Carol Wyatt 
Member since Oct 7, 2012


Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.


  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Badge of Dishonor: Top Oakland Police Department Officials Looked Away as East Bay Cops Sexually Exploited and Trafficked a Teenager

What's sad is that this blemishes the many actually good and caring officers in the department.

So I too am for an overhaul and I think Mayor Schaaf kicked off the fixing of this by putting the right leadership in.

Posted by Carol Wyatt on 06/17/2016 at 6:47 PM

Re: “Badge of Dishonor: Top Oakland Police Department Officials Looked Away as East Bay Cops Sexually Exploited and Trafficked a Teenager

Now, if only we could get eyes on the issues that plague our city, like this story has managed to uncover (as it continues and unfolds). It's exactly things like this that take away the resources we need on the community concerns we consistently have. As someone who sits on several boards and volunteers my time on commission(s), this is a G.D. SHAME. The time we spend as citizens trying to clean up communities, we are CONSTANTLY TOLD "we don't have money for this OR we are trying to do this". THIS IS WHERE OUR TAXPAYER MONEY IS GOING? WTF? So when I chair our Beat NCPC next month, this question will be at the top of the list. I'm sorry this is happening at all and horrified that its sex with a minor and federally a crime, not just an embarrassment. Perhaps our Local/State/County and Federal representatives across politics and law enforcement can help us figure out why we have to read about this embarrassment, but can't seem to get traction on some of things they're to have oversight on.

People need to do their jobs and stop stealing money for the time they spend supposedly working but are creating news stories to embarrass the rest of us.

Posted by Carol Wyatt on 06/15/2016 at 12:55 PM

Re: “Oakland Can't Afford to Wait

Here's a thought: the housing that continues to sit blighted throughout the City is really a problem and also needs to be addressed. I was told by someone (not in city government but appears to be knowledgeable on the subject) that Oakland had a bad past history on racism and doing things like imposing fines on poor or minorities, and these impact fees cause the owners to essentially build up liens and fines against the properties.

Since the City may never see that money if the owner doesn't sell the house, the City of Oakland in its crisis for affordable housing needs to put a moratorium on blight. If you can afford to own a building or property, then you should be able to either RENT apartments in it or work with the municipality to see how something can be done. Perhaps a incentive from the City is to assist in re-establishing these properties and making them inhabitable if the building owners can't afford to make them re-habitable. Owners should then by City mandate, commit to providing these units to the City for a period that is in alignment with a portion of the loan-grant to fix u these properties (5-10 years for example); the writing off of some liens can support the incentives if that's what is compelling owners to stand mute on sales and sitting on premium locations but dilapidated structures. The buildings are standing but may not be habitable. Let's get this construction going because no matter how quickly Oakland identifies housing, if it has to be built from the ground up, that's gonna take some time. And in the meantime, we'll see more folks suffering from the lack of affordable places to reside.

As a West Oakland resident, I can confirm that there are TONS of properties just sitting, vacant, empty and apparently still OWNED by people who just don't do a damn thing with them. These properties continue to be what we see day-in and out with no new improvements and in many ways can be a side-bar to dumping and blight. A city that doesn't care about what the landscapes look like, even in poor communities, are going to have their share of things that express "we don't give a F***" and while that comes from a City that doesn't enforce regulations to make sure it's a habitable place for everyone, that is also expressed in the form of property owners who are not identified and given the opportunity to work with the City since they are not taking care of their properties. Many communities without live-in ownership suffer from obstructive behaviors that impune the community.

There can be room in here for everyone, as long as EVERYONE is at the table and the regulations are fair but the support to solve and creative solutions needs to be more than rhetoric and the promises since an election for Bond Measures may not pass...what happens then?

Posted by Carol Wyatt on 03/16/2016 at 3:41 PM

Re: “St. Andrews Plaza: More than a Triangle

Bravo for this article. All sides should be one should be silenced.

There are the passionate voices from the community and even those who have been homeless and saw the Plaza as a refuge but the question that keeps resonating about WHY DID THE COMMUNITY WANT IT REVIEWED AND SHUTTERED?

I can't speak for an entire community but I can speak for ALOT of people who over the past decade worked tirelessly to clean and try to bring a little hope to a long ignored part of Oakland that is on public display due to its position down a very busy thoroughfare.

There are many of us who agree that public space should be public. No one wants to see anyone displaced. But that wasn't the issue for many of us. The issue is how this public space that all who used it claimed to love it, but treated it like a bastard child in many ways.

To us all it's a public space...but, it's NOT A PUBLIC TOILET...NOT A PUBLIC CAMPGROUND nor was it accessible to CHILDREN and YOUTH. Several people who are frequenting the parklet threatened neighbors and frankly that changes the image a bit. Harassed because you are new in the community is a horrendous environment. And the seniors who live across the street, who also want to frequent the parklet, didn't feel safe. Many of them expressed this inasmuch when invited to a PUBLIC discussion (of which there were several) and the disruptions planned to try and stop this change from coming were clearly designed and engineered to divert the need away from this long-needed change.

As a resident of West Oakland for a decade with Family who have lived in Oakland for over 100 years, the St. Andrews Plaza was affectionately but unfortunately referred to 'crack-head' park. I don't find that charming and it's insulting that this parklet is known for being associated with crime and drug-abuse, but not in the good way where people identify their addictions and work towards curing.

As someone who grew up in East New York, Brooklyn (which is wrought with parklets like St. Andrews Plaza), I worked with the community on this change request. We hated the filth, people being fed in the park like animals when there are at least 3 dining halls within a 2 block radius of the parklet and the on-going drug-use and just disrespect of the community is far and away the answer to why the community members I know wanted it changed.

Many would prefer to see that row of buildings immediately alongside changed into something viable instead of being decrepit, ignored, blighted space. How about it becomes housing where lower-income with an extended place for those who reside in the community...FAMILIES, not single adults who don't know which way is up. (notice I didn't say market rate because there is plenty of that in Oakland and more to come).

So, that's my 2 cents which may feel more like 5 cents however, the goal of this mission is to allow the community to use the park again...not have an environment where 70% of the community won't go near it; 30% of the community will but 85% of them do it for reasons most of us don't want to even know.

Posted by Carol Wyatt on 03/09/2016 at 5:34 PM

Re: “UC Berkeley Researchers: Oakland's Homeless Camp Policies Are Contradictory, Harmful

Public toilets are a bit of a challenge since filthy seems to be synonymous with homelessness.

Container homes under the overpasses could help solve the problem. But the issue to me is the public nuisance concerns surrounding homelessness including filthy surroundings and improper disposal of vector attractions.

Living outdoors isn't a problem if folks know how to live humanely.

Posted by Carol Wyatt on 12/31/2015 at 12:47 PM

Re: “Utah Attorney General Could Kill Plans for Oakland Coal Terminal

if they keep this up, they can turn it into a Broadway fitting for it to begin in the SF Bay Area...just like Wicked!

Posted by Carol Wyatt on 10/27/2015 at 3:56 PM

Re: “Oakland's Culture Clash

I also have repeatedly heard that the person in Oakland who oversees planning and building (Rachel Flynn) said something about Oakland not having an affordable housing problem? Does anyone know what she said and how it was framed and I'd question her on that statement because she's someone who needs to be reviewed closely for any remotely made statement around this.

Stop harassing people not in planning and building and take a closer look af who runs your city and approves plans, discuses futures and has access to those that can progressively change things.

Posted by Carol Wyatt on 10/16/2015 at 7:22 AM

All Comments »

Readers' Favorites

Most Popular Stories

© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation