Two of the proposals, to hire sheriff deputies and civilian service techs sound good in a superficial view, but do not make much sense in the context of what's really may be going on.
There is a proposal (I don't know how far along it is) to involve current and proposed public safety consultants Harnett, Wasserman and Bratton in writing of a strategic, comprehensive public safety plan for Oakland, with significant community input. I think that this is the real first priority--to assess existing police resources and create an effective plan for moving forward by providing only those additional resources which will actually be productive and which we can afford.
Adding deputies and civilian techs is another ad hoc short-term-thinking approach which in the long run is very likely to be counterproductive. Oakland really cannot afford to continue to try to solve problems in this unsystematic way. Once money is spent in an uncoordinated way, that money is no longer available to be used in the most efficient manner.
Underlying all this is the undeniable fact that there is no overall leadership in Oakland on public safety. There are lots of uncoordinated efforts going on and it's very difficult to get a sense of priorities or the ultimate direction all this is taking us. The bottom line is little transparency, little accountability, no real leadership.
Barbara Lee as labor Sec? Proof positive Obama has no big labor-related initiatives planned for his second term. Patronage appointment, pure and simple.
Details of political horse-trading on the Council are irrelevant. It's probably a good thing that a new Council member with a commitment to reducing violence heads Public Safety because existing Council members have done a fine of job proving that they don't get it. If Gallo can do any critical thinking he will see that stop-and-frisk offers lots of challenges in Oakland-- there will be big problems implementing stop-and-frisk here. There is a lack of good evidence that tactics like stop-and-frisk are effective. There are other tactics which are much more likely to work here.
#3 Now isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? Gallo and Kernighan should dredge up some of Brooks' "non responses" to her illegal shenanigans over the years and throw it back at her. Or better yet say, "We'll respond to your charges when you respond to the BS you pulled on the East Oakland Teen Center!"
Ha! I find reading a few of these comments to be quite amusing considering the plethora of errors made in the students' English. It's not a very good way to express your "education" that you have achieved from this school. I'm not trying to insult them; I just find it ironic.
Nevertheless, I believe that the school should not be shut down. However, that sounded very simple and broad; therefore, I will explain myself. My main point may be to defend the school, but if the school wants to get anywhere, some reforms are a necessity.
As I have observed this school for a little more than 3 years, I have noticed some things that disturb me. Not only does this school not provide any ways for students to get in touch with society, but the staff literally discourages it. They segregate students by grade and reprimand them if the grades ever mix. That's an awesome way to make friends!! Don't you think? Secondly, it is quite a popular punishment to exclude students with bad behavior by removing them from classrooms or by keeping them alone in their own little designated area, and if a student tries to defend them, the advocate would get punished. That's a nice lesson to teach influential youth. Don't defend your friends and authority overrules all.
All in all, this is not to bad-mouth the school but to keep the public aware of what happens in this school. Keep the school, make reforms. When countries have rebellions, they don't fight. They make some changes to satisfy all, so maybe instead of starting all the way from the drawing board, you might want to look at your math and see if you added correctly and then fix it.
I must say that I am a student at this school, so I warn readers that my words have lots of bias whether I realize it or not. Therefore, do not immediately be persuaded and suddenly join my party without realizing the possible hyperbole I may have written.
"Youth curfews and gang injunctions have clearly been shown to be effective tools for combating crime. These tools would clearly save lives and make Oakland a safer place to live."
No, they haven't "clearly been shown" to do anything. The evidence elsewhere is at best very difficult to interpret for Oakland.
Most shooters and victims in Oakland aren't "youth." They're adults 18 and older, up to age 35.
Gang injunctions, as they were devised in recent years in Oakland around specific individuals, might have been of some use. The nature of "gangs" in Oakland is very complex. The important points are that gang injunctions are politically infeasible in Oakland and there are much more powerful violence-reduction tactics available. Read Frank Zimring on what worked in New York and David Kennedy about what worked in Boston, Cincinnati and other cities.
Why are youth curfews and gang injunctions "unsuitable" for Oakland? Please explain without making non-arguments like "OPD does not have the resources to enact and enforce a youth curfew." Neither OPD nor any other police department have the resources to completely enforce every statute (consider jaywalking, exceeding the speed limit, and driving at night without your turning on your headlights, for example), but that doesn't mean that those statutes should not be on the books. Youth curfews and gang injunctions have clearly been shown to be effective tools for combating crime. These tools would clearly save lives and make Oakland a safer place to live. Enacting these tools is a total "no-brainer," so why is EBX so hellbent against this?
Three police academies will help assure that OPD staffing doesn't continue to decrease. But three academies are not, despite what Schaaf and Reid like to think, the answer to OPD's need for more resources. The answer lies in planning and strategic thinking which, unfortunately, is unknown territory for our elected officials.
Right on. Gammon makes all the right points--he gets it about improving policing in Oakland. Unfortunately, Oakland Council members do not get it not does the Mayor.
Oh joy! Our problems are over!
Here's the truth from a scientist who is a whistleblower.
I challenge the East Bay Express to interview Dr. Corey Goodman.
People of integrity demand the truth from the press.
Post Sustainability Institute
Democrats Against UN Agenda 21
Any Council President is going to have a hard job during public speaking when rules are set and many speakers (mostly those rude to council members) don't follow them. The Council President is damned when they don't stick to the rules and damned when they enforce them and are then called all kinds of names.
As for the feud between Reid and Quan, there are two side to that feud. That Gammon (who IS an Oakland resident) blames only Reid without any supporting information (like journalists are supposed to) shows the bias of both this "journalist" and "news"paper.
I think both Reid and Kernighan have strengths and weaknesses, but overall I like both and wish them the best of luck with a difficult job.
Process of elimination: Reid's boorish behavior should disqualify him from the position, Brooks is whip-smart but just as divisive, Schaaf is a lightweight who's clearly out of her depth, and (excluding the newbies) that leaves Kernighan and Kaplan. Kernighan is a step above most of the other incumbents (not hard), but only Kaplan offers the blend of intelligence, empathy and even temperament the position requires.
Oakland NEEDS someone like Kernighan? I dunno. An improvement over Reid? Almost anyone could be. Better than Brooks, no doubt.
Kernighan carries lots of baggage IMHO. Like Reid and Schaaf she came from a position as a Council staffer. Thus she’s well-socialized into a culture of destructive micromanagement, lack of leadership, adversity to political risk-taking, avoidance of priority-setting, and a deep preference for staff opinions rather than openness to the views of informed citizens. And Kernighan is an elitist, with a deeply-rooted contempt for regular folks. I will never forget her speech to the Council advocating that the City Attorney be an appointed position because voters are not competent to make that kind of choice. Indeed she proves her point--she was elected by the voters.
Kernighan is intellectually a lightweight and often appears to be confused by discussions at Council or in public fora. Yes, she will be a notch above Reid. And she, along with Reid, Brooks, Schaaf and Kaplan will be, when the new Council members are sworn in, all that remains of the Council’s old, entirely dysfunctional clique.
Change will come very slowly to Oakland, a tiny step at a time, but it will come. And that’s good. Citizens need, however, to keep their expectations very very modest.
Robert - You are an idiot who likely does not even live in Oakland. This slam piece is shameful. More Reid and less Quan is exactly what Oakland needs. Reid has been outspoken against Quan becuse she's been terrible and a bully: Including her biggest gaffs such as her failed "100 blocks" (to get reelected) campaign. That is not "petty bickering" that is leadership. He's had to defend himself against attacks from Quan's family, that is not a "feud" that is politics. Oakland does not need more of Quan's cronies or puppies.- Greg
East Bay voters in the next election for EBMUD Board, should throw out on their ears, every board member who voted against Community Choice.
Once again, comprehensive reporting on this development by Ali. It's interesting that nobody asked the Oakland community what we thought of this idea. So much for community policing!
If this guy is so good why not fire the police chief and hire him. Why spend the extra money on a non-effective police chief? Really Quan needs to get her house in order.
If our officials were more interested in reducing crime than they were salvaging our City's and their images, they would just pay Richmond CA to borrow their successful police department management team part-time for a year.
Question: will Bratton's contract require that he stay in Oakland hotels?
This comment was removed because it violates our policy against anonymous comments. It will be reposted if the commenter chooses to use his or her real name.
East Bay Express All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation