Oakland, Berkeley, And East Bay News, Events, Restaurants, Music, & Arts
5395 Bancroft Ave at Fairfax. Can't wait to visit!
I'm less than enthused by a picture of a meatball sub — probably 800 calories or more — on a half loaf of unappetizing white bread, for $8 (plus tax = closer to $9).
I literally saw a $10 box of dried pasta in the grocery section of that shop.
They also very obviously went to a wholesale grocer, got various dry goods, put them in plastic bags with "Stay Gold Deli" stickers on them, and added price tags that are 50% higher than Whole Foods.
There's a much more pressing problem in our own back yard: the Bay Area's many live animal food markets. California annually imports some TWO MILLION non-native American bullfrogs for human consumption (commercially-raised). Plus an additional 300,000 to 400,000 non-native freshwater turtles, all taken from the wild in states East of the Rockies, depleting local populations. These markets are common in Oakland, San Francisco, San Jose, Sacramento and Los Angeles, mostly in various "Chinatowns." Often illegally released into they wild, they prey upon and displace our native species.
Worse, the majority of the bullfrogs (60+ %) test positive for the dreaded chytrid fungus (Batrachrochytrium dendrobatidis, or Bd), which has caused the extinctions of 200+ species of frogs and other amphibians worldwide in recent years.
ALL of the market frogs & turtles are diseased and/or parasitized, though it is ILLEGAL to sell such products: E. coli, pasturella, salmonella, blood parasite, giardia, et al. Many of the animals are stacked four and five deep, often without food or water, and butchered while fully conscious.
Now THERE's an issue where the Berkeley and Oakland City Councils could REALLY make a difference. Follow the money.
Eric Mills, coordinator
ACTION FOR ANIMALS
I can't wait for a branch group of Direct Action in Mumbai to take exception to Americans devouring cows.
Do something real people.
In South Korea, which has a strong and long duration of Western cultural influence, dog restaurants remain somewhat common and a choice for older Koreans who are feeling under-the-weather. The trauma of the dog being beaten adds stress-related chemicals to the flesh, which in turn are supposed to provide health benefits to the people who eat it. It is pricey meat. However, dog eating is not popular with younger Koreans and small dogs are increasinglng finding their way into apartment dweller homes as pets. Kudos for Berkeley City for flexing their soft power, but don't expect this practice in Asia to go away in the near future.
I have made this place a regular weekly excursion. Food is delish.
There are many animal rescues in CA, Hope for Paws and MarleyMutts to name two, which are working with rescues in China and Korea to stop this practice. But what they can do is just a drop in the bucket compared to the dogs that are languishing in small cages waiting to be killed and eaten. Particular types of dogs are also being bread as a food source (they look like a combo Samoyed/Husky). It's quite sad when you think about it. A tiny number of these animals are "saved" by rescues and shipped here - but should we really be doing this with the amount of dogs in shelters needing to be "saved" from extermination as well.
I appreciate Kriss Worthington for putting this item on the agenda. It brings grotesque practices such as those described to the fore, and creates political pressure that may eventually be effective.
Thanks, Luke! Have followed the Miliki story a bit, but was never sure whether that was the same chef. I certainly hope they find a way to make it.
As for Mama's needing an update: only a few details, perhaps, like fixing the stools (and maybe some fresh paint)! When it comes to retro/camp, that place is already the real deal!
Oakland doesn't need a Mama's Redux with Edison lightbulbs and faux-industrial fixtures, any more than it needs yet another hipster beer garden to replace Miliki. Stick with the genuine article!
Love Mama's grits and hash, but man that place needs a serious update. Getting very tired and worn in a not-good way.
Well, Sam, he already had the space and has been operating there since well before Uber decided to move there. That area serves a lot of people, not just the new white folk. I applaud Patterson for learning more about the community he serves, closing the pricey destination Plum restaurant (yes, Plumbar is still there, a scaled back version with more affordable food), and trying something that might actually appeal to the broader base of customers in that area. As to the "he is only employing people to help make his profit" ...well, yes. But a lot of hot Oakland restaurants are not at all concerned with employing or training people in the actual community, or providing healthy, tasty, affordable food. Could he change his business model and do more? Maybe. But he could have bailed on Oakland entirely and instead is is doing something.
Why all the hate? I tell you what, when someone, maybe you Sam, can open a healthy, cheap, profit sharing, community, sustainable, local, unionized, happy happy fast food joint, I will be the first to go. But until then, I'm heading to Local. It's a fantastic vision & we should all support it. And if Patterson & Choi make a few bucks along the way, don't they kind of deserve it? I mean, I hope they do well so they will keep the vision going & who knows? Maybe they will convert to employee owned in the future.
It won't happen if we throw a bunch of hate on them & they fail. So, I say, go!
I am very excited to try LocoL but my only question is why is the price for everything in the Oakland storefront one dollar more than everything at the Watts location? I feel as though they are trying to exploit the tech profits of the bay area. A dollar may not be a huge difference to the new influx of gentrification but to the original inhabitants of Oakland a dollar can make a big decision on where they spend their money. Especially if you're trying to feed a low-income family which I feel is their mission.
Michael's comment proves it - Tea Party Republican folks love LOCOL! haha
Sam-profit is good. The only obligation of a business is to obey the law-health codes, minimum wage requirements, and pay taxes to the minimum levels needed and make a return for their investors. Their menu, their locations, and their slogans is their own business, not the damn government's or these elusive "communities" people proclaim. I'm a teacher- don't eat out much, but like simple and low priced food.
had dinner there last night, olivetos, with my family! Bravissimo! Incredible meats, pastas, etc. For a special occasion or just for the hell of it, this is the place to go. Very nice and quiet upstairs with terrific service. That young chef, jonah, cooks beyond his years.
the brooklyn foodie
I'm really confused about what their "revolution" means...
Is it a stretch to think they are using vague positive, social slogans to simply push their brand? How well would a new low production cost fast-food franchise do these days, especially in CA without dropping vague slogans like "building community", "empowering", and so forth? What do they actually mean? My guesses:
It seems like they kinda use Republican "job creator" rhetoric as one of their benefits. What's going on here is that you are paying people to make profit for you. If this was purely about "community", you'd use a cooperative ownership model. But, nah, it is about profit...even if they pay their workers slightly more than minimum wage.
Next, you dropped one of your initial locations in arguably the most white, gentrified area in Oakland (a block from the new Uber HQ). There are loads of restaurants affordable to techies and hospital execs who live and work around here. If part of Locol's mission is about solving the food desert issue, why build one of your few locations in one of the richest parts of the Bay Area?
The whole line about "teaching job skills" is also bogus. Every company from Walmart to TGI Fridays acts like employees who are underpaid and don't benefit from profit sharing are actually "developing job skills" or whatever. Bogus corporate sloganeering that actually means "you are benefiting from exploitation."
Not selling sodas, and the political discussion on "soda taxes" is paternalistic and frequently has racist undertones. Another item that I wouldn't say is suspect at best and far from "revolutionary."
Without any clear benefit to any of the Bay Area's most deserving communities, their "revolution" seems like nothing more than to make the owners rich. Revolutionizing their pocket books.
Hey Mitchell, my understanding is that the Full House chef has since moved onto Miliki (whose own future is a big question mark). But yes, Marino said he wants to find a new owner who will keep the staff — though of course it may be impossible to guarantee it.
Has he held onto the former chef from the Full House Café? Any talk of whether the staff (as well as the recipes) might be part of the package when he sells?
East Bay Express All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation