Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range
    • From:

      To:


Comment Archives: stories: Blogs: Seven Days

Re: “I Was Kicked Out of Federal Immigration Court — Because I'm a Journalist

Keep up the good work, and consider whether you need legal assistance to preserve a free press.

Posted by Naomi_Schiff on 02/17/2017 at 4:19 PM

Re: “Bay Area Immigrants Turning Down Health Care, MediCal, For Fear of Trump's Immigration Policies

Bob Hope: "The question is why are ILLEGAL immigrants even allowed to enroll?!?"

Jon Stewart: "I didn't realize Oakland had an active KKK branch."

Posted by Hobart Johnson on 02/17/2017 at 1:51 PM

Re: “Bay Area Immigrants Turning Down Health Care, MediCal, For Fear of Trump's Immigration Policies

The question is why are ILLEGAL immigrants even allowed to enroll?!?

Posted by Robert Hope on 02/17/2017 at 10:30 AM

Re: “California Health Department Opposes Bill to Help Formerly Incarcerated People Access Jobs

Informative piece - BTW if you are requiring a CA CDPH 0929 , my wife came across a template form here http://pdf.ac/8prbgM.

Posted by Griselda Foreman on 02/17/2017 at 1:17 AM

Re: “Bay Area Immigrants Turning Down Health Care, MediCal, For Fear of Trump's Immigration Policies

Alice Feller Immigrants here legally can not be deported no fear needed the illegals are the ones opting out of health-care coverage and welfare you know this but still mislead the readers please you want legal rights for illegals the laws are not here to manipulated at will . Trump supports legal Immigration most Americans do .

Posted by Terrie Henderson on 02/16/2017 at 7:18 PM

Re: “California Health Department Opposes Bill to Help Formerly Incarcerated People Access Jobs

My business partners needed to fill out CA CDPH 0929 some time ago and came across a document management site that hosts a huge forms library . If people are searching for CA CDPH 0929 too , here's https://goo.gl/XCS41J

Posted by Griselda Foreman on 02/15/2017 at 10:36 PM

Re: “Dakota Access Pipeline Opponents Call on CalPERS to Divest

Absolutely agree with all positions opposing continued funding of DAPL(and any other fossil fuel infrastructure investments)for all the reasons mentioned.
To those who say staying invested is more powerful in terms of changing their activities, I say on the contrary: Divesting until such time as the company complies with the wishes of its investors(the people ofCALpers)will be a much more powerful way to effect changes that leaves the way open to reinvest.
Secondly, it is the money of the people of CALpers. They get to decide whether the place they invest it meets their ethical and moral standards. Anything else is placing profits over people and life. Get busy finding and funding Green Infrastructure to look at long term benefits, which are not necessarily measured in dollars, to the people who recive CALpers.

Diana Richardson

Posted by Diana Richardson on 02/14/2017 at 10:15 AM

Re: “'Sanctuary State' Bill Moves Forward in California Senate

I support you Kevin de Leon ! Great job !!!

Posted by Martha Elizabeth Hernandez-meh on 02/12/2017 at 12:49 PM

Re: “Town Business: Affordable Housing in the Hills; $300,000 Police Chief; Cell Phone Surveillance Policy

IMO, the news from Darwin BondGraham about the new police chief's salary lack important context.

So what that she is being paid more than her predecessor? Why would that be important? Is she actually more qualified and experienced? Is the new wage actually more appropriate and competitive?

People with different levels of experience, competence and potential get paid different amounts.

How much do other police chief's get paid in City's of similar size? I would say similar size and crime and reform issues (should be paid more because the challenge is greater) but it is so bad here that there may not be any comparable data points.

Is the pay at the median, at the top, at the bottom? There is this thing out there called a competitive market. If we are paying the new chief compensation that reflects the market norms, then so be it.

If she is being paid well above those norms, then there is a problem. Given our problems and challenges are likely way above the norm, somewhat above may actually be OK.

Without this kind of information, all Darwin is doing is throwing out a hand grenade for someone to jump on.

Posted by Michael Good on 02/10/2017 at 8:49 AM

Re: “Trump Threatens UC Berkeley's Federal Funding After Milo Yiannopoulos Protest

Mike Bradley:

Seriously? What other conspiracy theories do you subscribe to? Were the undercover police shape changing reptiles by any chance?

That is not even worthy of a fake news sighting.

Posted by Michael Good on 02/09/2017 at 9:54 AM

Re: “Oakland Planning Commission Approves 'Mammoth' Tower Next to MacArthur BART

I think the City Council should oppose the present plans. When people buy into a neighborhood, they have a right to expect that neighborhood changes won't undermine their investment of both money and heart. The City's own Design Guidelines for Corridors and Commercial Areas, adopted in 2013, supports this principle. It specifies that new large buildings should be much more integrated into a neighborhood's existing buildings than the huge slab shown here, and it explains how this can be achieved. The design that's on the McGrath Properties website would be wonderful, for instance. And although more people spoke in favor of the project, numbers alone are hardly the only criterion for approval, and it's one that the Planning Commission often ignores.

Also, I think McGrath should do more to provide affordable units, and I'm worried about Boston Properties' involvement. It doesn't have a good reputation as a landlord.

Posted by Mike Bradley on 02/08/2017 at 2:09 PM

Re: “Oakland Could Become First City To Boycott Companies That Work On Trump's Border Wall

I'm sure this is going to have a HUGE impact.

/s

Posted by Robert Hope on 02/06/2017 at 4:43 PM

Re: “Town Business: Affordable Housing in the Hills; $300,000 Police Chief; Cell Phone Surveillance Policy

The City owned parcel at Oak Knoll is in the southeast corner of of the site adjacent to an existing single family neighborhood. Historically, Oak Knoll was in a Redevelopment District and the city's intent was always to have the affordable housing obligation from this site be satisfied with the developers obligation helping finance actual construction of affordable units off site. As I recall, the Oak Knoll redevelopment area was combined with the MacArthur Redevelopment area to facilitate that construction in a more appropriate area. I mean more appropriate in terms of site constraints of this hillside parcel, compatibility with surrounding mixed uses and availability of transit and services for future occupants of the affordable units that Oak Knoll does not offer. Having a policy about affordability above I-580 is a noble goal. However, each site still has to be evaluated on it's own merit.This city parcel is not a great site for affordable housing. The portion of the proposed development that may be more suitable would be in the flatter portion of the site where multiple family or senior housing is proposed by the developer. That would require a land exchange or commitment from the developer to satisfy all or part of the requirement on site as opposed to paying an in lieu fee.This option would still place affordable housing on a somewhat isolated site with difficult public transit and service options.

Posted by Gary Patton on 02/06/2017 at 11:28 AM

Re: “Town Business: Affordable Housing in the Hills; $300,000 Police Chief; Cell Phone Surveillance Policy

$300K per year for the new Chief, OK.

Spending is the best entertainment, if you've got the cash. I guess city hall has got the cash, just like I do.

The complete relevant city document includes even more entertaining spending. When (not if) the new Chief takes a powder from Oakland, she gets a year's pay in consolation. That's a nice pleasure hit for city hall to anticipate. You need to plan for the future!

Not to wander too far off topic, the document which supposedly is devoted to the required spending for the new Chief mentions a couple more ka-chings, one real and one potential. There was a headhunter consultant hired to help city hall spend the $300K for the Chief. There is no amount specified for this joyful advice but I'm willing to bet that it's signficantly more than the $50K pocket change I like to carry for homeless requests streetside and waitperson/bartender tipping restaurantside.

Last, there's a tiny paragraph in the document upping the potential pay for the City Administrator to $325K. That is good planning by city hall for future spending joy!

Oakland, the town with the happiest city hall! My town!

Posted by Hobart Johnson on 02/06/2017 at 10:58 AM
Posted by Margaret Cunningham on 02/05/2017 at 9:23 PM

Re: “Oakland Could Become First City To Boycott Companies That Work On Trump's Border Wall

@Matthew: Concillors and their staff can work on more than one problem at a time, ya know

Posted by Victoria Fierce on 02/05/2017 at 12:10 PM

Re: “Oakland Could Become First City To Boycott Companies That Work On Trump's Border Wall

Abel, you should be more worry about the Ghost Ship fire

Posted by Matthew Lee on 02/05/2017 at 11:47 AM

Re: “Oakland Planning Commission Approves 'Mammoth' Tower Next to MacArthur BART

Many people submitted letters of opposition including a petition with over 100 names. Unfortunately not everyone can attend these meetings. Some need to be home to care for family or are at work.

Posted by Charlie Chan on 02/05/2017 at 10:46 AM

Re: “Trump Threatens UC Berkeley's Federal Funding After Milo Yiannopoulos Protest

We always have to question who the vandals are. Often, they are undercover police from one agency or another, deliberately damaging the reputation of the genuine protestors. The so-called anarchists who show up at nearly every demo are probably a prime example. Newspapers like the Express should be more aware of this and report it.

Posted by Mike Bradley on 02/05/2017 at 8:45 AM

Re: “Oakland Asks Judge to Throw Out Coal Lawsuit

Unfortunately, this is what the City of Oakland gets for continuing to do business with this character, who acts as if he is entitled to Oakland's public land and resources, and expects to be given public money for his projects. This lawsuit is being funded by big coal and their investors to force this on the residents of Oakland. This is an important fight that is less about the few permanent jobs it could generate, but more about the agenda of corporations to take over public resources for their interests.

Posted by Momasaid Momasaid on 02/04/2017 at 6:21 PM

Most Popular Stories


© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation