Open Thread
Want to talk about something I haven’t covered? Do it here. You can find the previous open thread here.
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...
161 Responses to “Open Thread ”
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All
February 16th, 2010 at 1:31 pm
Hi, I know that this blog has covered efforts to revive the “uptown” concept – and I have an invitation that might be attractive to you and your readers. A few friends and I are hosting a weekly Happy Hour/Open House at the Bellevue Club. It’s part of an effort to open the historic club’s doors and represent the new Lake Merritt/Lakeshore/Uptown community. We’d love to see a crowd each Thursday! Here’s the URL for this week’s evite:
http://www.evite.com/app/publicUrl/QMPIXOSFWFPIGFDUEGWE/Thursty
Please let me know if you’d like more information, or simply visit the Evite and let us know you’re coming!
Ray
February 16th, 2010 at 7:21 pm
I’d like to see a few City Charter Amendments placed on the ballot.
1.
Make it unlawful for the City to negotiate a labor contract with a “defined benefits” pension package. Why is it nobody employed by private companies get anything but defined contribution pension plans, while we pay the load of these unseemly benefits to thousands of city employees. Retiree Miss Deborah is certainly a suitable poster child for this cause. What is her annual compensation under retirement? And since the fiscal responsibility demonstrated by the city council and mayor make drunken sailors look prudent, consider the size of the pension that is unfunded and soon coming due.
2.
City Charter Amendment requiring that all work done by city employees be offered out to private business bids, if they can perform the work for less than city employees cost.
Any more you can think of? Yaa hooo.’
Oh, and I’d like to congratulate the city of Oakland for maintaining a homocide rate that is now twice that of the estimated one for Iraq. Nice job folks.
February 17th, 2010 at 10:44 am
I just wanted to know if there were any “hearsays” in the upcoming and exciting Oakland City Council races in 2010? What has our fellow Oaklander politicos heard from the battleground precincts? Who has been confirmed to run? Who would be our “dream” candidates in our Council Districts? Please let me know what’s on your mind and what you have heard?
February 17th, 2010 at 1:05 pm
The Bellevue Club is a beautiful building and would be a wonderful resource to the community, if tapped properly. Best of luck on getting your dreams off the ground, Ray.
February 18th, 2010 at 4:59 pm
For you DTO’ers, Free Sandwiches Friday downtown at new restaurant called
“Uncle Dougie’s New York Style Italian Heroes”:
> I wanted to let you know that my uncle has opened a sandwich shop in downtown Oakland and will be giving away free sample sandwiches on Thursday and Friday, Feb 18/19, to anyone that shows up.
>
> The concept is modeled on Bakesale Betty’s: limited menu, unique, hot, fast,
fresh, tasty, not too expensive, mostly takeout, closed by 3pm or whenever they
sell out.
>
> He’s a New Yorker and always wanted to have a sandwich shop, so he is using
recipes he learned 30 years ago from an old Italian New York hero sandwich
maker. Only four sandwiches: eggplant parmesan, chicken parmesan, sausage and
peppers, Italian meatloaf. Thursday is the first day of training for the staff,
so things might be a little uneven, but the recipes are proven and he is hoping
to entice lots of people with the free samples to get some good word of mouth
and Yelp reviews.
>
> Please stop by for free hero samples on Thursday and Friday if you happen to
be in the area and tell anyone you know in the area for lunch about the free
samples.
>
> Uncle Dougie’s New York Style Italian Heroes is at 362 17th St. in downtown
Oakland, between Franklin and Webster St. It’s around the corner from Spice
Monkey, a few blocks from the Kaiser Center and Lake Merritt.
>
> He just had a graffiti artist spray painting the wall on Tuesday. His hero
sandwiches should be authentic and distinctively New York, too.
>
> Hope you can stop by!
February 18th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
lg, to be authentic the crust has to be stale enough to cut one’s palate.
February 19th, 2010 at 12:36 pm
The sandwiches are crusty, all right, making for a smushy eggplant parmigiana, but the flavor is there.
February 20th, 2010 at 6:56 pm
Anyone up for a counter State of the City demonstration in front of City Hall etc. on Monday late afternoon? gotta get at least 15 people to make it credible. Limit it to the cc and mayor dithering on the deficit.
ignorant of such stuff, I’m assuming there will be at least one reporter there.
-len raphael
February 21st, 2010 at 8:50 pm
Two questions – anyone know what’s up with both Franklin Square Wine Bar and Louisiana Chicken closing almost at the same time.
And, does anyone know the (eventual) fate of the curved building across the street from both where work seems to have stalled for the last couple of months.
I love that corner and look forward to (one day) sipping cocktails on the “square’ when the weather improves.
February 21st, 2010 at 10:16 pm
PRE, I suppose the obvious answer would be that neither were proftable. With the possible of the law enforcement peeps who lunched there, LC will not be missed. To paraphrase John 11:35, I wept for the loss of FSWB.
I suspect the curved bldg (wish i could recall the name) would do well to stay on hold until the economy improves. The daytime foot traffic is probably not enough to sustain the anticipated new food businesses
February 22nd, 2010 at 10:07 am
Love the new banner photos, V. I’m curious, though – what is the image in the middle a picture of?
February 22nd, 2010 at 12:34 pm
Len what time? Call/text me. Although I’ve been unhappy with Dellums’ apparent on the ground lethargy, he’s given us Chief Batts. I’m not sure if that’s the Trade of the Decade, but it’s something more than what we had before.
And, here’s my new post at RO:
http://newoaktown.wordpress.com/2010/02/22/rekindling-our-existing-oakland-police-foundation/
February 22nd, 2010 at 2:05 pm
ken, i was serious, but you were the only person to respond. nothing lamer than a two person demo. we’ll just have twitter and email the cc and dellums until they beg for mercy.
-len
February 22nd, 2010 at 3:45 pm
len, if i weren’t otherwise engaged in shaping the young minds of Oakland, I would be down for the cause. may i suggest you call up those DC kids who did the flash snowball fight. i am sure they have some tips for how to get people to a place in a hurry.
February 22nd, 2010 at 4:18 pm
what about a one-person demo?
anyway, big D is going to look good due to our econometric drop in crime + the new chief, regardless of happened last year.
he won’t talk much about the budget, or how the city won’t be able to get money any more from the bond market. http://ow.ly/19eYk
Interesting that the Seeno real estate mogul family being investigated by IRS/FBI/SS/etc in the last day or two is one of Don Perata (Oakland mayor candidate)’s larger campaign contributors, over $140,000 donated to date.
Campaign contribs feel like protection money.
February 22nd, 2010 at 4:36 pm
ralph, you could have been the spokesperson. but alas, it would have been the sound of one person demonstrating.
ken, the seeno contribution total was not small potatoes. but compared to what unions gave dp and (wasn’t there something about ron cowan the developer? that the feds pursued and gave up on?) seeno is small stuff.
February 23rd, 2010 at 8:55 am
Thanks, Dustin! The photos were way overdue for a change. I’ll tell you what the middle photo is soon, but first I’d like to see if anyone knows. How about it, readers? Anyone?
February 23rd, 2010 at 9:10 am
John Russo is on KQED forum right now regarding gangs.KQED Radio: Oakland Gang Injunction http://shar.es/mme6h via @sharethis
February 23rd, 2010 at 4:28 pm
The photo on the right looks like the view from the end of Chetwood Street.
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:38 pm
Paraphrasing the ACLU: If OPD & the City takes action against gang members who are african-american, then they are racist.
2nd Paraphrasing of the ACLU: It’s better to have a Gang-Run Injunction. Then blame OPD if they do something, blame OPD if they don’t do anything. Whatever it is, it’s OPD’s fault.
Often when the ACLU rep was asked a question by Michael Krasny she ignored it & went to a topic she preferred to address. She also refused to acknowledge any of Russo’s efforts to narrow the Injunction, which specifically addresses her concerns. It’s easier to stick to one’s narrative, however wrong, if one ignores the opponents points and answers.
Paraphrasing Maya Dillard Smith: OPD Officers are not from the community, therefor they don’t know the community or belong in it. This also makes Officers just plain wrong (an opinion shared by some of the callers). Two points:
–While I agree Oakland needs more Officers from Oakland or living in Oakland, it is simply not true that there are not Officers from the Community. I know or am acquainted with 3 Officers that are from or live in Oakland. & I don’t know many Officers…
–Maya also said the NCPC’s don’t offer enough access. What does that mean? There are NCPC’s over the entire City. All you have to do is get up, go out the door, and go to a meeting. If you don’t have one you can get them started. There’s NW programs all over too, and they’re easy to get started…
February 23rd, 2010 at 5:44 pm
I’m wondering if the middle picture is a portion of the long mural on Park Blvd at Oakland High.
February 23rd, 2010 at 6:36 pm
While having more police who are from and live in Oakland would be nice, it is not a requirement to being a competent successful officer. Isn’t a similar argument used in education re the black male learning problem? Studies indicate that black males will learn if the teacher is good independent of race. I would hope that the key criteria for hiring police is individuals who want to be employed by OPD and are committed to the mission.
If gang members are African-American are star-bellied, then it would sensible to take action against them. I would think the same would apply if the gang members were white. Now stopping and targeting African-Americans and star-bellied Americans when you know the gang are neither that would seem racist. Someone needs to take the ACLU to the woodshed. Personally, I am huge fan of Chief Batts and the city’s new gang initiatives.
And while people are going to the woodshed, someone please take the “convinced the cops are racist” individuals down there too and smack them into the 21st century.
February 23rd, 2010 at 6:46 pm
Yikes! V., that teensy-tinesy font in the News of Interest area – especially in pink – is not working for this man of “a certain age”.
February 23rd, 2010 at 8:06 pm
re website changes: when i edit my post, the text goes very faint to be unreadable. is there a setting on my pc to make to prevent that?
February 23rd, 2010 at 10:15 pm
happy: lighter background good for a man of a certain age; not so happy: comment font size not so good for a man of a certain age
RtO
February 23rd, 2010 at 10:21 pm
Me no like. But it’s not my blog. Do whatever you want V. Re. Officers, I think some people have the concern that Officers are stereotyped to be white & therefore representative of the emigration from Oakland to the burbs (presumably to flee African Americans, as you’ve made not of before Ralph). Or alternatively representative of white slave holders(?), take your pick.
But as long as they have a balance from both inside and outside the City & the Cops are well intentioned & perform well, I agree, keep ‘em. If they’re bad, get rid of them. If they can relate to the communities they work in (wherever they’re from) that will only help…
February 23rd, 2010 at 11:06 pm
Gosh, I’m sorry. The whole point of the typography change was to improve readability. I tested on a variety of platforms and browsers, the larger fonts seemed like an improvement in every tested instance. If people really don’t like it, I suppose I can change it back…
February 23rd, 2010 at 11:14 pm
Big fonts works for me especially after a few glasses of Scotch well marinated.
February 23rd, 2010 at 11:42 pm
I think the reason I like the smaller fonts is because I can see more comments & links on the page in one glance, without having to scroll down. But V, its really no big deal. Change is good. It’s already growing on me…
February 23rd, 2010 at 11:45 pm
Yeah, ACLU, elementary school students getting harassed & their parents targeted to be robbed, both by gang members:
http://www.insidebayarea.com/top-stories/ci_14458229
As long as you live in San Francisco it’s easy to say protect gang members because they’re minorities. Well what about the 99% of good kids & parents who are also minorities?
February 24th, 2010 at 12:32 am
Relax, V. The redesign is beautiful, and yes, much more readable. I love it! Don’t change a thing.
February 24th, 2010 at 8:07 am
h8 new design! h8! h8! h8!
February 24th, 2010 at 1:08 pm
I guess this is for V. Maybe there is a specific thread for this topic: local script.
Briefly, jobs, housing and quality of life are are related issues and are usually addressed in terms of money and legislative efforts. Rules, laws, ordinances get introduced, batted around, and in turn, money goes in and money goes out.
i think the issues are ultimately about where the money ends up. Does it circulate in the population where it is intended to provide benefit or is it funneled out of the city?
It does really boil down to that, and not just in Oakland. There are measures being implemented all over the country to keep money circulating locally. I think the real obstacle to something like this working in Oakland, where it does seem the problem is very prevalent, is the sheer denial of the fact that there is a shadow economy in Oakland, perhaps as large as the pie we are always fighting about.
So, really…how much of the budgeted money actually ends up going to legacy costs for existing bureacrats, and other than Oakland entities, and how much is kept in circulation? I think that is the real issue.
In Oakland, it seems fairly obvious that there must be a flourishing underground “cash” economy. To prove it and repair this situation does require something of a big brother approach.
Maybe, to offset these budgetary constraints, a new interpretation of the pie should be considered. Instead of just granting concessions to Unions the old-fashioned way, a portion of every person’s pay should be limited to a percentage, a percentage automatically alloted to every unemployed/valid resident of the county or city. Unlike food stamps, or EBT cards, or other networked “cash” cows, a local monitoring system would insure that money distributed for basic food stuffs and other amenities is spent in the intended fashion.
Two phenomenon occur simultaneously with such limited controls. One, the actual percentage of money going out of Oakland entirely is subject to strict limitations at every level of purchasing power, and two, the invisible “cash” can no longer be used to purchase items other than what is approved of or non-essential items.
It is like welfare, again, but with so many people already compromised and the dollar amount always factoring into service levels and staffing levels, there has to be a way to make all the real Oakland residents feel included….right now…and for the forseeable furture…regardless of the economic ups and downs. The perpetual enrichment of a few, on the backs of the many, is still the existing paradigm.
Drastic times call for drastic measures. If we can’t manage the budget now with the present government, what are the chances we will reach a balance with the ever increasing and anticipated population growth.
It does undermine all the existing labor agreements but historically, these institutions have never gotten to the core of the problem, the invisible, “cash” network that underlies every metropolitan hub.
Without a way to dissect this cancer fed by money, drugs, gambling…and all the associated crimes, at the individual consumer level, there is no way to get a handle on the city’s real problem(s).
One little aspect to a system that begins to acknowledge and quantify this is that it would immediately illustrate how very little actually ends up circulating within the city. Aren’t we entitled to know this?
It’s not a perfect idea, but it’s a start.
February 24th, 2010 at 1:49 pm
Am I the only person excited about the possibility of a stadium built for 2 in Oakland? Football travel is a booming industry. Anyone ever notice how many people come to town for a 49′ers game. A sig. number lodge on the penisula. A stadium built for 2 could possibly transfer the demand from peninsula to oakland and could stimulate the economy. If Dellums and team can pull this off, I may give him credit for laying a partial foundation.
February 24th, 2010 at 2:11 pm
Propaganda from Ken:
Are you a Citibank customer? Read this.
Get your money out of Citigroup/Citibank today. Get angry. And do it now.
http://digitaljournal.com/article/287902
Same goes for BofA, Wells, Chase.
These banks aren’t lending to small businesses. They are raising fees on you. They’re saving themselves by feeding off us.
Don’t be dumb and fly a plane into a building. Starve the Wall Street vultures who are taking your taxmoney to cover their stupid mistakes and pay for $20 Billion in bonuses for 2009 “performance” by closing your account. Much more effective.
Not every vote is counted, but every dollar is, and usually more times than once.
Bank on Oakland for real with a local bank or local credit union!
End of rant.
Ken
February 24th, 2010 at 2:13 pm
new design is even more strawberry yogurty, but hard to decipher. slower to load. eh, i guess i’ll get accustomed.
Ralph thanks for your common sense comments about police.
February 24th, 2010 at 2:16 pm
V, font too small. please add buttons to the page for +/- or just increase a couple points? please (:
February 24th, 2010 at 3:00 pm
KenO, try +, to make everything bigger (ctrl + plus keys) or – to make things smaller. There is also a plus scroll wheel if you have a wheeled mouse. (In IE, other browsers most likely have something similar.)
February 25th, 2010 at 10:23 am
LG, is it too late to get my free lunch?
And if Oakland has a revenue problem, why don’t they start charging people for 911 service like Tracy?
February 25th, 2010 at 11:18 am
Here’s a new one…
Why does the downtown ACTransit office have a huge private parking lot for its workers?
February 25th, 2010 at 1:24 pm
They don’t, Matt. Their parking lot is tiny, especially compared to other high-rise office buildings downtown. The goal of bus improvements is not to force everyone into a bus, as some BRT opponents appear to assume.
February 25th, 2010 at 1:39 pm
BTW, V—the new layout is still not working on Firefox 3 on Windows XP. Headings show up as random character streams. Other wonkiness with names of commenters, too, such that only 3-4 comments fit on a page because the names are so big (though the text of the comment is sized normally, oddly enough).
On the upside, I am probably not supposed to be reading ABO at work anyway….
February 25th, 2010 at 1:46 pm
Ommmmmmmm mani padmi Ommmmmmmmmm!!!!!
Ommmmmmmm transitaxi ooooooooooommmmmmm!!!!!
Get on the bus, or do not. All is lost either way.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRPJh-LJq1o
February 25th, 2010 at 2:58 pm
Only slightly related to public transit post.
War Socialism.
check out this fun presentation
http://dieoff.org/c1.html
February 25th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
That’s it for Sears. For years I recommended them as a local employer good value for appliances and tools, but heck instead of opening their clothing office in those unused floors of their building here, they’re renting in sf.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/bottomline/detail?entry_id=57986&tsp=1
February 25th, 2010 at 6:47 pm
How much substance to the statement in the Perata article http://oaklandlocal.com/article/wheelings-and-dealings-don-perata-short-take-long-subject that Oakland gave a large subsidy to Signature on their estuary development about 8 or so years ago?
And was there an exemption for EIR only for DTO supported by DP?
Amazing what a little competition in the mayoral race seems to uncover info that if true should have been reported by mainstream media years ago.
February 25th, 2010 at 8:33 pm
SB 1925 is the bill that limits environmental review downtown.
The Oak to Ninth development was on land controlled by the Port of Oakland. The original deal was to sell OHP (signature props plus some others) around 60 acres for 30 million dollars, which was to include environmental remediation. The complexities of this are too much to go into here, and the deal is subject to many negotiations. They just stretched out the payments recently, so OHP is only paying 4 million up front (I think). Some of us felt that 500,000 an acre for waterfront land was pretty cheap. Sen. Perata also secured legislation enabling a swap-out of publicly held tidelands to make it possible to build residential on some restricted acreage. This swap was approved at Port Commission last week. I haven’t looked lately, but three or four years ago, the Secretary of State contribution reports showed at least 20,000 from Signature to Perata’s “defense fund.”
February 25th, 2010 at 8:40 pm
I don’t see what the problem is with limiting EIRs in dense urban areas. California’s EIR requirement is unique and in many cases makes growth much much slower than in other states.
I know NYC based developers who moved out here and expected the process to be less insane. Wrong.
As to the unfollowable string of dozens of streams of money: Len, while Bob Gammon and JDAT may pepper their work with a biased tone of voice, they aren’t making up public records, financial disclosures or anything like that. If they were, somebody would have called them out on it.
Look at the comments on Bob’s article in the Express, and you’ll see the people who attack the piece don’t ever dispute points of fact. It’s all ad hominem, or accusing Bob of witchhunting. But no rebuttals on his sourced facts. Not one.
February 25th, 2010 at 10:55 pm
One reason the web is wonderful thing. If you like delving into this sort of thing:
http://cal-access.ss.ca.gov/
Just as an aside: Oakland’s own veteran archives expert, League of Women Voters stalwart, and Cleveland Cascade heroine Barbara Newcombe wrote the seminal work on public access to government records for the Center of Investigative Reporting: Paper Trails, (before the web!).
http://www.centerforinvestigativereporting.org/articles/papertrailsaguidetopublicrecordsincalifornia2nded
February 26th, 2010 at 2:06 pm
I’ve generally supported Kaplan and thought she’s been doing a good job, but I dunno, I found this report from the Bay Area Reporter (http://www.ebar.com/news/article.php?sec=news&article=4586) to be just a little odd . . .
“Oakland LGBT commissioners wanted
In the meantime Kaplan is looking for qualified LGBT people to serve on two public oversight committees. As Oakland’s rep on the Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority, Kaplan can appoint two people to serve on the body’s citizen advisory committee. Those positions recently came up for renewal, and Kaplan is asking interested applicants to contact her office by March 15.
Kaplan is also looking for LGBT people interested in serving on the Paramount Theatre’s board now that Dellums’s slate of four nominees to that governing body has been put on hold.”
Is Kaplan saying that she’s only going to appoint LGBT people to Alameda County Transportation Improvement Authority’s citizen advisory committee? What relevance does sexual orientation have to transportation?
I’m guessing she doesn’t have a litmus test, that would just be extremely silly, but that’s the way it comes across as reported. Kaplan should really make sure her positions & requests are accurately reported.
February 26th, 2010 at 2:32 pm
Brad,
Kaplan doesn’t have the power to appoint anybody, she only has a vote in some of their confirmations.
The relevance here is that the LGBT community in Oakland is among the largest per capita in the nation. The Lesbian population is the highest pre capita in any large city in the US, possibly in the world.
However, the LGBT community is very underrepresented on volunteer boards in this city. There’s no litmus test, but it makes sense to seek talent from this community.
Michael Lighty, our newest port commissioner, is an example of seeking remarkable talent from the gay community and having that talent apply for a high ranking commission seat.
I believe that the local Rainbow Chamber of Commerce and the LGBT Roundtable are working this issue, as are other members of the community. But no, no litmus test, just a talent search within a particular community.
February 26th, 2010 at 4:18 pm
Brad,
If the LGBT were the only qualification she were seeking, I, too, would find it a bit odd. But the sentence you did not reference re the Paramount Board included having particular skill set. A diverse board for the sake of diversity is stupid and it looks like every effort is being made to identify people who have skills that would be beneficial to the board. I hope that they can find some rich sugar mommas and daddys who can start a capital campaign and truly make the Paramount self sufficient.
To follow up with what Max said. Ms. Kaplan can only identify. I believe the PT Board actually comes up with the slate, the Mayor more or less signs off and council approve. (Thus, no one can really fault Cottontop for submitting LH to council. This process has been in place for some time and he probably just went with the flow.)
February 26th, 2010 at 5:57 pm
Unrelatd to anything except budget worries, the laugh i needed…
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/u_s_economy_grinds_to_halt_as
February 27th, 2010 at 1:28 am
For David:
‘if we somehow manage to solve every other env. problem except population growth, we will have solved nothing for all.’ -jared diamond
http://www.thesamosa.co.uk/index.php/comment-and-analysis/society/257-populated-with-ignorance.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
China has contributed more to solving “climate change” than any other country, with its 1 child policy. (Tho emotinally, I would have preferred 2 child policy.) They estimate they have 400M fewer people due to that policy. Which, of course, worked better or worse in different areas. On the whole though, it probably helped.
If every California couple has octuplets, how long would it take before all Californians were starving? Soon I’d say! It’s selfish to have more than 2-3 kids. In a psychopath CEO kind of way.
Similarly, if we are subsidizing housing for people (ie, OHA or BMR housing) that leaves more money for folks to pop out more kids… which sets us up for a bigger fall off a taller cliff later.
Bad, bad, bad. Even more reason to love our LGBT community. Is it coincidence there are more LGBT people in crowded, dense cities?
Ken
March 2nd, 2010 at 11:17 pm
becks, what were the bad financial results of the golden handcuffs that at least two councilmembers, Q and B, had pushed. Seemed worth trying to me at the time. Did too many employees sign up?
March 3rd, 2010 at 1:32 am
Job creation: Oakland, sfbay, cali, US could stop killing their local economies and jobs if they wanted to.
1. cancel nafta “free trade” which offshores our jobs faster and faster to Asia.
2. immediately slap huge tarrifs on all imported manufactured goods (shoes, clothes, equipment made in china, mexico, beef and broccoli from brazil and china, etc) everything would start being made here.
details here: http://emsnews.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/ibmll-be-seeing-you-all-later-tech-offshoringfiring-us-workers-accelerates/
this would create local jobs, instead of increasing brain drain, money drain, job drain and essentially, local slavery.
March 3rd, 2010 at 3:02 pm
Budget: Is the CC finally getting the message?:
Oakland council president says elected leaders must cut budgets by 15 percent
By Kelly Rayburn
Oakland Tribune
Posted: 03/03/2010 01:17:24 PM PST
Updated: 03/03/2010 01:17:24 PM PST
OAKLAND — City Council President Jane Brunner said Tuesday night all of Oakland’s elected leaders should prepare to cut their office budgets by 15 percent within two weeks.
Her remarks came just before the council shed roughly 40 jobs — about half of them filled — from its payroll as the city struggled with deficits in funds for transportation-related projects and economic development.
“I think we all need to suffer together,” Brunner said.
Cuts of 15 percent to elected officials’ offices would be relatively minor from a budgetary standpoint, as offices for the mayor, the City Council, the city attorney and the city auditor make up about 4 percent of the city’s $420 million general fund budget.
Still, such cuts would be symbolically important because critics of the city’s spending habits both inside and outside City Hall often zero in on the way elected politicians are spending tax dollars.
The council’s next meeting is scheduled for 5:30 p.m. March 16.
“We have been discussing this year’s budget for months,” Brunner said. “We cannot wait until the end of June to make all the cuts we need to finish this year’s budget and go into next year. We need to move as fast as possible.”
March 3rd, 2010 at 5:06 pm
LG,
That’s purely symbolic. She just wanted to get in the paper as an advocate for fiscal responsibility. If those cuts happen, they’ll have minimal effect. But they will give her the ability to take credit for demanding accountability among politicians.
There have been extensive cuts already proposed to council staff, along with extensive cuts to the city attorney’s staff. Those cuts were postponed at the council meeting 2 weeks ago. It is totally unclear if the 15% Brunner demanded includes those cuts or if her 15% is in addition.
So depending on what it means, she either proposed something that’s already on it’s way to happening, or something that unfairly targets certain councilmembers and the city attorney’s office for extra cuts on top of what they’re already about to lose.
I think more than anything she was looking for attention. It was a boring meeting, she had the opportunity to take the floor at any time and go on a rant, because she’s the chair of the meeting. She timed her talk tactically to happen at the end of a depressing vote that laid off a bunch of people and that also pissed off the Union (Local 21).
Theater. Nothing but. Again, even if she gets it to happen, it’s effect will be barely noticeable in terms of the overall deficit.
What they’re really going to do about the deficit is move debt around again and pray their revenues don’t drop any more, even though they will. Property owners are appealing their tax assessments in droves. And they’re all winning.
DOOM DOOM DOOM!!!
March 3rd, 2010 at 5:32 pm
I think the city should cut work hours across the board, say to a 30- or 32-hour week, rather than decimating key departments and leaving upper management relatively unscathed. How about just shutting all office operations on Friday afternoons, or all day Friday, instead of having these random furlough days that the public cannot keep track of? Employees would get a three-day weekend so at least there would be some benefit in exchange for pay cuts. Granted, the unions might be unhappy, and there would have to be some negotiating, but that will be necessary anyway. From the union point of view, they’d be maintaining positions that otherwise would be cut.
I regret the way various groups of employees are being pitted against each other: union v. mgmt, one union v. another, and classification v. classification. It is bound to lead to a demoralized and less-productive workforce. And, it encourages brain drain, in which the most competent people (who can find other employment) leave first. You could end up with a leaner but less productive staff. Cuts across the board are more egalitarian, and while not quite as much of a savings in benefits costs, serve to keep the departments functioning instead of spending all their time a) grousing and b) reorganizing the workload continually. As an employer, I believe that morale counts for a lot; a threatened and traumatized workforce is unlikely to perform well.
A lot of cities in California are taking every second Friday off as furlough days. It isn’t ideal but it does seem to work.
March 3rd, 2010 at 5:44 pm
Naomi,
It’s a city government, not a jobs program. We need to make cuts that are efficient and that generate savings.
Department heads have an interest in keeping their departments working, so deferring to them is exactly the right thing to do.
Actually one of the most ghastly pieces of hypocrisy last night was when Jane Brunner said that in order to be non-political, the best thing to do was to trust the department heads. Prior to saying that, she did the most political thing possible: moved a motion to save Betty Marvin’s job based on political pressure from dozens of speakers, many of them influential folks such as yourself.
Betty is valuable, but she’s also very expensive compared to her subordinates, and generates little direct revenue. Eric Angstadt’s plan to find revenue streams from her work is a decent compromise, but really, part of CEDA’s entire concept is that they’re supposed to self-fund.
Cuts hurt. I’m particularly sad to see the man from the Buildings Department information desk go. He’s charming and very competent. That vote was an incredible downer. But we’re hemorrhaging money. I think it really is best to leave the triage decisions to the people who know the departments and know what they need to keep going.
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:05 pm
The Survey has made possible millions and millions of dollars of tax credits, property improvements, neighborhood improvements, etc. and I won’t go on at length, as too tired. A good many developers and builders want to keep the Survey staffed because it facilitates successful projects and speeds permits and environmental review. Betty’s only “subordinate” is a single part-time intern. I don’t think it makes any sense for Permits to let Memo go, and I don’t understand the decision. I saw how the employees are pitted against each other, and it is really hard to imagine a lot of work getting done in departments that are plunged into turmoil and acrimony. Cutting hours is one way to keep people productive and more efficient, not less. Ask the city of El Cerrito, offices shut every other Friday. It isn’t ideal, but it is easy to figure out.
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:32 pm
Deferring to departments might seem like the right thing to do but in reality is has not been the best process. Was it not just 2 weeks ago that one department head submitted all Planner IVs for execution.
As a city, I would think we have an on-going mission to ensure our future growth, not just close the current budget gap. The Department assumed his only mission was close the gap. And as we all know planting the seeds for future growth does not smart tomorrow.
City government, heck all governments, are businesses; all businesses strive to remain in business and be profitable. You do not stay in business if you cut the people who are core to your growth.
I would love to see the city eliminate non-core positions and “the unfilled” positions, trim current working hours for others, and renegotiate the pensions. But it has been my general experience what I want and the city does are vastly different.
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:36 pm
LG, are free hoagies still available. I’d even consider writing a Yelp review.
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:38 pm
I’m sure there are a host of reasons to keep Betty on. But at the same time, what reason do we have to think Eric Angstadt didn’t assemble his pink slip list in good faith, in order to preserve function as best as he can?
The only duplicitous motive I can come up with for him putting Betty on the chopping block would be that he knew damn well she would be protected, but he also knew protecting her would be a great excuse to start charging for her consulting time and for mill act contracts and the like.
If it was a trick, good for him! I don’t think it was, but based on what I’ve heard about other cities preservation staff, we charge nothing for services that would bill the user significantly in other cities. Getting the council to mandate more revenue from that office is very smart.
March 3rd, 2010 at 6:44 pm
I think Betty Marvin is great and good for saving her hide. However, many “good” people have lost jobs in private industry over the last 10 years in fact. Businesses have been downsizing and cutting employees for years to enhance their bottom line as well as competitiveness in the face of a world economy.Life is not fair, not for the under served residents of Oakland nor the many City employees who will be walking the streets next year.
March 3rd, 2010 at 9:08 pm
You are right: “life is not fair” is just what is always on my mind these days. But as someone said to me yesterday, “Well we’ve been promised a four-day week since before we were born. Maybe now’s the time to finally try it!”
I’m not sure which article it wasin which I read the explanation yesterday that in some ways, our increased productivity results in an economy that does still manufacture and produce, but employs a lot less person-hours to do it, and that’s why employment is so lagging. If that’s true, a four-day workweek would indeed spread the employment around and perhaps we would learn to do a few other things with our time as well as work. Compared to many countries, US people who have jobs work more hours and take fewer vacations. It may be that we should be rethinking this.
March 3rd, 2010 at 10:30 pm
So why not just keep staff on, and everybody take an even cut? The unions are just saying “no” to everything, even though they know there’s no other choice. So what’s their plan? At least if they accept an even salary/benefits cut, their members will be able to keep their jobs.
Are the Unions interested in representing their members AND do what’s right for the City? Or just yelling and calling the City & Taxpayers names? (As if it was our fault the economy tanked).
March 3rd, 2010 at 10:43 pm
Naomi, And what kind of services do we get during these service outages? You’re asking for MORE furloughs? Under your proposals Libraries, Parks & Rec, etc. will be closed how many days a week?
What happens if that isn’t enough? Then cancel Thursday too? Woops there goes Wednesday…What alternate reality is this?
March 3rd, 2010 at 11:34 pm
Hi, LG: Well, I said “office” operations, because I agree with you that it would not work for departments that operate a 7day schedule. For some years now I have been fairly active in trying to have libraries open 6-7 days, and I don’t approve of less. But as to the office-visit types of services–the stuff at City Hall and 250 Frank Ogawa–already now with intermittent furlough days folks are often nonplussed when Building Permits or some such is closed. The days selected are somewhat random (due to union negotiations? I don’t know why). It might be more predictable to be closed on the same day of the week every time. Many cities have started taking every other Friday off. (And then there’s our hapless closed-on-Friday State govt as well). It is pretty hard to cut hourly pay. It is also difficult to cut back hours, but then you are not demanding that people work for less per hour. I can see some benefits to doing it that way.
I accept there may be some layoffs. But we and the unions too should be open to varied methods of accomplishing cutbacks. The people being laid off or whose salaries or benefits or hours are cut back are our neighbors and colleagues and do deserve respect, and still we want the city to function. To see the unions and workers pitted against each other AND against management is really depressing.
March 4th, 2010 at 12:00 am
LG. I don’t think the current method of laying off people just to meet a fiscal objective is a smart approach. I don’t think furloughs are a good solution, but hte unions stand in the way of real change and department heads take the easy way out.
This whole idea that seniority trumps need is the worst union practice ever. It ignores actual business need to save your buddy. Businesses don’t survive because managers saved either a bunch of long-term punks or dismissed all the highest paid employees to protect the bottom line. You stay in business because you have a workforce which addresses your needs.
The union is a barrier to progress as their sole purpose is to protect jobs. But I do appreciate the union attending council meetings objecting to everything proposed and asking to be involved. I bet everybody in the profit sector wishes they had the chance to plead their case before getting the ax. We need to do some union busting. Heads need to roll. And management is a ballless wonder. When someone on either side finally understands how to run a business, then and only then will we see real change.
Absent that, it almost seems that the best way is to just furlough people.
March 4th, 2010 at 8:20 am
lg, i have sympathy for the employees but none for the union leadership. Over the last decade they negotiated contracts with our Mayors and the CC, with retirement benefits that would have created large deficits even if the real estate bubble had continued a few more years.
In effect the union leadership negotiated a great package for their members at the time, but sold out younger and future members.
The tragi-comic part of all this, is that Jerry Brown sailed out of terms as Oakland mayor with a reputation as “tough Mayor” or some such nonsense even though much of our fiscal and police problems was created on his watch .
March 4th, 2010 at 9:01 am
I agree with you Len. It seems that the employees would need to take control of their unions in order to have any fresh ideas, and in order to avoid pitting more senior against less senior employees, one classification against the next. It is made more complicated because there is not one union; there are a number of them, and they may not all take the same approach. But it’s also true that managers don’t usually cut back on managerial staff. He who draws up the budget always has a safe job. I hope someone is looking at upper administrative jobs, and making sure they are needed. Those are big salaries; one of those might fund two or three less glorious but perhaps more effective staffers.
March 4th, 2010 at 12:15 pm
Naomi, case in point is the older Hispanic guy Max said was laid off. He can’t have been highly paid, but made it his job as front desk gatekeeper to greatly help newbie contractors and home owners navigate the byzantine zoning and building permit process.
Since dept heads and CC members will muck up the layoff process to feather their nests,we should get the power to the voters to use IRV to make the cuts.
March 4th, 2010 at 12:29 pm
The city needs to determine what programs it needs to have and how large those programs need to be, and then staff accordingly. Across the board cuts or furloughs are nothing but a way for the cc to avoid making hard decisions about what is important. Furloughs are particularly bad because they presuppose that this is a temporary situation, and those workers can go back to full time employment sometime in the foreseeable future. That just isn’t the case in Oakland. If the unions what to spread the pain, then maybe the union should collect 20% of the salaries from the remaining workers and distribute it to the ones who were laid off.
Layoffs do not need to only focus on the lower level employees, and that is not how large organizations do it. When they need to lay off people, they make the cuts at all levels.
In Oakland things are going to be complicated by having most of the managers, except at the very top, also be union members.
March 4th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
Just wanted to say thanks today for an Oakland parking officer in Glenview. I will not name her because I hope she would not get in trouble. I had bought a parking slip and stuck it in corner of my car dash but left an old one in middle of dash. I saw that I had received a ticket, despite paying for the time, and approached the meter person. At first she told me to contest it but then I showed her the current parking slip stuffed on the corner of the dash. She took the ticket back from me with the proof that I had paid for the time. She couldn’t have been nicer. She has a very tough job.
March 5th, 2010 at 2:23 pm
oh what a beautiful day it is in oak land.
i was going to paste in a bunch of info from other California cities about how they are handling their big budget cuts and how big they are but Mr. blog engine told me it looked “spammy.”
time for a beer! our city will become one of beer, bikes and boats, not one of guns, drugs and gangs. (in my dreams)
here’s to a better, union-free tomorrow.
have a great weekend everyone.
March 5th, 2010 at 2:46 pm
FYI. Thanks for your response on this Pat K:
Posted by: “Kernighan, Pat” Thu Mar 4, 2010 1:09 pm (PST)
Folks: Oakland’s Director of Information Technology, Ken Gordon, says
that Oakland will be submitting an application for the Google pilot
program before the deadline, March 23.
Pat Kernighan
City Councilmember,District 2
1 Frank Ogawa Plaza, 2d Floor
Oakland, CA 94612
510-238-7002
pkernighan@oaklandnet.com
http://www.patkernighan.com
Subject: [PSA3] Google Inc. asking for cities’ interest in a fiber optic
pilot project
Your new ISP? Google launches 1Gbps fiber-to-the-home trial
By Nate Anderson
People have wondered for years what Google might be up to with all that
dark fiber it had bought up around the country. Now, we may have an
answer: delivery of open-access, fiber-to-the-home Internet service at
speeds of 1Gbps. That’s right: 1Gbps.
Google has just announced
a trial run
of its new scheme, and it’s asking city, county, or state officials to
let it know if they’re interested in a pilot project. In its initial
phase, the fiber optic network will serve anywhere from 50,000 to
500,000 people.
As for the speeds, they make cable’s DOCSIS 3.0 and Verizon’s FiOS look
like also-rans. Google promises 1Gbps home connections, which have
previously been the province of boutique builders like Paxio in San
Francisco.
The goal is to use the system as a high-speed testbed for next
generation apps and deployment techniques. “We want to see what
developers and users can do with ultra high-speeds, whether it’s
creating new bandwidth-intensive ‘killer apps’ and services, or other
uses we can’t yet imagine,” said Google’s announcement. “We’ll test new
ways to build fiber networks; to help inform, and support deployments
elsewhere, we’ll share key lessons learned with the world.”
Perhaps the best part of the announcement was the “open access” bit.
Other countries like the UK (through OpenReach) and Australia are
working on fiber networks that will be maintained by one entity, but
open to all ISPs. “We’ll operate an ‘open access’ network,” said Google,
“giving users the choice of multiple service providers. And consistent
with our past advocacy, we’ll manage our network in an open,
nondiscriminatory, and transparent way.”
It’s hard to know how far the company plans to take this. Running a
national fiber backbone is one thing; getting out in the streets,
digging trenches, and wiring homes is another. As Verizon’s FiOS project
has shown, stringing fiber to the home can be hugely expensive.
Google stresses that this is an experiment, and it may simply be used as
a proof-of-concept and a data-gathering project. Still, it can’t help
but put at least mild pressure on other ISPs. Once people recognize that
1Gbps are available in the real world today at a “competitive price”
(Google’s words), they’re going to take a look at their own speed/price
tier and start asking some hard questions.
Sascha Meinrath of the New America Foundation praised the plan, and said
that Google’s actions showed the soon-to-be-released National Broadband
Plan needs to think big.
“The Recovery Act committed $7.2 billion in broadband investment
defining high-speed access at most 5Mbps, while Australia is investing
$31 billion in an 100Mbps effort. When you break it down per capita,
Australia is outspending the US 60 to 1. Google is sending a shot across
the bow-we need to set far higher standards here in the United States.
Our national broadband plan must take this into account and our
leadership needs to stop shying away from the challenge.”
March 6th, 2010 at 9:12 pm
RK is considering running for Mayor? Ah, finally the race might get interesting…
March 6th, 2010 at 10:18 pm
LG, I’ve been reading the articles about RK as they are released and all I can say is political backers are a funny people. I am willing to bet dollar to donuts that GP supported BO because he was the future and while he readily admits that RK is Oakland’s future, he would be content to support Cottontop, Oakland’s own Marion Barry, sans the crack and ho problem. Yet another thinks RK lacks the experience yet that backer probably supported BO. At least in the latter’s defense, I can say BO has proven without a shadow of a doubt that political neophytes have no business in the executive office.
All that being said, if she campaigns on fiscal responsibility with a promise to place before the voters a measure to repeal the more onerous measures that the dimwits of Oakland said yes to, renegotiate with the unions on pay, retirement benefits, and who can be laid off, commitment to economic growth, market housing, and bringing more corporate offices to downtown Oakland, I could support her. She certainly can’t be worst than our current ballsless wonder. Of course, I said the same thing about GWB, and now, I am stuck with a joker trying to pass healthcare when 10% of the population is jobless.
As for the unions, I would like to see younger and new employers go to a thrift savings plan like the Fed, the older workers with x number of years can either keep their pension plans or opt to switch over. Layoffs should be determine by need not seniority.
March 6th, 2010 at 10:57 pm
I am sorry but unless RK gets a makeover or decides she doesn’t want to look like John Russo, I cannot support her for Mayor. It’s just too weird for me and she is otherwise a well intentioned person I am sure. Please give us Oaklanders a break!
March 6th, 2010 at 11:12 pm
Ralph, I’m willing to accept the funds, if she (or anybody) can get the City employee’s unions to get real, present realistic alternatives to just more property taxes for the middle class, focus on the middle class (not just rich vs. poor) & get businesses of all sorts downtown (as you say) AND industrial areas that employ not just white collar but also blue collar.
As Batts said, Safety comes first. I wouldn’t be surprised if he runs in a few years…
BIO, “It’s just to weird” is not a reason to oppose anybody. Give some specifics please.
March 7th, 2010 at 12:44 am
RK has played the hilary clinton as new senator game by keeping a low profile on everything except her niche interests (ok, maybe that’s my prejudice, calling green oaksterdam mass transit stuff a niche interest when the city finances are in a tailspin).
silght problem is that we contributed money and sweat to her campaign in the (dare i use the word) hope she would shake things up, not play it safe for her to run for higher office.
odd how she and don p both owe labor unions big time for election support. don has somewhat offsetting real estate developer support (though they seem to join with construction unions on large development issues), rk has lgbt help to offset some of the unions golden handcuffs.
i just don’t see either of them telling the municipal unions to take a flying leap, but since rk considers herself a progressive (don p probably once did too) she’d more likely to try higher parcel taxes to avoid decimating oakland’s social services and union muni employment.
it wb nice for rk to let her supporters know where she stands on fixing oakland financial disaster.
March 7th, 2010 at 8:29 am
Len,
You’re forgetting that she passed ballot measures which balanced our city budget last year, and which created dedicated revenue streams for programs people love.
Not one of those measures was a parcel tax. All of them passed with ease, and Kaplan is personally responsible for them passing.
She’s also one of two councilmembers who voted against the reckless way in which the council is trying to “fix” this year’s budget.
On the flipside, Jean Quan was head of the Budget and Finance Committee during a period when Oakland had more revenue than it had ever seen before and more revenue than it will likely see for at least another decade. What did she do? She spent it all. She saved nothing. And even that wasn’t enough: She also spent our reserve funds. During a boom.
So by comparison, yeah, I think Kaplan’s shaking things up. And I think I have a pretty good idea of where she stands in comparison on fiscal responsibility.
March 7th, 2010 at 8:38 am
Max, more details on your first paragraph, please.
March 7th, 2010 at 9:11 am
Len:
The Ballot Measures weren’t all written by Kaplan, but if you’ll remember, she lead the campaign once they were decided upon by the full council. She had very direct input into the writing of all of the measures, and wrote at least one of them herself.
One ballot measure was a hotel tax, which creates a dedicated revenue stream for Chabot and the Zoo, and the city’s arts programs. By finding a source outside of the general fund, these programs become far more sustainable.
Another measure rolled back the idiotic Measure OO. I think it should have killed OO all together, but that wouldn’t have passed. Sometimes you have to go with what you can get.
A third measure clarified the city’s transfer tax policy to close a loophole used almost entirely by large corporations to avoid paying any tax.
And the fourth upped taxes on Marijuana businesses by more than 15 fold, with the enthusiastic support of these businesses.
Kaplan was instrumental in getting all of these measures passed with a large mandate. The ability to evangelize is a huge part of leadership, as is the ability to recognize what can be won. As they say, politics is the art of the possible, and I think Rebecca is extraordinarily pragmatic in a field which can be extraordinarily dogmatic.
March 7th, 2010 at 9:11 am
I agree with len, RK has kept a very low profile, and I really don’t have a clue as to where she would stand on any major issue in Oakland, including meaningful budget balancing.
March 7th, 2010 at 9:27 am
It’s always interesting (and almost always surprising) to me to see what kind of perceptions people who don’t follow the day to day of the City Council have of its members.
For example, the idea of Rebecca Kaplan has focused only on “niche” issues or “played it safe” during her just over a year in office is totally bizarre to me. Just off the top of my head – she jumped head first into three long-standing hugely controversial issues – addressing foreclosed buildings, condo conversions, and billboards. In two of those three cases, she was successful in pushing through a way to reduce existing blight in our neighborhoods while also generating revenue for the City’s coffers. On condo conversions, her proposal could have brought in a couple million dollars, which would of course go a long way towards preventing service cuts, but sadly the rest of the Council was just too hung up on their battles from ten years ago to do anything about it.
But what I appreciate most about Kaplan is her attention to detail and sense of pragmatism. The Council, in general, doesn’t seem to have much stomach for the nitty-gritty of either budgeting or policymaking, which I find depressing. So their output is often un- or counter-productive relative to the goals they say want to achieve.
While the rest of the Council was totally out to lunch on the downtown rezoning and then sat around complaining building heights and Beijing in the 1970s and about how they couldn’t read maps when it came to them, Kaplan was attentive throughout the whole process made sure that we took out burdensome and expensive barriers to opening businesses downtown. That would just not have happened without her. Try talking to another Councilmember about how there are too many CUPs, you’ll get, like, a blank stare. Other measures to help business that come to mind include her work on cabaret reform and efforts to allow for online permit applications.
Another one that comes to mind is the City’s ongoing efforts regarding performance measurement. The Council keeps saying they want to institute a real performance measurement system for City departments, but of course none of them have the faintest idea what that actually means. They came up with this brain-dead list of like every ridiculous and random metric that popped into their heads and wanted all the departments to report on them once a month. Rebecca was like “So, what is the point of this? What will happen with this information? How is it going to improve service delivery? And how can you possibly say that adding all this work isn’t going to take any time or money” And the rest of the Council is just like “Oh, gosh. I never thought of that. That’s a good point. What is this going to do?” Thankfully, because of Kaplan, they did not pass that version and now will hopefully actually end up getting a real performance measurement system.
Certainly, during the budget hearings over the last year, she’s been more realistic and more responsible about how we need to move forward than any of her colleagues. They sit there talking about program cuts, she talks about looking for efficiency. They keep acting like this deficit is a temporary thing, she keeps reminding them that our two and three year projections are actually worse, and that we need to plan for long-term spending reductions rather than pretending cuts are just temporary. When it comes to fiscally responsibility, I trust her far more than any of her colleagues.
Kaplan doesn’t make a big show out of the work she does, it’s true. But I’ll take governance over grandstanding any day of the week.
March 7th, 2010 at 9:44 am
Oh, and speaking of where various candidates stand on the issues. Well, we know where Jean Quan stands, I suppose, based on her tenure on the Council. With respect to the budget, she chaired the Finance Committee during the greatest period of boom revenues Oakland is likely to see for I can’t even imagine how long. And not only did she not manage to save any money for when things got worse – she actually couldn’t even live within the boom means and had to go spend the entire reserve we had previously built up. As far as I’m concerned, Quan has already done more than enough damage to Oakland’s finances. And her campaign literature is all about how we need more social services.
Perata, on the other hand – well, it’s not like the State is doing so great either. I, of course, realize that there are many barriers to effective work in the State legislature and that it’s not fair to place all the blame for California’s meltdown on the Senate’s leadership. But when it comes to Oakland, I can’t seem to get a single concrete idea from the guy. Every event I’ve seen him at, he tells the same boring story about how he got a pothole fixed or something in front of Adesso, and that’s it. One time he tried to tell me how Oakland needed to spend more money on youth programs. When you try to get specifics out of him, there’s like, nothing there. All I know about his positions from his literature is that he’s against cancer. Great, dude. What’s next? Do he also hate gangs? And the KKK? Dude, you’re going to have to give me a little more than that.
March 7th, 2010 at 10:16 am
In terms of a track record of participation in this city’s life, either Jean or Rebecca is head and shoulders above Perata. And neither of them is beholden to the state prison guard’s union, which I would say is a big plus. I do see a potential war between the unions, in which each candidate lines up a different group of unions, and that could be pretty silly. But I’m optimistic that this could be the year that proves that Larry Tramutola is not the only path to campaign success. On neighborhood issues, I think Jean has the deepest background. I appreciate her local focus. I’m still not certain about Rebecca’s priorities, and her relatively short tenure on the city council means we don’t have that long a record to look at. On the other hand, Jean’s long record means you will find a lot of both good and bad to scrutinize. At any rate, I hope we can get a woman in the mayor’s seat, and about time.
March 7th, 2010 at 10:52 am
RK is a bit more fiscally responsible than some of the other women on council. I thought she could have taken a stronger position on OO but maybe she knew that cottontop would be incapable of making a decision. (i wonder how he gets dressed in the morning.)
Frankly, if she could lay out a vision (which we all know DP hasn’t and propably won’t), set some goals and define a mission for the city (and while that may not be the task of a council member, the 1st person who can step in and fill an obvious void merits serious consideration), write policy that is consistent with those goals, and communicate with the citizens in a more substantive way (i love the events happening in my district and in the city emails but sometimes you want to hear about the real issues), i could be convinced of her potential.
Naomi, “At any rate, I hope we can get a woman in the mayor’s seat, and about time.” What happened to being the best qualified candidate. That being said, I’d be ok with a woman who can govern from the head and not the heart. JQ is all about the heart, which sadly results in decisions that are not fiscally responsible.
March 7th, 2010 at 7:36 pm
Ralph, please stop calling our mayor the c word because i might slip and use that term myself.
re RK, the hotel tax prop was a good deed; the forclosure rule was an improvement except for the signage requirement which was surprising counterproductive, and the condo proposal seemed reasonable if a bit special interest. You know what i think about OO and nothing that’s happened since has shown me that it was “responsible” to tweak Kids First measure so that it was just merely dangerous instead of
catastrophic. to this day, i can’t figure out if rk really believes in Kids First and wanted to save it, or was just being pragmatic.
interesting that someone like myself who follows cc about an infinite order of magnitude more than the average oakland resident (which is o), but nowhere as much as some here, only associated the marijuana tax with rk.
she needs to some grandstanding.
-len raphael
temescal
March 7th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
I agree with V about Perata. What are some of his ideas for Oakland? He hasn’t given anybody a reason to vote for him. Maybe he’s planning on sharing info during the campaign.
JQ & RK will start off talking about what they’ve already been doing here. But they better get into both the vision thing, and some details on implementation. This means going beyond Social Justice & Rich vs. Poor. (Does anybody care about the Middle Class, or even know we exist?).
How do they plan to address Safety, growing jobs & businesses (both), growing the Middle Class & tax base (organically and externally), while paying for it all (cost & efficiency of Government)?
There are other important issues that greatly tie into these, but the candidates should be able to address all these issues. Anybody who can’t (or doesn’t want to) isn’t ready to be Mayor.
We need a plan, stan…
March 7th, 2010 at 10:05 pm
The decision to up spending during the boom times was a collective one – residents wanted more programs, the Mayor and City Council wanted to say yes.
If anyone has learned anything from the financial crisis, it is the importance of building and maintaining reserves so that we can make it thru the next economic downturn. I am not sure how much the Council/Mayor have learned this lesson, so it is important that all of us who care about Oakland to raise it again and again.
March 7th, 2010 at 10:50 pm
Well, I wouldn’t expect to see a platform from Kaplan until she actually decides whether or not she’s going to run, but if you want to hear her ideas about job creation, she talks about that fairly frequently. In fact, she’ll be addressing that exact issue at this month’s Mix It Up East Bay. 6-9 PM on Thursday at Shashamane Bar and Grill (2507 Broadway). Speakers usually talk at 7.
March 8th, 2010 at 9:02 am
What’s bothered some of us about Kaplan is her well known “Open Door” policy for Carlos Plazola and Oakland Builders Alliance. “Carlos doesn’t need an appointment” is the policy, I believe. The plot thickens on this because the Ethics Commission has refused to regulate OBA, so undisclosed lobbying is going on with abandon.
There is nothing wrong with development, but those folks, who include the crowd that brought SF its affordability problem. don’t just build, they like to take over City Hall. This concerns me if she wants to be mayor.
She’s not particularly open about it, either. When I requested records from her, she responded with all the email addresses redacted, even mine. I had to remind her that an email address is not the same as a medical record regarding privacy. But, it took slinging ‘legalese’ back and forth to get unredacted records from her. I’ve gotten better responses from De La Fuente than from her, believe it or not. As a lawyer, she should know better.
March 8th, 2010 at 9:31 am
John, I have had it with your habit of just making up paranoid accusations out of nowhere about everyone and anyone you perceive in your twisted mind to have ever had a civil conversation with anyone involved in the Oakland Builders Alliance.
I have warned you several times before, both online and offline, and I’m warning you again. You need to take your OBA lobbying witch hunt and your paranoid fantasies somewhere else. If you want to fabricate lies about people whose political positions you disagree with, go start your own blog and do it there. That sort of behavior is not welcome here and I am completely out of patience with it. Continue the practice and you will get yourself permanently banned from commenting on this site.
March 8th, 2010 at 10:01 am
V, I know that the windmills in John’s mind can get aggravating, but I think banning him would be overkill. Everybody knows he’s got a grudge against OBA, so it’s not like belaboring the point is going to do any harm. John also has plenty to say about non-OBA related issues.
John,
I don’t know where you got the idea that Carlos “doesn’t need an appointment” to see councilmembers, but I highly doubt that’s accurate. Kaplan, in particular, is busy as hell, so it’s a pretty funny idea that anybody could just come tromping into her office unannounced and expect an audience.
Rebecca is known for having positive and engaging relationships with groups that are often in conflict with each other. She also appears to be one of the few councilmembers who’s been able to develop a strong working relationship with our absentee mayor. Everybody else resents him. She somehow found a way to reach him.
A huge part of the reason I’m interested in seeing her get into the race is the fact that she doesn’t have any ongoing blood-feuds with any of her peers. In a city full of leaders who’ve held office for decades and who’ve become entrenched in one camp or another, Kaplan’s ability to remain objective and distance herself from petty squabbling is truly refreshing.
March 8th, 2010 at 10:04 am
I don’t think it’s overkill at all. If John has worthwhile things to say about other topics, and wants to say them here, then he can stop making up lies about people and repeating them as though they are fact. I will not allow my blog to be used as a platform for slander, and John has been warned about this exact problem at least a dozen times.
March 8th, 2010 at 11:16 am
Two points made here have helped me think more clearly about Rebecca Kaplan as a mayoral candidate, and they correspond with my own observations at CC meetings:
V: “What I appreciate most about Kaplan is her attention to detail and sense of pragmatism.”
These are certainly basic skills for a political leader, and obviously are not all that abundant in Oakland.
Max: “She doesn’t have any ongoing blood-feuds with any of her peers. In a city full of leaders who’ve held office for decades and who’ve become entrenched in one camp or another, Kaplan’s ability to remain objective and distance herself from petty squabbling is truly refreshing.”
Absolutely.
March 8th, 2010 at 12:01 pm
There are no lies in what I said. If there are, please point them out. At the LWV forum two weeks ago with Andrew Wiener, he agrees that it is a problem for groups of businesses to form non-profits for the purpose of lobbying. Ask him yourself – but I doubt you will.
In the amendments being considered now, the PEC will be adding volunteer board members of non-profits as being subject to lobbyist registration. This is in direct response to my OBA complaint. There is no lie here; you just don’t like it. If you need to ban someone who disagrees with you, let it be known, then.
Everything I said about Kaplan is true, also. I walk the walk and talk the talk. It was my records request, my interaction, my discussions with people around town. There is no lie here, either. V, honestly, I have no idea what happens to your common sense when someone says something you disagree with. Pitiful.
Pages: [1] 2 » Show All