, you know more about the Golden Handshake than you could possibly want to know. Joe Tuman clearly did not. Which is fine. But, of course, you’d think that if you were going to make it the centerpiece of your campaign platform, you would take some time to learn the rules at some point.
Here’s the deal with the Golden Handshake (PDF). It doesn’t save money. It costs money (PDF). That two years additional service credit you’re giving people? It’s not free. You pay for it. And you keep paying for it (through increased City pension contribution rates) for like 20 years. The only way you can make up for this additional cost is by keeping the positions vacated by employees taking the Golden Handshake vacant. That way, your salary savings offset the increased pension contribution costs.
Did you guys get all that? The Golden Handshake is not a good way to save money. What it is good for is reducing your workforce without having to lay people off. This is why it sometimes makes sense to do it — because layoffs are awful.
Another problem with his plan is that it is not even legal under California law, which explicitly states that you can only use the Golden Handshake for permanent reductions in the workforce. The shorthand people will give you about the program is generally that you have to keep the positions vacant for at least two years, and while it is, in practice, more flexible than that, it is not a tool you are allowed to use for doubling the size of the police force like he wants to do, even if it did make any financial sense. Which it doesn’t.
So there you go. The main point of Joe Tuman’s platform doesn’t make any sense if you know anything at all about the subject, which, of course, he doesn’t. As far as I’m concerned, that’s enough to write him out of consideration. But hey, why stop there?
Neighborhood Service Coordinators
I laughed out loud when I got to the last line of that Chronicle article about the Mayoral candidates positions on crime:
Neighborhood service coordinators, for example, have numerous and vocal supporters. Asked whether he, like Perata, would cut them, Tuman said, “Describe those to me.”
As Chronicle reporter Matthai Kuruvila noted on KQED Forum a couple weeks back, there is literally no way you could not know what Neighborhood Service Coordinators are if you had paid any attention whatsoever to the budget process earlier this year. Or last year, for that matter. Or the year before. Because they come up for cuts like every damn time the budget comes back, and there is always the same parade of people lining up to defend them, and always the same arguments about them, and there really just is no way to not know that this is a big issue if you are at all engaged.
Additionally, anyone who has been involved in their NCPC or their community or trying to improve their neighborhoods would know what Neighborhood Service Coordinators are even if they hadn’t paid any attention to the budget process, because you work with them. You get e-mails from them all the time just by signing up on your neighborhood listserv!
This really bothers me. I mean, I don’t believe that one has to have worked in City government before to be qualified for public office. But I do think that, if you want to be taken seriously, you need to be able to demonstrate some record of involvement and commitment to your community. It doesn’t have to be a big thing. But if you can’t point to anything you have done in the past that shows you’ve made an effort to improve the City in your capacity as a resident, why should anything think that you’ll take the job seriously once you’re elected?
Willful ignorance
On a similar note, I have often said that I don’t think the candidate forums should be some kind of trivia contest. It’s not fair to expect the same off-the-cuff knowledge of the City from people who are already working for it as those who aren’t. A smart person who is willing to put in the work can and will learn the details over time. The City is complicated. But it’s not rocket science.
Which is why I’m inclined to give outsider candidates a little leeway when they’re asked questions about City issues at forums and produce totally out to lunch answers about it, as Tuman does in response to a forum question about the Army Base development in the video below:
Some people might say that after a multi-year competitive bidding process with an RFQ and then an RFP and now an ENA and all the debate that went along with each step in the process, and with the Army Base being such a huge development project, a candidate running for Mayor should know at least something about it other than the fact that Phil Tagami ended up getting the deal. I’m sympathetic to that argument. But I also realize there are a ton of things to learn, and you don’t know what you’re going to get asked, and the fact is that sometimes you’ll get asked about something you haven’t gotten up to speed on yet. That’s forgivable.
And that’s one of the reasons I like reading candidate questionnaires so much. If you really want to know where someone stands on an issue, the best way to do it is to give them the time they need to research the subject and come to a position. I wish more organizations would publish their questionnaires, and I think that Make Oakland Better Now has done an excellent service to Oakland voters by asking all the Mayoral candidates to fill out detailed questionnaires and then releasing them for everyone to read.
And reading Joe Tuman’s questionnaire (PDF) is, I think, quite enlightening. But it doesn’t paint a very flattering picture of the guy. In fact, it paints a picture of someone who is basically completely ignorant about City government, and worse — proud of that ignorance.
When asked what he would cut in the budget, his response is that he doesn’t know:
I don’t know what I will cut yet; that will be subject to what I find in the audit.
I’m sorry. How can you possibly think you deserve to be Mayor in this time of complete fiscal crisis and not have thought of a single thing to cut in the budget?
MOB NOW! Questionnaire
It keeps going. He says he’s going to hire someone to study the Mayor’s and City Administrator’s office to look for efficiencies. I guess the 168 page report (PDF) from less than two years ago produced by PFM Group about exactly that subject wasn’t good enough for him? Oh, or maybe he just didn’t read it, or even know it exists.
His position on labor negotiations is uninspiring, to say the least:
Suffice it to say, I will use the following criteria for negotiation with our labor partners and stake-holders: a, every decision we make with respect to closing the deficit must serve the interest of everyone in the city — not just interested parties or select groups; b, every decision we make must reflect a long-term solution to the city’s fiscal planning.
Jesus. He’s going to meet with the unions and tell them we have a deficit? Does he think they don’t know? Does he really think nobody has ever thought of doing that before?
There’s another question in there about the Public Works Agency Performance Audit, and this is the one that got me the most.
This kind of audit provides terrific material, but it leaves me at a disadvantage for answering your questions because the report is a year old, and I am unable to tell what, if anything, the City has done with its recommendations (btw pages 24-25 do not deal with “recommendations for adequate funding” – as your question implied).
Look, I don’t expect the guy to have watched like every Public Works Committee meeting for the last year and therefore be some expert on what progress they have made on the audit recommendations off the top of his head. But the fact is that this information is out there and not that hard to find if you’re willing to look for it. But he can’t be bothered to make any effort to find out. He goes out of his way to say that he was too lazy to find out.
There’s a question about KTOP in there, and again his answer is that he doesn’t know what the City does with it other than broadcast Council meetings. Why would you say that? Why does this man take such pride in ignorance? It’s an odd trait for a professor, don’t you think? I mean, how the hell hard is it to find out what’s on KTOP besides a Council meeting? Turn it on! Or go to their website and look at the schedule! It’s not some great mystery. The information isn’t hidden. It just requires a modicum of effort to find out. And if you can’t be bothered to expend that tiny bit of effort to answer a question about why people should vote for you for Mayor, then why should anyone expect you to lift a fucking finger once you actually get in the office? Being Mayor is a hard job. Getting elected is the easy part.
He also has some strange ideas about management:
I will not fall victim to the micro-management curse, which would only lessen my effectiveness as Mayor, but I will insist on regular meetings with department heads that will require them to present me with firm, verifiable data as to capacity of their department, including a history of the performance of their employees, from the most senior managers to the lowest worker…Once a reachable goal has been agreed upon, I will insist that daily progress reports be sent to my office and will presonally review each such report.
He’s going to demand detailed data about every single employee in a department and then make department heads write him daily progress reports? In what universe is that anything other than micro-managing?
I could go on and on about this damn questionnaire. When asked about preventing police layoffs, he suggests applying to the DOJ for grants and using redevelopment money to pay police officers. We, of course, already do both of these things. I don’t think it is outside of the realm of possibility that there are ways we could do both of them better. But he doesn’t suggest doing them better. He just says that we should do them. Because, of course, he doesn’t know that we already do.
Like I said above — I don’t think you have to know everything before getting in office. But you sure as hell need to show you’re willing to learn. And everything about this questionnaire says the opposite. It’s like getting a question outright wrong on an untimed, open book test. There’s just no excuse.
I’ll figure it out when I get there
Can we go back to that budget question again? The one where he says he’ll decide what to cut after he gets elected? I’m sorry, but if you are running for Mayor in the middle of the biggest financial crisis Oakland has ever seen, and your position on the budget is that you’ll figure it out later, how are people supposed to take you seriously? Why do people take him seriously? I’m not being snide — it’s an honest question. I just don’t get it.
I mean, I can sort of see his appeal to a certain segment of the population. He’s got that whole angry citizen thing going on. It’s an attitude you see a lot from people who pay just enough attention to politics to know that we have serious problems, but not enough attention to grasp any of the nuances in policy debates or the barriers to progress. The end result is this attitude that basically says “Well, the people in charge have done such a bad job running things, any random person off the street must be able to do it better.”
And that’s a tempting thought. It’s easy to look at things from a distance and think “Oh yeah, I could do that!” But the thing is, running the City actually is, you know, hard. And that’s not to say that I think our leadership has done a great job, because I don’t. And I do believe there are a great many people out there who are not currently part of City who could do it better. And I don’t think you have to have work in City government to be one of them. But it is hard. It’s not like everyone in City Hall sits around eating peeled grapes all day.
And that’s Tuman’s attitude. I’ll figure it out later. I’ll tell you I’m going to do obvious things that everyone already agrees on or that we’re already doing and pretend nobody has ever thought of them before. I’ll learn about the budget once I’m in office. It can’t be that hard, right? After all, I chaired a committee at my school. That’s the same, right?
The Ron Dellums of 2010
Someone recently told me that they think of Tuman as this year’s Ron Dellums. And as soon as I heard that, I was like OMG, that is exactly what he is (minus the long and admirable record of public service, of course)! He’s a really good speaker, he condescends to his audience, says absolutely nothing, can’t be bothered to learn anything, and yet somehow, people are entranced. I didn’t get it then, and I don’t get it now. Don’t make the same mistake a second time, folks. Vote for a minor candidate who has no chance if you want to, but at least pick one who does their homework.
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...
329 Responses to “Joe Tuman doesn’t know Jack”
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 » Show All
October 19th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Like any academic talking head, he is clueless about the realities of governing. I never considered him as one of my picks, then when I read that he didn’t know what a Neighborhood Service Coordinator was, he became dead to me. It’s like he’s never even read a Tribune article on the issue-but then again, he’s an academic, why would he need to read the pesky Tribune? I also think it’s laughable when he says most people know who he is from his television appearances. That is complete and total bull. He only wishes people knew him from the teevee!
October 19th, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Understanding you have issues with Joe. I would like to extend again an invitation to have coffee with Joe so that you can talk with him directly.
October 19th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Hey Tod,
V, myself, and some of the other kids are headed down to the Planning Commission tomorrow (http://www.abetteroakland.com/say-no-to-more-surface-parking-lots-downtown/2010-10-15). Maybe Joe can tag along and see how some of this stuff works. He does know where City Hall is, right? It will also be on KTOP, but I’ve read he doesn’t know what that is.
October 19th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
What Joe has is Charisma. I think that’s it. And he’s a true Outsider.
I think Kaplan + pension cuts/two-tier would help, but it won’t be enough, fast enough, to weather the coming storm.
More like natural trends really: the rat of baby boomers going thru the snake of time/ society. Pensions were ponzi schemes from Day One. Part of our ye-olde fossil fuel powered garden of eden.
October 19th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
When I listened to the first audio clip, it turned out that V.’s comments about it are not well-founded. Tuman was asked a tendentious question demanding that the answer take a particular policy slant. His reply packed in a lot of common sense and practical stuff into the allotted minute or so. So I skimmed the rest of V.’s 3,500-word emote.
The best strategy for dealing a blow to City Hall’s ongoing destruction of Oakland is to vote for Joe Tuman first and Don Perata second on the 1-2-3 ballot.
October 19th, 2010 at 4:16 pm
Tuman doesn’t have much idea of what is going on in city government, based on my own conversation with him some weeks ago. We already know that Perata has ethics problems, too much money from all the wrong people, and little idea of what is happening in the neighborhoods. I can’t see why Mr. Pine would support either of them. I certainly don’t plan to rank Mr. Perata any higher than 10th.
October 19th, 2010 at 4:30 pm
I don’t know if I like Tuman. In fact, I know I really don’t but he serves a purpose. But I prefer him to either Quan, who can not balance the checkbook, or Kaplan, whose friends at the Green Party described her as credible but weaker than Quan with an eye on Swanson’s termed out assembly seat in 2 years.
I can definitely understand why Mr. Pine would support Tuman and Perata. I certainly don’t plan to rank Ms. Quan any higher than 10th
but she has my vote for Youth Services Czar.
October 19th, 2010 at 5:48 pm
While rational people disagree all the time about candidates, after reading V. Smoothe’s comments I think he goes beyond that. V. you are reacting to Joe in an irrational way. He doesn’t talk down to people at all. You may feel that he is but that is your take on it and a problem you have. Joe is pushing your internal buttons but that says something about you not Joe.
Jenn says she has never heard of Joe before and Joe is acting like everyone should know him (like he is making this up). I’ve never met Joe in my life before three months ago at a house party. I am an average working person, not a particularly social or high profile person. However I’ve heard about Joe since I moved to Oakland in 1997. If you watch the news or read newspaper articles Joe has been quoted and seen for years.
I became a Joe follower after the first public event. I’ve followed him by attending mayoral forums and I now volunteer for his campaign. I’ve talked with him one on one. I have never met anyone more honest, sincere and thoughtful than Joe. He is in the race to win and to make Oakland a better place. He has no higher political ambition and he will be beholden to no one throughout his term. I have absolutely no doubt that he will sit down with all parties and hammer out a tough and fair deal.
Joe is willing to think about things in a different way, “thinking outside of the box” which is what the citizens of Oakland deserve. And his ideas are not pie in the sky but well thought out and he is tough enough to make it happen.
V. I did listen to the video answer about child prostitution. Joe did answer the question throughly but you are too blinded by your emotional reactions to Joe.
October 19th, 2010 at 5:51 pm
V
Nice hit piece but since Tuman can’t win anyway, it is not clear to me why you wasted so much bandwidth and emotional energy on him. I see the choice this way:
Tuman and others – Cannot win so irrelevant
Kaplan – should be standing in SF or Berkeley which might actually have the money and the luxury of voting in a dreamer.
Quan – Easily the most hopeless but maybe worth voting for if you believe that the only salvation for Oakland is fiscal collapse followed by outside help to bail our sorry asses out.
Peralta – he gets my vote even though he is despicable, corrupt and skeevy. Why? Because I think he can get stuff done and has been around the worst block in town and survived.
What is really sad is that the choice is so dismal.
October 19th, 2010 at 6:33 pm
Wow. What a diatribe. Interesting that a guy who claims to be so up on the issues and claims to only be evaluating candidates on their stances would write something that relies on partial truths and inadequately contextualized quotes to advance his obvious agenda. So sad. V, were you one of Joe’s SFSU students? Your rant sounds like bitter grapes from a guy who got a D. Lord knows your analysis and writing skills would reflect that sort of evaluation.
October 19th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
By the way Mary –
So you know, Joe and Rebecca will be the frontrunners by next week so you migh reconsider your vote for sleeze and think about a real candidate. I’m Tuman first and Kaplan second, Perata won’t live through his first year, he’s already falling apart and hasn’t hardly campaigned. You like Brunner for Mayor, vote Perata.
October 19th, 2010 at 6:48 pm
“So sad” Diane. V. is a chick. Sorry, what was your diatribe about?
October 19th, 2010 at 6:51 pm
Diane, I am hardly a Perata fan, but I find spreading rumors about a candidate’s health to be about the lowest form of politics.
October 19th, 2010 at 7:04 pm
Compare the candidates to this
http://www.virginmedia.com/images/apple_pie430x300.jpg
I was thinking about the election the other night while watching a KQED special on early Christianity.
They spoke about Paul or Mark’s early meetings being held in the home of a city leader.
That connection adding respect to the movement.
They spoke about the city leader, similar to a city council person, as being “respected”.
Then I thought about our mayoral candidates and other city leaders on the council.
I could not think of any who I really respect or find admirable.
Couldn’t really think of any local elected officials I find admirable.
Isn’t that odd? No leaders to respect or admire.
It would seem that quality people no longer aspire to these positions.
Rather they work in other fields or pursuits.
Perhaps it was always that way, but I seem to remember some elected officials in the past I admired and respected.
Perhaps I am looking at the past through rose colored glasses.
October 19th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
V.’s point is cogent and important: Tuman is ignorant about issues that our next mayor will have to deal with. Her argument here is persuasive.
Her secondary point is that she finds him pretentious and condescending. I’m unpersuaded but will listen again to yesterday’s mayoral debate on Crosscurrents – http://bit.ly/bvYjl8 – while pondering this essay.
I disagree with those who decry the field of candidates. We have several strong candidates and I’m excited for election day.
Ranked choice voting allows you to give your first place vote to an outsider without fear of wasting it. Consider Don Macleay: http://bit.ly/bTjSnc
October 19th, 2010 at 7:08 pm
“. . .Peralta – he gets my vote even though he is despicable, corrupt and skeevy. Why? Because I think he can get stuff done and has been around the worst block in town and survived.”
Sad, very sad Mary. Oh and by the way his name is Don Perata not Peralta. At least spell the devil’s name right.
October 19th, 2010 at 7:10 pm
You decided before you even knew anything about Joe Tuman that you didn’t like him, so, surprise, surprise, to support your pre-judgment you looked at all his words with a jaundiced eye. I hope you do not make too many decisions in your life this way. If you, or any readers, want to see and hear him with clear eyes, he provides many opportunities:
http://www.joe4mayor.com/events.html
October 19th, 2010 at 7:25 pm
Joyce –
I think you misread my post. I didn’t decide I had a poor opinion of Joe Tuman before I knew anything about him – I decided that after I went to a candidate forum and in his response to the very first question, he talked about how he wanted to reform the foster care system, something the Mayor has absolutely no jurisdiction over at all. I have found his answers at the many forums I have attended since then, as well as those in his questionnaire, similarly ignorant.
Diane –
Since you asked – no, I am not, in fact, a former student of Mr. Tuman’s. I attended a much better school than the one he teaches at.
Mary –
Yes, I know he has no chance of winning. But there are few things that bother me more than taking pride in ignorance, and I knew from the moment I first read the MOBN! questionnaire, there was no way I could go through the election season without saying something about him. It didn’t actually take too much time to put together – I mostly compiled it from various e-mails I had sent over the past couple weeks to other engaged Oaklanders who are also frustrated with the fact that nobody has bothered to call him out on not knowing anything. The hardest part actually was editing it down to a reasonable length. I had to take about half of my quotes and stuff out, cause there were just too many.
October 19th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Excellent post, V! I completely agree with your characterization of the difficulty of governing, how detailed is the knowledge needed, and how the way you get it is to get involved—way before you presume to be mayor material.
I’m afraid that I can’t be quite as generous as you in cutting newbies some slack, but I admire you for it nevertheless!
Your critique is dead on. But I still have to give Tuman my #3 position, because no way will I give any of those positions to Perata.
October 19th, 2010 at 7:43 pm
Maybe Joe is really doing this so he’ll have enough material for another poli sci book.
In his next book, he’ll show how with enough name and face recognition courtesy of his ex media colleagues plus mastery of social media, a candidate can instantly get over 10% of the vote.
He’s proven that the media is the message for many intelligent, upper middle class white voters here, who as V says, simply don’t have the time to learn the issues.
I’d add that there is no mass media for voters to have learned the issues from.
-len raphael,
greg harland groupie,
don perata voter
October 19th, 2010 at 7:44 pm
V, if you and others are so frustrated b/c no one will call Joe out, then why don’t you or your friends do it yourself?
Please explain further what you mean when you say he doesn’t know anything. What specifically are you referring to? Please give your readers some specifics.
October 19th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
Hmmm… San Francisco State, not that good of a school?
How about St. Marys in Moraga? is that a good school?
Is a candidate from St. Mary’s or SF State good enough to be a quality mayor? Or would they be better if they were a graduate from UC Berkeley?
Just wondering…
Any good Bay Area mayors ever graduate from SF State or St. Marys?
October 19th, 2010 at 7:50 pm
Len, I take issue with this comment:
He’s proven that the media is the message for many intelligent, upper middle class white voters here, who as V says, simply don’t have the time to learn the issues.
How do you know that intelligent, upper middle class, white voters don’t take the time to learn the issues? How offensive and just plain wrong. If you are talking about a group of people who are intelligent then you are talking about a group who know how to gain access to information to make an informed decision.
Geez, come on people if you are going to state an opinion have some information to back it up. If for no other reason, it makes it more interesting to debate back and forth.
October 19th, 2010 at 7:52 pm
Dax,
All I can say to your comment is Kaplan is an MIT graduate and Stanford graduate but she won’t get my vote. She doesn’t come across as very smart. She comes across as a clueless cheerleader.
October 19th, 2010 at 8:03 pm
Len,
I am re-thinking Harland. It doesn’t do me much good because he cant block.
People may not like Perata but when hoodlums are running up and down Broadway, Harrison, Webster, 27th, Franklin and Telegraph breaking store front windows, I am pretty sure he will not be standing in front of the police saying stop.
Perata on jobs: healthcare and green industries
Safety: job one
Being a dreamer is great but if you can not work responsibly with public safety then all your dreams are going to go up in smoke.
Being mayor is the job Perata wants, it is the name recognition Kaplan needs before stepping into Swanson shoes in 2 years.
The only sound choice is Perata.
October 19th, 2010 at 8:09 pm
Karen, I personally have talked to about 10 Joe Tuman supporters. Everyone one of them is white, between age 35 and 62, upper middle class, and highly intelligent.
They all have a much higher than average knowledge of Oakland muni govt issues, but each of them would admit they only well one area at most eg. zoning or policing. All of them would say they only know the general outlines of the financial issues.
You’re right that most of Joe’s supporters are very capable of digging into the issues say online. But they simply don’t have the time to do that.
It is extremely time consuming for reseidents to do the work of full time professional journalists. As it is, the people I’m thinking of, devote many hours of the year to their particular civic niche, eg. zoning.
So they talk and listen to an intelligent excellent communicator like Joe, and rationally conclude he’s their guy.
Even when the people I know attended a forum, they wouldn’t have seen any reason to doubt their first impression of Joe, because none of the other candidates criticized each other, except for Harland criticizing Quan, and a few jabs by Quan and Kaplan on Perata.
Comparing Joe’s statements to say Kaplan or Quan, would only have shown that he supports more cops than they do. Because all the “serious” candidate’s platforms are silent on how they’ll solve the financial crisis, all they do is is mention that there is one.
Joe did go one step further at the LOWV forum: he announced that he had a secret plan to negotiate w the unions but he couldn’t tell us what it was before the election or he’d be violating basic rule of negotiation: “never show your hand” ahead of time or some such.
-len raphael
Don Perata voter
Greg Harland groupie
temescal
October 19th, 2010 at 8:10 pm
Tuman is a nice enough guy (I’ve met with him twice, and attended a candidate forum at a neighbor’s house), but he does continue to demonstrate a very strange (mis)understanding of Oakland. He’s smart, and yeah, he might be able to figure it out once he gets there…but I’m not really willing to take that chance. He’s very popular among middle of the road, white Dems…hence the yard signs in Montclair/Crocker Highlands/Lakeshore. All he really has going for him is that he’s not Perata…
October 19th, 2010 at 8:16 pm
Ralph, block? as in blocking JQ from being our next mayor?
October 19th, 2010 at 8:19 pm
Karen, Len & I don’t always agree, but I do with him here. It’s just too boring for most people to get into the details of Oakland politics, or they’re too busy doing other things (which is understandable with work, family, schools, etc.).
Part of the problem is our local news sources (the “media” Len refers to) simply don’t have the coverage they used to.
But the worst is people don’t attend City Council meetings and see how hard governing is, or even more importantly, to give input.
Very few citizens do and, the few times I’ve been down, I encounter the same dedicated group. But more to the point, the BIG turnout is the interest groups who have a stake in the game, and who whenever there’s a decision being made that will affect them, turn out in BIG numbers to make their voices heard.
And that’s who the City Council leaders hear from, time and again. They mostly only hear from their average constituents AFTER a decision has been made (& probably only about a decision that pissed them off). But by then the decision is made, and it’s TOO LATE.
So the next time your Cit Council representative makes a decision you don’t like, ask yourself two questions: Where and to whom did the Council Member turn to outreach or ask questions? & did you take the time to give your opinion?
Democracy is not TV, it requires participation. Unless you want your leaders to make choices in a vacuum. If you do, expect somebody, who might not agree with you, to fill it.
PS. This does not excuse bad decisions. But it certainly contributes to it.
October 19th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
Len,
In honor of Happy Days, correctamundo.
October 19th, 2010 at 8:27 pm
Len,
I would be interested in your response to Don’s involvement in the Oakland A’s and how the City of Oakland has to pay out $10MM a year until 2025. I heard Don Perata admit the deal was a huge mistake. $10MM a year is a heck of a lot of money that could be put to good use right now.
Why would you want to vote for someone who helped create some of the problems Oakland now faces?
You make some excellent points about people’s level of understanding of the City’s issues. I would have to say most people have limited knowledge of the issues. I think some people will have an in depth knowledge of the issues. And some will have a good working knowledge of one or two issues. This may even be true of some of the journalists out there.
It doesn’t bother me at all that Joe stated he wasn’t going to show his hand right now. He didn’t say it was a secret. Rather he was making a point that if you want to sit down and negotiate with a group you don’t announce in advance what your ideas are. If you do that you give your opponent the advantage. Anyone who goes into a negotiation has to hold his cards close to his vest (or her cards close to her vest) in order to get the best deal at the end of the day.
I truly believe Joe is the best candidate for Mayor.
October 19th, 2010 at 8:33 pm
Livegreen,
That was an excellent commentary, thank you.
October 19th, 2010 at 9:39 pm
Perata’s rhetoric is one thing, Ralph, but his track record is something else and you should look at it. He has been involved in some awfully costly mistakes, and at the same time has not involved himself in the Oakland community until he decided he wanted to be mayor. Plus, he is absorbing vast amounts of money from folks we really may not want to have calling the shots around here. Really–the prison guards union? Why would we want that? I fail to understand why you would believe his bluster and not someone else’s? Why suspend skeptical review for this one candidate?
October 19th, 2010 at 9:48 pm
So V, whatever school you went to, did they have a writing class? Geez, at least proofread this stuff before you make us read it.
October 19th, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Karen, if you search abo, you’ll find posts by me over the last two years reminding people of Perata’s Raider fiasco.
I stand by those comments, but what I’ve come to realize is the strength of the sports team mania that has many voters as well as pols in its grip.
The mass Oakland delusion that Oakland needs professional sports teams no matter what the cost is a good example of how to lose your leverage in negotation.
Al Davis knew we would give the store away to get him to come back.
Perata got us what we wanted in full view and approval by the city council, county board, other outside consultants etc. (wasn’t a big 8 cpa firm one of them?)
That delusion continues unabated today with the A’s. Except now the money won’t come from the general fund but from redevelopment money.
It was a giveaway that Perata should have tried to stop, but really I don’t think he could have.
-len raphael
Don Perata voter
Greg Harland groupie
October 19th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Karen, no one is asking Joe to disclose the specific minimum cuts in specific department personnel compensation which he’ll accept from unions in negotiations so that the unions can tell if he’s bluffing.
We’re just asking him for general outlines of magnitude of salary cuts vs borrowings vs sales leasebacks of city assets.
Magnitude of cutbacks in current pay vs future retirement benefits.
Magnitude of differential between tier 1 current employees is say opd, vs future tier 2 total compensation.
Is he planning to get this by threatening to seek court adjustment of vested medical benefits? Or threaten to seek bankruptcy court overturning vested pension benefitsL
Or maybe he’s counting on a Federal bailout for broke municipalities.
Many of the above approaches will require the support of the citizens to be effective, credible threats. Keeping them secret will hurt not help gaining the public’s support for some potentially very costly and painful tactics.
But the real reason I don’t buy his reason for not telling us what he’ll do about the financial crisis, is that he would have to be partaking of Oaksterdam’s finest via a monster blunt to believe that he has any chance of winning.
He would be performing a public service by educating voters about the options as Greg Harland does when he discusses the pros and cons of the bankruptcy route.
Since there’s no chance of Joe wining, I conclude he’s either delusional or so vain that he’s afraid of losing a couple of percentage points by saying something controversial.
-len raphael
Don Perata voter
Greg Harland groupie
October 19th, 2010 at 10:26 pm
Susan, who made you read this blog?
October 19th, 2010 at 10:42 pm
Naomi, Perata’s made some whoppers. Quan has made some real doozies also.
The difference is that Perata has shown by both his public admission of the Raider’s mistake, and by his kissoff of all the muni unions by signing the rebuttal of the parcel tax, that there were unintended consequences of giving big compensation boosts to muni unions over the years.
Quan on the other hand is unrepentent.
Depending on what forum she’s attending, it’s a variant of “it’s the recession, stupid” or “every city and state has the same problem” or “that decision was made before/after I was board member/council member.”
Her other good one, is something to the effect “when the economy recovers, we’ll be fine”
You don’t hear those rationalizations from Perata. He knows he screwed up on the Raiders and engaged in shaky transactions with his campaign funds according to the Chronicle endorsement.
I can’t cite any fact or statement to back me up, but my take is that Perata really wants to perform his last tour of duty as a public servant in Oakland at a pivotal point in Oakland’s history and development.
Dax has made light of Perata’s clean ups, and they look like pr stunts to me also. But people I know who know him say even before he was a politician he had a strong sympathy for the less advantaged whose lives he would like to improve by economic development while helping the entire city get better.
Len Raphael
Perata supporter and proud to say it
October 19th, 2010 at 10:52 pm
V, good post. Well at least, it’s passionate. I like that you never are afraid to hand out criticism of any public official or candidate, no matter how nice they may be in public.
Anyways, regarding the topic of Joe Tuman I largely agree with you that he does not possess the nuts and bolts knowlege of city government that Jean and Rebecca do. When the Sierra Club conducted interviews in late August, Joe Tuman did not respond with a questionnaire. So we didn’t endorse him. The answer he gave (in the video feed you provided above) on the topic of fixing the budget mess is instructive. First he talks about encouraging early police retirement and then hiring them back. In other words, allow them to double-dip, and INCREASE their public salary – so that Oakland can save a small amount. Then he talks about “convening a meeting of all labor interests” and goes on to say that he’s “not giving away negotiating strategy.” That is what I would call a platitude. It’s not a specific solution – it’s just an idea that sounds good.
In the questionnaires we received for the Sierra Club, Rebecca Kaplan’s answers stood out for clarity, vision, and demonstration of knowlege and understanding of how policy and progress is made at the city and regional level. For an example of what I am talking about, read the answer Rebecca gave to our question number 3: Development in the older urban centers helps the environment by redirecting new development away from wild and rural land on the edge of the urbanized region. What is your vision of future development for Oakland, both in downtown and in the neighborhoods? … Then read the answers from the other candidates and you understand why we felt her questionnaire was the best.
Joe Tuman did not respond with a questionnaire, by the way. So we could not endorse him even if we had wanted to.
In terms of the perennial hot topic: crime and safety. Making promises to voters and appearing to be tough on crime sounds great – but what is actually going to make a difference in terms of reducing violent crime in this city? That depends whom you ask. The “law and order” folks I talk to – I have met some of them while walking for Rebecca – are all seemingly convinced that Don Perata’s “tough guy” talk is just what the city needs to deal with the crime problem. The thing is, Jerry Brown talked tough about crime but did the problem improve under his watch? I don’t believe so. In fact, the mayor we all love to criticize – Ron Dellums – I think has the best statistical record in terms of crime stats improving under his watch. Or am I wrong? (I could be – I don’t track statistics.) Was this a sypmtom of Mayor Dellums’ superior instinct and knowlege? I don’t know, but I doubt that too. Mayor Dellums did a good thing by hiring our present police chief Batts and then letting him do his job. So we should give credit where credit is due.
Crime is one of those things that is too complex for any single person to fix. So many voters are deluded by the belief that a guy like Perata can come in here and fix things all by himself. How naive! It takes a village, as Hillary says – and that applies to more than just child rearing.
My favorite part of your post, by the way, was how you were driving your mother around in the Crocker Highlands while she offered you ideas for a career change to allow you live there. That was just too funny. Next time, take her up to wine country and ply her with some alcohol. That’s how I did it last time my parents were out here. Kept us all in a good mood and argument-free.
October 19th, 2010 at 11:04 pm
It must be election season. Someone let the cray cray on the blog!
Susan, no one forced you to read this long, persuasive, impassioned post with a few spelling errors. Get your own blog.
Karen, do you read this blog often? You sounds like the rants of Greg Hodge and his friends who discovered this blog when V took him down to reality 2 years ago. What next, Joe himself responds?
Naomi, $ from the wrong places? Which are the right places? Quan’s rich husband?
October 19th, 2010 at 11:24 pm
Just my two cents…
Perata? No. Way. In. Hell. Oh, shoot. He probably has connections there, too. Tuman, when I listen to him speak I find myself blurting out “that’s bullshit” way too often. Quan is a pro, but I want to see a lot more conviction and a lot less thumb to the wind. Kaplan shows she knows her stuff, has sound ideas and shows a lot of conviction.
October 19th, 2010 at 11:37 pm
KL, Ron’s crime stat improvements came at a time when many similar cities experienced even greater percentage declines than we did. Some did not. Pols always claim credit when reported crime declines and blame it on external factors when it rises or doesn’t drop fast enough.
Personally, I suspect distortion in either the self reporting of crimes or in the compilation of non fatal crimes in an election year.
The most attractive part of Kaplan’s approach to me is her encouragement and openess to resident’s ideas.
Quan talks the village talk, but her actions during this election and her behaviour on the Monkey Ward building show she’s one arrogant rude gal who doesn’t hesitate to talk over people and to talk an extra 30 minutes past her alloted time. Not what i’d call a great listener.
Perata on crime. Its a matter of emphasis and priorities short term vs long term. Perata is not under any illusion that more cops are the long term solution to our high crime.
He wants to give high priority to funding Batt’s requested number of cops etc. so that in the short and mid term we attract more job producing businesses and residents who will spend money here.
Quan and Kaplan made their approach clear when they locked arms to block tho cops at GrantII: they don’t trust their own chosen police chief to run his dept.
i’m surprised Batts didn’t resign then and there. As it stands, I’d be surprised if he sticks around very long under Quan or Kaplan mayoralty.
-len raphael
Don Perata voter
October 19th, 2010 at 11:38 pm
Naomi,
I direct you to Len’s post to explain my support of Perata.
As you have probably noticed there are pieces of Quan’s platform which appeal to me. However, at every turn, she has done her best to blame someone else for the mess we are in. She needs to man up, admit she made mistakes, and accept responsibility for her decisions. I lack the patience to put up with politicians who blame others for the problems to which they help create. And I have no desire to listen to her do the Obama, “look folks, I inherited this mess” for the next four years.
Then there is the small matter of development. We need it. Quan doesn’t support it. From what I can tell, she has some sort of beef with developers. Developers build houses. Developers build office buildings. Developers build retail. People need a place to live, to work, and to shop. Quan hates developers. I see a problem.
Ralph
Perata or bust
October 20th, 2010 at 6:07 am
Len, regarding the specifics of Tier 1 employees vs. future Tier 2 employees, benefits, etc. Joe is addressing this by talking about how to take police officers within a few years of retirement, allowing them to come back part time and then using the savings to hire new police officers at a lesser salary. Those strategies have been used successfully in the public sector and is a viable option. And it is not double dipping. Retired police officers are receiving a pension they earned and are working and receiving a part time salary.
And there are more details Joe has discussed. But at the end of the day until someone gets into the mayors office and gains access to the financial records, no one not even Perata can know specifically how much is going to be up for negotiations. I heard Perata personally say he was going to conduct an audit in order to figure it all out.
I certainly don’t hear any candidate seriously criticizing these plans and as a matter of fact I’ve heard Kaplan and Quan pick up these same ideas after Joe began talking about it. Recently Perata called Joe’s above ideas “fairy dust” but then he doesn’t say what he would do.
Len, you mention there was nothing Perata could have done differently regarding the sports mania surrounding this City. Then I would suggest Perata just goes with the wind allowing the powerful interests push him around. So this means that Wolff gets his billions to develop or expand the team in Oakland. Developers continue to get rich at the expense of the citizenry by developing these huge ugly condos in the name of urban revitalization. Kroger gets to put up a grocery store in West Oakland that will turn out to be the wrong decision. Hard working commercial property owners get their property seized by the City in the name of progress.
October 20th, 2010 at 6:18 am
Actually, Karen, Perata has laid out a very specific list of proposed cuts. It’s quite good.
As for Joe Tuman’s police plan – it is not real. Sure, it probably sounds great to someone who doesn’t know anything about how these programs work. But if you read the post above and follow the links I provided, you will see clearly that it simply doesn’t make any sense. Anybody who actually understands the types of programs Tuman is talking about and their fiscal implications knows that it’s nonsense. And against California law!
October 20th, 2010 at 6:22 am
Joe Tuman did NOT
Vote to loan money to the Merritt Bakery
Destroy the state budget
Bankrupt the Oakland School System
Block police action after the Bart verdict
So I am at least considering him for Mayor.
October 20th, 2010 at 6:59 am
Jack B. an opened minded person! Thanks for considering Joe for mayor.
V. Joe’s ideas about the police are not against California law. I will get back to this blog on the particular law.
I am seriously wanting to understand why some people (V. and Len in particular) think his ideas are nonsensical. Saying it doesn’t make it so. And I guess some people will color me clueless but I like the ideas. I think they make sense.
Must get ready for work so I am not late for a meeting — but I will be back later.
October 20th, 2010 at 7:48 am
V sez “Actually, Karen, Perata has laid out a very specific list of proposed cuts. It’s quite good”.
V, is this list available somewhere? I don’t see anything specific on his website.
October 20th, 2010 at 7:53 am
So, V., when can we expect your endorsements?
October 20th, 2010 at 8:09 am
To respond to the numerous people who blame Kaplan and Quan for locking arms in front of the police at “Grant II:” this was a situation where the police were ready to disperse a large crowd of mostly peaceful demonstrators with force. Grant II demonstration was by and large peaceful and caused little damage (except perhaps to public image, and to the Foot Locker store.) If the police had used force on the crowd, I believe it would have turned ugly. So, depending on how you view things, either Kaplan and Quan prevented an ugly meelee, in the interest of preserving public peace, or they obstructed justice. I believe the former (admittedly, I only watched video.) Many others believe the latter. It depends on your point of view.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:20 am
Ralph, Quan doesn’t hate developers. She voted FOR Oak to Ninth, SUPPORTED Broadway/Grand, SUPPORTED Uptown development, recently angered some in her district in the Laurel by SUPPORTING a large residential development on MacArthur. She supported the majority on CBD zoning. I can’t think of an anti-development vote. She seems to fully understand the need for economic revitalization. I don’t know why you think she is against development. Several times when I have argued against a development she has been on the “for” side. I may not agree with her, but she has supported many large projects and large-scale plans. Jean is supported by a wide swath of middle class people and business owners.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:29 am
The problems of Tuman’s police plan
* Two tier system & pension contributions. In debate parlance “non-unique.” That’s what everyone is proposing – it’s hardly Tuman’s plan.
* Golden Handshake requires large amount of upfront money. It is used by organizations facing fiscal problems that see worse problems in the future. They still have some resources to maneuver. Oakland is past this point. There is no gold for the handshake. Unless Tuman can find some extra millions of dollars, it ain’t gonna happen.
* Rehiring part-time OPD annuitants requires officers willing to be rehired. I’m sure a few might like Tuman’s part-time deal, but I doubt many would. If they want to make a lot of money they can go get another full-time job (they will be under 50), or if they want leisure they retire for good and move to someplace like Idaho with their six figure pension.
* Even ignoring the huge upfront costs of the golden handshake, it doesn’t save that much money. Remember this is supposed to work in conjunction with all officers making pension contributions. In effect, Tuman is double-counting savings.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:47 am
Naomi,
I use simple math, which, if you don’t follow the order, will result in the wrong answer. Quan uses the developers card as a reason not to support other candidates, and you dislike outside developers. The simple conclusion she “hate” developers. Now, your stance on outside developers may be an case where you hold your nose and vote because you like the rest of the package. So, if I have misrepresented her position, my bad.
October 20th, 2010 at 9:08 am
Kent,
You are partial correct.
Yes, Grant II began as a peaceful demonstration but then the riot types turned a lawful assembly into an unlawful assembly and created an unsafe situation for all. And if you think the damage was limited to FL, then you may want to talk to business owners on Broadway, Harrison, Telegraph, 27th, Webster, Franklin and other street.
I, too, watched the video. Quan and Kaplan were in the wrong. Prior to Quan and Kaplan locking arms, riot types started throwing stuff into the crowd. This created a risk to the safety of those assembled. Consequently, the police invoked unlawful assembly. (Yes, this is a law on the books and requires people to disperse.) But there are Kaplan and Quan singing Kum-ba-ya.
As to damages, FL was not the only business to incur damages. You only know about FL.
Broken windows at Sears, Ozumo, the medical bldg at 80 Grand, a small office supply store opposite Shaw plaza, Whole Foods, the wig store on B-way, Starbucks on W. Grand (note they boarded the windows, people had to throw rocks above the storefront panes to do the damage), Union Bank, former Kaiser branch would you like me to continue.
Rioters stole $50K were of jewelry from a store on B-way. The office supply store was closed for over a month following the damage.
October 20th, 2010 at 9:25 am
I find it somewhat amusing that people who support Perata continually go off topic. No respect for social niceties.
In this thread, can’t we discuss some of Tuman’s “novel” policies for staffing OPD, retail, etc.
Could those of you who want to keep running in the same circles go back to your other crazy thread http://www.abetteroakland.com/how-your-ranked-choice-voting-ballot-gets-counted/2010-10-07
October 20th, 2010 at 9:46 am
Really not much to be said about Tuman. Thus, we are left to discuss other stuff.
That being said, as it is highly unlikely that I will be having a cup of coffee with any of these people any time soon, I do, at times, find these off topic discussions informative. For example, I assume Naomi is being truthful in characterizing JQ’s support of developers.
Maybe the next entry should be Election 2010 Discuss. Yes there is Open Forum but it gets lost in the shuffle.
October 20th, 2010 at 9:49 am
Karen – I didn’t say I’ve never heard of him, I said that when he says most people know him from the news, that just doesn’t ring true. He’s not on the new often enough for most people to know him. It’s wishful thinking and ego.
October 20th, 2010 at 9:51 am
Thanks to V and Daniel for pointing out the flaws with the Golden Handshake. This seemed fishy to me from the get-go, but I couldn’t put my finger on it. But what you’ve both said makes sense:
If you pay somebody more upfront to retire, the only way paying those costs sooner can equal out is saving money later. This is roughly the equivalent to large corporate “early retirements” when workers are given a big 1x payout that moves their retirement forwards. The only way a company then saves money is by not re-hiring replacement workers.
Companies might combine it with reduced pensions in exchange for more cash upfront, but that is not an option here. The pensions stay fixed no matter the “golden handshake” (or might actually increase, as I think Dax pointed out, since the highest annual compensation will then increase?).
October 20th, 2010 at 9:57 am
Len, bubbe, you live around the corner from me and the reason the only Joe supporters you talk to are white & middle class is because we live in Rockridge-Temescal. You need to start walking your doggies in other neighborhoods, my friend!
I am supporting Joe, V’s post notwithstanding. I knew nothing about him until I attended the Oakland Climate Action Coalition Mayoral Forum. He was the only candidate who ACTUALLY read the Draft Climate Action Plan put forth by the OCAC. I know he read it because I have read it and am very familiar with the land use and transportation sections of the draft and it was obvious from his comments that he had really read the document. He ACTUALLY answered the questions asked at the forum rather than obfuscate or run out the clock with irrelevant personal anecdotes. I was impressed that he did his homework and kept his answers cogent to the questions asked. Taking the time to read the draft CAP shows to me that he respected the organizations who put on this forum to actually study their ideas. But he didn’t pander either because the last question of the evening had to do with implementation and his answer was decidedly “un-lefty” and the crowd’s reaction was not supportive. But his answer DID show he understands how large bureaucratic organizations really work and how you get things done in them.
As for Greg Harland – I understand and appreciate the need for someone with business skills being our next mayor. BUT this person ALSO needs experience negotiating with unions. I have never heard Greg say whether or not his previous businesses were union or non-union so I am assuming they were non-union. And if they were non-union then Greg is missing a very important business skill set. We need a mayor who has experience working with public sector unions but is not beholden to these unions. Joe has this experience because of his work at SF State.
As for Joe’s early retirement public safety proposal he has said (at least at the house party I attended) at the beginning his proposal will only lead to small savings but over time these savings will grow larger and larger. As for his proposal being “fairy dust”, that just tells me that the opposing candidate hasn’t bothered to take the time to study the position and build a decent argument in response. Such a comment doesn’t impress me, it only turns me off.
John
October 20th, 2010 at 10:10 am
All Mayoral, City Council and School Board filled out questionnaires on public education in Oakland, revealing what they really know and think about public schools. Like the MOBN questionnaires, candidates were given time to do research and then answer the questions thoughtfully. Check them out at http://www.gopublicschools.org/voterguide/ (scroll to bottom, after video interviews with candidates).
October 20th, 2010 at 10:11 am
There are several parts of the Golden Handshake proposal I don’t understand. The financial incentive to get the older cops to retire comes out of the City’s budget. Don’t their pension payments also come out of the City budget? So doesn’t that mean we’re paying a financial incentive to get them to retire, plus their pensions and retirement benefits, plus the salaries and benefits of the people who replace them? I don’t quite get how this saves us money. Moreover, keep in mind that according to the City’s own numbers, it costs the City approximately $120,000 to recruit and train every new officer. So you need to factor that cost into the mix as well.
Also, being a department chair hardly qualifies as having experience dealing with large, powerful unions. I don’t think Tuman was every involved with the union, other than being a member.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:20 am
MarleenLee, was Tuman ever a department chair? I haven’t heard that before.
All I remember was at the Chamber forum he claimed to have been on some departmental committees. In the MOBN! response, he wrote:
“My experience within these entities-and especially in the last 23 years at San Francisco State—
has included committee chair positions for hiring and retention, tenure and promotion and curricular development.”
I don’t think it has ever been made clear whether these were executive committees or merely advisory.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:52 am
For some reason I thought I had heard that – but I don’t know if it was department chair or committee chair. In any event, union members who sit on either of these types of committees would not generally have any executive power. It generally would only be advisory.
October 20th, 2010 at 11:59 am
V, Did you think of including his plans to attract retail? I thought it interesting how much attention he got (especially by the “educated” press) for this given how much planning the city is already doing on the subject.
Especially since Joe’s proposal emphasized the Broadway corridor, which the City has already been developing detailed plans for.
Nothing new. He just did a better job pointing out what the City & City Council has already been working on.
October 20th, 2010 at 12:22 pm
lg, the City has been “working” on this FOREVER,or so it seems. Brown made residential development happen. Perhaps, Tuman could focus the same sort of effort on retail and economic development?
October 20th, 2010 at 3:14 pm
I have to say I totally agree about the comments on City Employees and the Developers. It is fare to close a relationship for comfort. Take Walter Cohen, who was a unregistered lobbyist for PPD. Once he got the CEDA Director job he somehow talked city council into buying a PPD property at a significant profit for the troubled developer.
http://www.auditoaklandceda.com/index.php?news&nid=9
Then lets look at Don Perata who is taking campaign money from big developers just like Jerry Brown.
Then let’s ask ourselves who actually owns Sun Field Developers LLC who is developing all the Foods Co’s using eminent domain and which hedge funds own a piece of the pie and who owns shares in those hedge funds…. The answer might surprise you all..
No V, I have to respectfully disagree with you on Joe. He may not be as smart as he comes off but at least he is not clever like Don. Cleverness is not good in politics unless you are the politician.
October 20th, 2010 at 5:06 pm
KL, re Quan and Kaplan locking arms to block the cops at Grant II.
There is no debate about what Quan and Kaplan did, but whether it was the right thing to do at the time.
My point is that if Quan or Kaplan was convinced the cops were making a terrible mistake because they had info the cops didn’t (ie. no escape routes for the crowd), then one or both of them should have dialed up Chief Batts or Lindheim etc. immediately.
I find it very hard to believe that Quan and Kaplan had people scattered around the demo feeding them real time info about the crowd, the cops, escape routes.
My second source of info was from an OPD commander who was with his line of officers facing Quan and Kaplan just before and during the order to dispurse was issued.
(Never met this cop before or after. Random meeting at Tagami’s evening cop fete. No, I’m not connected in any way to OPOA, no family members etc.)
Commander said yes he had real time radio communication with other cops through out the are. Yes they were very very careful to make sure there were escape routes.
The order to disburse was made because a few of the demonstrators were doing things such as throwing small cans of red paint down on the heads of the cops from upper floors of some surrounding buildings, as darkness approached.
The order to disburse was made primarily to protect his officers and the peaceful demonstrators.
No, I didn’t confirm his story with any other cops.
-len raphael
Perata voter
October 20th, 2010 at 7:04 pm
Finally, the truth comes out. Tuman has been consistent in indicating that he has experience applying his lay-off plan. I am always skeptical of candidate claims about business and other experiences because it is hard to verify and it never comes with size. I ran a business which doubled in size over 5 years. Did you have 1 employee or 1000? Anyway the truth on Tuman is he was someplace where his proposed plan was used.
Ralph
Perata today Perata tomorrow Perata for the forseeable future
October 20th, 2010 at 7:24 pm
TUMAN KNOWS MORE THAN V SMOOTHE, THAT AT LEAST WE KNOW
Your hit piece was both amusing and annoying for its one-sided nature. Just curious, having watched some of the forums, given that Tuman was the ONLY one who seemed to know about state and federal authority on ports, why didn’t you address that or even mention it? Not convenient for your conclusions, or were you yourself clueless on that? For you to talk about Tuman not knowing the jurisdictional limits of foster care auspices, then to ignore what Kaplan, Quan and Perata are so ignorant about on a larger issue – well, cherry pick away, but it is a transparent form of bias. And from what you say about foster care, given its complexities, I’m not sure you have any clue or have a proper vantage point to be throwing any stones.
I suppose you prefer Kaplan or Quan? How much worse could you be than the two folks who’ve in the first case blindsided and crippled transit, and in the second been a leader in bankrupting the whole city? What is your better option, Ms Smoothe?
Here is what I posted on the related Chron piece:
Many of us trust Tuman to make the hard choices rather than pick-you-pocket-Perata (whom the Chron ENDORSED for God’s sake!), to overseer of failure #1 (Kaplan – with a DISASTEROUS run on the transit board spearheading the Van Hool buses and the absurd current transit workers contracts, which combined have basically bankrupted to transit system – way to go “Transit Expert Becky”) or #2 Quan, who as you admit has been actively involved top to bottom in the contracts that have bankrupted the city, & before that helped destroy Oakland schools.
… you lack all perspective. Read about great Mayors and what makes them great:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1050214-1,00.html
Perhaps then you will begin to understand why many of us think Tuman ‘gets it,’ & you just don’t.
Here is a piece showing that you are quite wrong about the golden handshake, and that while controversial it can reduce budgetary costs and has been used to do exactly that with a number of cities:
http://publicceo.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=280:california-cities-get-creative-with-retirement-incentives&catid=151:local-governments-publicceo-exclusive&Itemid=20http://publicceo.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=280:california-cities-get-creative-with-retirement-incentives&catid=151:local-governments-publicceo-exclusive&Itemid=20
A great Mayor comes with someone willing to confront the challenges, prioritize them correctly, and stand their ground on important issues (like renogotiating city worker contracts). Tuman is the only hope on these fronts; the other candidates are preordained failures. At this point Kaplan and Quan couldn’t get a concession from the police if it were in the interests of the police even in the short run; they are perceived as disloyal and unreliable, with some justification in my view of the world. The cops will virtually spit in their face, as will firefighters. Where will we be then, Vsmoothe? Did you know the Oakland police sat and met with Tuman for several hours to see what compromise might be reached? Do you notice they don’t vociferously oppose him? Tuman is that middle ground between taxpayer and civil servant that can make it work – not that you have any interest in that, of course.
Tuman or several more years of catastrophe is the choice, and the bottom line. If you get Kaplan or Quan as you seem to want, I’ll be watching as Oakland burns, but from the other side of the tunnel, thank you. Perhaps I will hear you fiddlin’… it wouldn’t surprise me in the least. Vnero – has a nice ring to it!
P.S. what the heck do YOU know about foster care funding? It is a complex myriad of state / county, and yes, local / city funding (particulary for group homes), but non-profit funding as well, particularly for group homes. It is especially annoying when people who in truth know very little set themselves up as experts. You could call such a person a charlatan of sorts – and I guess I am, but to you, not Tuman. Tuman has been very courageous to put himself out there given the poor quality of the candidates, and that is what I think urged him to make this leap. Old style “service,” the sort that a student is school gives who isn’t looking for ‘community service hours’ for their transcript. So forgive me if I don’t bow to your belief that someone has to have participated in mind-numbing beaurocracy first. Do you know anything about prisons as schools of crime? Start people out on local government committees, and what we end up with is Kaplan and Quan, and what that tells me is that local committee and board training (transit board, school board) seems to be highly related to inculcation with the values of a system of failure, and trains people who participate in just that. How has that worked out for you so far, Oakland? How do you enjoy those hefty new fines and agressive parking enforcement efforts, while hearing Kaplan and Quan spout out of the other sides of their mouths about “creating a business friendly environment?” That is Kaplan and Quan, products of service on our transit and school boards, before joining our city council. Too bad efficacy isn’t a part of your equation. Tuman has been a success at everything he’s done for at least the last 20 years; can you say that about any other of the top candidates? None of them have been a success for even the last FIVE years. Understanding of how to succeed is more importance than prior experience in venue; point to me a candidate who has been successful at all to compare him with, and I’ll consider it. From all I can see Perata, Quan and Kaplan are a sorry series of failures on all the most important issues they’ve been associated with. If I’m wrong, prove it. You will be contriving arguments of small scale ‘success,’ while ignore 800 POUND GORILLA sized failures. I’ll take Tuman’s success over Quan or Kaplan’s failures.
Needless to say, the crop of people running is so poor that Tuman graciously decided to offer himself as an alternative. I for one say ‘thank you,’ Joe, I really appreciate it, and you’ve got my vote.
October 20th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
In response to V. Smoothe’s comment about how rehiring retired police officers would be illegal in Oakland.
In 2001 it became legal for state employees to retire and then get hired as a part time employee. The total number of hours a part time state employee can work in a given year is 960 hours. The State recognized that there were advantages in both preventing a brain drain and providing cities, counties, municipalities flexibility in their budgets.
To those who criticize Joe’s plan to rehire retired police officers (including Chip’s most recent article, kindly posted by V. Smoothe on this blog), I’ve done some rough calculations and I think this is a good beginning for increasing police officers and not having to make cuts else where to maintain or increase the police force.
Chip’s article stated that Joe thought realistically only 15 officers would retire and then get rehired part time.
SFgate.com previously posted the top paid City of Oakland workers, many which are police officers. With overtime pay many police officers are paid over $250,000 a year and this does not include health and retirement benefits. So let’s add another $50,000 to that figure so that a highly paid police officer is being paid $300,000 a year. That costs the City $4,500,000 a year. These 15 police officers are now off the City payroll and receive retirement benefits and these costs are shifted to the State (CALPERS). Now the City of Oakland hires back these 15 officers at the maximum number of hours 960. Multiply this by 15 and you have a total of 14,400 hours that that City has to pay these part-timers. Per hour wages tend to range from 30 to 60 dollars for part time professional staff. Let’s say we pay them $40.00 per hour. The total cost to the City is now $576,000.
The City of Oakland now has an extra $3,924,000 to spend on new recruits. If Joe could get new police officers hired in at a starting salary of $50,000 and add another $50,000 to pension and health benefits, the City could hire 39 new police officers.
If we currently have 679 police officers, you subtract 15, add back in 7.5 as they are now part time, then add the 39 new recruit. We now have 710 officers.
Perata has talked cuts, cutting the Public Ethics Commission. I mean getting rid of it. What? So where do city officials, council members, etc. go to complain when ethics have been violated? Why doesn’t Chip and others question the soundess, or lack there of, of these types of cuts?
Joe is being inventive, trying to find solutions to some serious budget problems. He is also not going to take a full salary as he will give back the entire pay raise Dellums gave himself. Joe is ready to lead by example.
Oh and one more thing, The City of West Covina is currently hiring back retired police officers. They have a population of approx. 110,000 people with a police force of approx. 112 officers.
October 20th, 2010 at 7:41 pm
I have met all the candidates. My opinion of Joe is pretty good. He really is sincere. I believe he is honest which is more important than any other attribute a candidate can have. I don’t believe Don P is sincere, and I am still on the fence with Rebecca. Rebecca has come out on some real issues and I am starting to believe but I am still not quite sure if she is real. Jean has not taken money from any of the bad developers. I believe she is totally clean. I was relieved when I saw who donated to her campaign. Don is taking all the bad money, from developers and contractors. He is bad for Oakland no doubt about it.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:07 pm
For those who support Joe T, do you honestly think he can get the police to agree to a starting salary of $50K?
Living in the the bay area is more expensive than the rest of the country. So, while I agree that it makes sense to reduce the salary while in training, realistically, the best you should expect in salary is a reduction to the average, adjusted for cost of living.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:18 pm
New York and Los Angeles pays their new recruits less than $50,000 (NYC $43,000 and LA $45,000).
With high unemployment do you think a new recruit will turn down that salary?
New recruits who are high school graduates making $85,000 plus is out of touch with the reality of the economy and so is the Police Union.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:21 pm
Was that post a joke asking if we can find people to work with full benefits for $50k? Do you not know unemployment in Oakland is nearly 20%? I think the last time we posted jobs we had something like 1,000 applicants for a handful of jobs. What do you say to that?
Can Oakland hire new officers at $50k or less? That would be a resounding ‘yes.’
October 20th, 2010 at 8:34 pm
On the jobs issue, 11,000 applied for jobs at Wal Mart at a fraction of the pay and marginal benefits, back in the ‘boom’ years of 2005!
http://articles.sfgate.com/2005-08-17/news/17387778_1_wal-mart-job-market-hot-job
Should a starting police person make DOUBLE the wages of a middle aged average family, which makes $45k on average in Oakland? STARTING OPD officers make between $72k and a loaded plate of benefits, with retirement at 90% of wages by age 50 (!), and a whopping $90k, and those are STARTING WAGES. The whole system is very seriously out of whack, and remember that Quan voted for these contracts, and Kaplan did basically the same thing for transit workers, then fled to the city council for a ‘do over’ on the burning building she left behind her.
C’mon, Oaklanders – let’s think this through. Tuman may have a shorter ‘civil service’ type resume, but really, that is a plus given the mess we are in.
October 20th, 2010 at 8:47 pm
Here’s some Oakland specific evidence on job applicants for police jobs:
from the OPD website -
“Q: Can I select my Oral Interview appointment?
A: No. Due to the large number of applicants being scheduled, the Office of Personnel is unable to allow individuals to select their own appointment. The date and time will be randomly assigned to qualified applicants.
Q: What if I can’t make my appointment?
A: Due to the large number of applicants being scheduled, the City of Oakland, Office of Personnel is rarely able to reschedule an appointment. You are strongly encouraged to make every effort to attend your scheduled interview. In the event that you are unable to attend your scheduled appointment, there is also the option of “standby”. We do typically have some last minute no-shows and will allow applicants to wait for an available interview slot. Standbys will be taken on a first come, first served basis however, there is no guarantee that we will be able to accommodate you.”
Haha – to show how absurd this question it – Berkeley just had over 1,000 applicants FOR THREE JOBS!
http://www.ktvu.com/news/24090403/detail.html
Here’s a boo-ya Cramer fans. Berkeley PD starts at $60k, and got those 1,000 applicants for 3 jobs. $12k less, and 1,000 applicants. Yes, we can fill the jobs.
“Great benefits include great retirement pkg, job security, uniform allowance and premium pay for bilingual. Opporutunity for overtime.
Salary: $60,504.00 to $78,792.00 per year
Contact Information
Sgt Patricia Delaluna
bpdrecruiting@ci.berkeley.ca.us
Berkeley Police Department
2100 Martin Luther King Jr Way
Berkeley CA 94704″
We want to work with reasonable Oakland police. But if they don’t want to work out a reasonable deal, let them strike, and let them be replaced. $188k average salary and benefits – AVERAGE – is criminal in and of itself, and just too much. OPD should at least be agreeable to letting things retrench a reasonable amount, and hiring new officers at more like market rates. Then they could be grandfathered in if they are there now in some reasonable way.
Oakland residents just want a way out of this mess, and no, we can’t pay $200k a year for rank and file police. That is double what New Jersey pays for goodness sake, and they actually are under the impression they have the highest costs in the nation! Read this to see what is bankrupting THEM, at $90k average pay – haha – they aren’t even CLOSE (we in Oakland are at $188k in the high estimate that I’ve seen – the Chronicle in July I believe, $162k low estimate).
http://blog.nj.com/njv_editorial_page/2010/09/high-cost_cops_taxpayers_cant.html
October 20th, 2010 at 9:29 pm
MF, I can’t talk re the other great mayors in that article, but to put Tuman in the same category as Denver’s (ex oakland resident) John Hickenlooper is ludicrous. I knew John personally in his college years and later when he lived and often visited Oakland.
Joe has neither John’s business experience nor John’s years of community service that gave him a very strong understanding of Denver’s policy issues long before he ever ran for office.
Hickenlooper ran a multi state brew pub biz with hundreds and possibly more, employees that went from zero to big bucks.
Tuman managed his family’s local restaurants for a while.
Joe is no Woodrow Wilson. He should stick to academia.
-len raphael
Perata supporter from temescal
October 20th, 2010 at 9:35 pm
Mfraser,
When you have the time can you tell me where you found your BPD salary info?
Last time I checked:
Trainees earned $5817/mo, ~$72K/yr.
Polices Off. Step A – E $90K – $106K/yr
Polices Off. Step F – G $109K+/yr
Sgts: $114K+/yr
Thanks
October 20th, 2010 at 10:00 pm
While I’m not saying Joe matches any of those profiles tit for tat, I am saying that ‘great’ Mayors DON’T tend to come from career politicians, or at least, don’t HAVE to. The odds of Perata being a great Mayor are about the same as him taking the side of taxpayers against the unions that have funded his campaigns.
Here’s the $188k combined salary and benefits costs article…
http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-07-13/news/21980988_1_police-union-officer-s-salary-and-benefits-city-spokeswoman-karen-boyd
The city of Oakland, Calif., has laid off over 10 percent of its police force after failing to negotiate a settlement with the police union — whose members earn an average compensation of $162,000 a year.
“What’s going on in Oakland is an example of a phenomenon being seen across the country: states and cities choosing between providing services to the public or maintaining luxury compensation for public employees,” Josh Barro, the Walter B. Wriston Fellow at the Manhattan Institute, writes for the Real Clear Markets website.
“More often than not, public employee unions have been winning this fight.
As the result of the loss of 80 police officers, Oakland’s police chief says cops will no longer respond to 44 categories of crimes, including grand theft.
“At current levels of compensation, Oakland cannot afford to maintain a police department with 776 employees,” Barro observes. “That’s because total compensation for an OPD employee averages an astounding $162,000 per year. But at a more reasonable level of pay and benefits, Oakland could afford to maintain its force, or even grow it.”
OPD officers finishing training receive a starting salary of up to $90,459, before overtime, plus a health plan worth $15,859 last year — compared to California’s private sector mean of about $9,100 — and a pension contribution equal to 9 percent of their salary and overtime pay.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:29 pm
MF, I wouldn’t agree with your general point. After all, Greg Harland got my full support before it became very clear that Quan has an excellent chance of becoming our next Mayor.
The NYPD starting salary number is deceptively low. Search for the step raise schedule (i posted a link to it on this site a few months ago)and you will see that within 5 years of starting, NYPD cops rapidly get up to the 80K level.
I’m not convinced that the reason NYPD, SFPD, OPD etc pay high salaries and benefits is that the police unions are so powerful.
Especially in Oakland where the number of cops has consistently been a small fraction of total union employees, and like those other cities is forbidden to strike.
Add to that the unique distrust and dislike of many of the residents towards the cops, and I don’t think the city council was under tremendus political pressure to overpay cops.
it’s more a result of the professionalization of police work; and the overall very high compensation Oakland and surrounding cities like SF pay their muni employees.
i can see both sides of the professionalization of policing after I recently personally benefited from the amazingly competent officers who responded to an emergent situation.
Lets face it, do we really want to go back to Officer Bob whistling a tune as he strolls down the street twirling his baton? Not to put down community policing or beat cops, but we want our cops to be more than flatfeet but also mediators, youth counselors, family interventionists, and paralegals all in one person.
When you expect those qualities, you’re competing with a bunch of other white collar jobs that pay (or least did) close to 75k/year without the risks of police work. add another 33% for the risks of being a cop in Oaktown, and it’s easy to see why we pay so much for cops.
What’s impossible to justify is why we lowered their min retirement age to 50 and pay all city employees including cops, absurdly high pensions.
Sure, of course the 9% sb paid by the cops as should Quan pay her 9%.
-len raphael
Perata supporter from temescal
October 20th, 2010 at 10:38 pm
Oh, sorry, the BPD was just a job listing I found straight from BPD. I checked it and it is way out of date, so please ignore that. I’m done for tonight, so accept your stats.
There are a plethora of locations that have more reasonable salaries for police, and Oakland pays pretty much nation-leading salaries. Even crime ridden New Jersey as I posted above has compensation at about HALF of our average, and for some reason they think THEY lead the nation in paying the most.
Literally 72% of our city budget, as of this summer, was going to fire and police, all of which I expect you know, and that is 12% more than the California average.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
Kent Lewandowski says:
“The thing is, Jerry Brown talked tough about crime but did the problem improve under his watch? I don’t believe so. In fact, the mayor we all love to criticize – Ron Dellums – I think has the best statistical record in terms of crime stats improving under his watch. Or am I wrong? (I could be – I don’t track statistics.)”
Funny enough it was Elihu Harris with the best statistical improvements in crime reduction in recent history. Then Ron. Crime actually got worse during Jerry’s tenure, which is why I can’t understand Brown supporters touting their love for him because of reduced crime. What’s worse is that stats show a definite spike in crime after Brown’s appointment of Tucker as chief. So in this case you can more reasonably tie the rising crime to a specific decision Brown made as mayor. Tucker’s eventual firing threat/resignation over performance issues only corroborates this assertion.
len raphael says:
“Ron’s crime stat improvements came at a time when many similar cities experienced even greater percentage declines than we did.”
It’s true that most other cities saw declines in crime as Oakland has in the past four years – some with more declines but some with less. Unfortunately in the Brown years, while most cities in the U.S. saw crime declines, Oakland experienced increases. By the end of Harris’ 2nd term as mayor Oakland had dropped out of the Top 10 cities for violent crime. By the end of Brown’s 2nd term, Oakland was back near the top.
Talk is cheap when it comes to crime. I hate to say it, but sometimes I wonder if people see a white male talking tough on crime and automatically think crime is/was/will be low. Harris and Dellums are no hawks but still had better performance on crime than Brown. Similarly Quan and Kaplan are also no hawks but this sense that crime would rise with either of them as mayor while it would drop with Perata or Tuman is unfounded and shortsighted. In fact given recent history and experience, voting dove seems to be the way to go if you’re concerned about crime.
Speaking of demographics, it’s interesting (not good or bad) that diverse Oakland could be on the verge of electing its first female or Chinese or Jewish or lesbian mayor and there hasn’t been much fuss over it. To my knowledge all Oakland mayors have been white or black Christian males.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:56 pm
I wasn’t incredibly impressed with Joe’s knowledge of city affairs, but I would rank him well ahead of Perata on ethics. Alas, Perata is number ten. I can’t vote for someone who is taking big money from interests antithetical to Oakland’s success. Come on, people, he is on the payroll of the prison guards union! And apparently every police lobbying outfit in northern california is sending out his mailers. How could he be a tough negotiator with his very generous benefactors? We would be plundered by the profiteers who are hanging around like vultures, hoping to swoop on fat pension deals and the remaining redevelopment bucks.
October 20th, 2010 at 10:57 pm
Mel, doesn’t surprise me about Jerry. As I remember it, JB had to buy the Calif Sherrif’s endorsement for Attorney General by hiring Tucker, good buddies with heavy weight Alameda County sherrif, Chas Plummer.
Crime dropping the most under Elihu.
Maybe that just proves that we are all clueless about the effects of policy on crime.
-len raphael,
Perata supporter from temescal
October 20th, 2010 at 10:58 pm
While I am open to listening to criticism about political candidates of all backgrounds, there remains one truth by which I tend to lean towards when it comes to voting.
I’d never heard of Joe Tuman before a month ago, when he was out canvasing my Temescal-Rockridge neighborhood streets. At the time, I happened to be walking to the farmer’s market to get some fresh veggies, when one of his volunteers approached my better half and I and handed us one of his cards. Being a de facto political scientist by choice of educational path, I found myself immediately skeptical of what this person may have had to offer.
In fact, I’d dismissed Tuman for just another wanna-be and didn’t think much about it until the East Bay Express started pumping out a few commentaries on the guy, then Chip Johnson wrote not one, but two articles saying how surprised that he was that he liked Tuman. (I’ve generally enjoyed Chip Johnson’s perspective on matters relating to Oakland, as well as Zennie62′s, but I digress.)
After seeing a few things about this person, I started to look into matters for myself, much like you did. And, where I see some of your complaints as valid opinion, I do not see any validity in any of your claims, and it appears that your conclusions are drawn to prove nothing… concrete.
Much of what you have taken the time to share (and thank you for sharing it, I appreciate some thought in opinion, and you certainly tried) is not fully thought out, in my opinion.
For example, in the first argument you provided about Tuman’s response to teenaged prostitution, you assert that Tuman didn’t actually give an answer. Further, you argue that Tuman’s answer doesn’t address the question.
Well, not to insult you- but I think you should listen to the clip that you provided again. Tuman very clearly provided his solution. He stated that he felt that as Mayor he felt that it was *important* to *address* the *entire problem* of teenaged prostitution by enforcing the laws regarding prostitution more rigorously- from start to finish. He further went on to say that a large part of the problem with that entire equation are the actual customers participating in teenaged prostitution rings.
AFTER he’d made those remarks, he went on to talk about communities and getting shelters and the likes involved. But, he’d already addressed the question, and was building on ideas at that point. So, really- he answered the question adequately, in the very least.
Secondly, on the matter of the “Community Service Coordinators” you basically outlined the very reason for his response of “Describe those to me” by offering this up, in your very own words: “Because they come up for cuts like every damn time the budget comes back…”
If they’re so effective, then why do they continually get put on the cutting block every time the budget comes back?
I mean seriously. How did you miss that rather important detail?
Tuman’s response could be implying what you suggest, OR it could also suggest that he sees no cause to have them because they’re not effective in what they do. He could also be suggesting something else entirely. (I don’t know, I’m not Joe.)
This, however, does NOT go to say that there is NOT a better option out there, because there MAY be. It also doesn’t suggest that there is another option at all, because there might not be. However, I think that he very keenly addressed the issue without having to commit to any further discussion on the matter.
That said, and on a side note: Please understand that I have no beef with anyone in that particular organization. In fact, I’ve never heard of them either… but, I’m also not running for mayor of Oakland, and have only lived in CA for about 4 years- 2 in Santa Cruz County.
And, finally, I must point something out to you regarding how the City actually operates.
BY CHARTER in this fine city we call home, the City Auditor (Courtney Ruby) is responsible for providing the Oakland Mayor’s Office, City Council members (and citizens) an unbiased opinion on what the best practices for operation of city government should be.
Thus, when Tuman says “I don’t know what I’ll cut, I’ll wait to see what I find in the audit.” it’s pretty clear that he’s got a firm understanding of what is required of him, and what the Oakland Mayor’s job does and does NOT include.
You see- by waiting for the City Auditor to continue doing her award-winning performance reviews and audits of how well the offices of the City are under way, it would actually SAVE MONEY for Oakland tax payers by NOT over-stepping Section 403 of the City Charter, thus doubling up on work performed, expenses paid and the likes.
Instead, Tuman would be in compliance with the City Charter with respect to the Office of the Oakland Auditor and would smartly wait to see what areas in City government are the weakest performing. From there, it would behoove Tuman to begin to strategize an INFORMED plan in order to re-vamp them most effectively.
So, while practicing this method of respecting the framework which forms the City of Oakland as a City, it would be a clear demonstration that Joe Tuman knows EXACTLY what he needs to know about the City of Oakland.
Now- that all said… I’m not going to counter the Cop issue. I think that there can be about 50 dozen ways to reduce crime in this city which would also benefit the citizens living in the neighborhoods that are a little more rough around the edges than others. In my opinion, there needs to be a sincere movement in the direction of progress in Green-collar jobs, education and re-education (where applicable), business on all levels, and most importantly above all of that- community building. I’m fairly certain that you’d probably agree with me on those points at least. Those points, from my perspective, are what I see Joe Tuman offering to help with on some levels, but I’m not calling him a messiah either. (BTW: I’m not positive about his stance on green-collar jobs to be honest- but I figure that getting a new mayor with some political savy would be a good start.)
IN conclusion: Kaplan, although highly educated, doesn’t really make me want to vote for her. I mean, didn’t she JUST become a City Council member like 2 years ago?
And, while I do like her, I also think she’d be good for Oakland in a lot of ways. But… running for Mayor so soon after being elected City Counsel makes me feel like she’s pulling a liberal version of a Sarah Palin, only- Kaplan doesn’t provide us with pure entertainment and hilariously stupid remarks like Palin does… VERY much to Kaplan’s credit. And, Kaplan does have a vision for Oakland, and very much of it good. I just have a really hard time with the quick jump up the ladder of City Politics. I’m sorry Rebecca- that really bothers me.
All the rest… meh.
And, that- folks- is my $0.02 on the matter.
Joe Tuman- Oakland Mayor ’2010
He knows what he’s talking about, shouldn’t you?
October 20th, 2010 at 11:18 pm
len, to be frank I couldn’t point out precisely what Elihu did to affect crime rates. In the 90s crime had been dropping in most cities and thankfully Oakland was part of that trend (though Oakland’s drop was a little bit more than average). Also thankfully Elihu didn’t do anything to cause crime to rise, obviously, since crime didn’t rise. Sometimes just not screwing up is enough to ask of a mayor, which is again why I’m not a big Jerry Brown fan, and why I’m not moved by any hawkish posturing from mayoral candidates. People can do stupid things when they try to appear tough.
October 20th, 2010 at 11:20 pm
It astounds me that people will accept that Perata is a sleazeball crook but then convince themselves that he’ll “get things done”. What is it – that’s he’s a conservative middle-aged white guy and thus other conservative middle-aged white guys living in the hills feel a subconscious affinity for him? Its wholly irrational.
You want to see the best predictor of how a candidate is going to perform in office if you elect him or her? Look at their records in previous political office.
In Perata’s case, its a dirty sordid history of giveaways to the state prison guard’s union in exchange for campaign contributions and barely disguised kickbacks in the form of “consulting fees”. Its a history of paying for giveaways and goodies to his campaign contributors in the form of mortgaging California’s future in the form of bloated infrastructure bonds (Props 1B-E) that have saddled us with mountains of debt.
Nobody gets investigated for five years by the FBI and the Justice Department for public corruption by accident. And in a sleight of hand worthy of a professional con artist, he set up a campaign war chest for an obscure BOE office in order to funnel campaign contributions into his legal defense fund. Even now, he’s funding behind the scenes Marcie “Dumb as Dirt” Hodge’s campaign in a cynical attempt to draw African American votes away from Quan and Kaplan. (Go ahead -next time you see Hodge at a candidates forum, ask her where all her mystery cash suddenly appeared from – I’m sure she’ll get back to you – and the elections board – five months after the election is over)
And somehow, this serial crook is going to improve things in City Hall? How? By setting up a credit card swipe machine in the Mayor’s Office to more efficiently process pay-for-play? Or maybe hemorrhage the City budget even more by giving the patrolmen’s union everything they want, the rest of the city be damned.
Dirty is as dirty does, and that is exactly what Oakland will get with him in the Mayor’s office.
October 21st, 2010 at 5:50 am
Len wrote–
“Tuman managed his family’s local restaurants for a while.”
Len, I don’t think that is correct. I believe Tuman worked part-time in his family’s small-town diners while he was in high school. His duties were probably more along the lines of busing tables and washing dishes than making management decisions. Besides does it really matter when we are talking about events over 30 years ago?
I find it interesting that Tuman’s business experience has grown with every retelling the last few months.
October 21st, 2010 at 6:52 am
Tuman’s business experience has been outlined by Joe himself. He has managed businesses, met payroll, created budgets, hired/fired – - everything a small business owner has to do to survive.
Joe’s business experience is not an urban myth. I’ve sat and listened to Joe on multiple occasions outlining his business experience.
October 21st, 2010 at 6:56 am
Yes, Karen, we all know what running a business involves. The question is whether Joe Tuman has actually done it or not. The way he has described his experience has changed dramatically over time. It’s like every time the dude is asked about it, his story becomes more inflated. Just look at the example Dan used. When he first announced he was running, he said he worked in his parents restaurants while he was in high school. Now, that experience has transformed into running two family businesses? I mean, come on.
October 21st, 2010 at 7:12 am
MF, i typo’d: meant to say “I would agree with your general point.” that you don’t have to have public office experience to make a good elected official.
David D, people around here never see the irony in their using the 5 year investigation of Perata as proof that where’s there’s smoke there must be fire.
Many of the same people who use the fbi investigation as proof of his wrong doing, would have automatically assumed any other powerful liberal Democract target of a Bush era FBI probe was politically motivated until proven otherwise.
But those same critics don’t extend that basic civil right to Perata.
Good debating method, used it myself when for a few days I thought my first choice, Greg Harland might have a chance,
but it basically proves nothing.
-len raphael
Perata supporter from temescal
October 21st, 2010 at 7:21 am
Karen Bishop, I’m just going off my own 25 year old knowledge when I was an undergrad at Cal and knew Joe, his brother John, and had other friends from Turlock. If you have more up-to-date information, I would honestly like to hear it.
My understanding of the 4 businesses Joe Tuman has run are:
1) working part-time at his family’s diner more than 30 years ago
2) working part-time at his family’s diner more than 30 years ago
3) running a seasonal debate camp with a couple of partners for 2 or 3 years more than 25 years ago. I believe all of the employees were college students working as 1099 contractors.
4) falling into a couple of speech consulting gigs based on his work on television. I wonder if this consulting business has any employees other than Tuman. Does he even have a business license? If so, is it in San Francisco or Oakland?
If I am in error or you can fill in any other details, please let me know.
October 21st, 2010 at 7:27 am
MB, if Joe were elected and waited for the mother of all performance audits from Courtney Ruby, he’ll be waiting a very long time. Her audit productivity is pretty low. The best of her audits were done by independent contractors.
My wondering how she could have been in office for several years in a major dysfunctional city and only came with a few hand slapping audit findings raised my rudimentary rusty cpa auditor instincts.
I tracked down Michael Kilian and after several meetings with him, am quite sure he’d be an auditor’s auditor instead of a public relations auditor like Ruby.
Kilian is not a Perata supporter like me, closer to the JQ camp. Always good to have checks and balances in govt.
-len raphael,cpa
Perata for Mayor
Kilian for Auditor
October 21st, 2010 at 7:39 am
Myles,
Without going into details, I think you are reading too much into Section 403. Per the charter, the auditor addresses the soundness of accounting, provides assistance to City Departments to enhance the effectiveness, efficiency and economy of their operations. What we really need is a complete overhaul in the city government org and delivery of services. I believe some consultants have completed this analysis but it sits on a shelf in FOP.
In other news, being highly educated does not prevent one from making bad decisions. Can you say NikNak and Grant II police interference.
—–
Crime…crime goes up and crime goes down. No one really knows why this is. Some theorize that people are less likely to report a crime the 2nd time if nothing happened following the 1st time. Others believe that PD have an incentive to juke the stats. The true measure is do people feel safer.
October 21st, 2010 at 7:48 am
Len,
The auditor in me says that MK would be completely useless as the City Auditor. The city’s internal control structure is awful. This was true well before Ruby took office. In fact, it is something that MK should have noted but did not.
Ruby has some work to do but she is one hte right path. I spent the first part of my career auditing municipalities. Ruby is on the right path.
Ralph
Proud Supporter of Perata
Ruby for Auditor
Strong Effective Government
October 21st, 2010 at 9:10 am
Ralph, Killian had a falling out with the previous auditor, which is why he ran against him. He was not attached at the hip to him, like u imply.
The principal differences between Killian and Ruby are that Killian believes in sticking to Audits in order to get more of them done. Not making Public Policy decisions, which is Ruby thinks is important but which she is NOT elected to do. She believes it is because…she’s setting herself up to run for higher office.
Len, My understanding is Killian’s pretty P.O.’d about all the politicians and budget situation in Oakland, which is why he’s running. I’d put him more in Ignacio’s camp fiscally, but has reservations about him too.
As many of us do with any of the candidates we choose. Nobody’s perfect. We’re all making priorities and judgement calls about the future, based on the best evidence we have available to us…
October 21st, 2010 at 9:16 am
The thing about Perata, Len, is that even ignoring the FBI investigation, his ethical lapses are legion. What about those contributions? And I’m not even talking about the recent ones. It is hair-raising to look at the public records, which of course aren’t that recent. He will be entirely beholden to his patrons. He elicits large sums from people who do not prioritize Oakland’s interests, his son is on the payroll, he is using a cancer fund as a front (disgusting!) and has received enough money to taint any decision.
October 21st, 2010 at 9:23 am
MF, re. OPD will not respond to 44 categories of crime, this is NOT true. They WILL respond to any crime that is happening including Grand Theft.
What they won’t do is come to take a report after the fact.
Where it gets difficult is when it’s a minor crime and it’s taking them a long time to respond. But that’s up to OPD to determine at the time of the crime and based on their workload. And only they know that.
October 21st, 2010 at 9:31 am
Quite a hatchet job, but thankfully the 10 people that read this blog AND that also happen to know what KTOP is or what a Neighborhood Service Coordinator is (or does for that matter), won’t be subjected to this abomination. KTOP, really?? I have been living here 20 years, read the paper every day, went to Cal and have no clue what KTOP is…tells ya something about its effectiveness doesn’t it.
Gosh, I really hope our next Mayor listens to KTOP. Give me a break.
You never did agree to sit down with the guy did you? Your mind was made up once you found out he lived in Crocker Highlands. Would it have helped you to know he also lived on Telegraph avenue?
Maybe that would give him “V cred”. Jeez, time to knock that chip off of your shoulder.
V., with thse kinds of literary masterpieces I suggest you take your Mom’s sound career advice:
–So then we go drive around like, Crocker Highlands or something as she relays a bunch of elaborate career strategies she has thought of for me (most of which involve changing careers) that would allow me to buy one of them someday—-
Like, maybe like you should have gone to like SF State after all.
October 21st, 2010 at 9:38 am
I don’t think I really care if Tuman ever ran a family business. It might be of help to a future mayor, but not critical under Oakland’s so-called strong mayor system. I say so-called, because, when it comes right down to it, the City Administrator retains the real authority for operation of the city government.
Perhaps, the single most important any new Oakland mayor can make is his or her selection of a city administrator. The mayor provides vision and direction and the mayor takes on the political battles, but the city administrator is the one who runs the city on a day-to-day basis and gets things done.
It is a common misconception that the Mayor hires and fires department heads. If you’ll read the Charter, you will see that the Mayor has the authority to hire and fire one person — the city administrator.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 » Show All