Sarah Lockhart 
Member since Feb 17, 2016


Stats

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Links to Me

Recent Comments

Re: “Role Reversals in the Oakland Mayor's Race

"Brooks and Price assert that unoccupied city-owned warehouses could temporarily house the homeless better than Tuff Sheds, and they advocate for utilizing public lands to quickly construct thousands of tiny homes."

-- Are these prefab homes or are they talking about doing actual construction? I feel like this article might be doing a disservice to Brooks and Price by summarizing their proposals inaccurately. If the EBE could clarify this, that would be great!

Posted by Sarah Lockhart on 10/17/2018 at 11:22 AM

Re: “What's Missing in Oakland's First Cultural Plan in 30 Years?

Other concerns from the arts community in regards the cultural plan include:

1. taking away the agency from Oakland artists and organizations in terms of city funding, in that the plan is prescribing the nature of their work for them, as opposed to providing funding for work that the artists and organizations deem worthwhile. While many other artists I have spoken to have come up with creative ideas for projects working with city departments, (whether or not said city departments would approve of said projects is another story), they mostly want to do their work, and not the City's.

2. In the Cultural Plan, there is a map of local cultural sites/groups, some of which have received or are in danger of receiving code enforcement action from the City for their activities. Again, a removal of agency, in that it is doubtful that all sites located on the map were asked permission to be put on the map. Whether the Building/Fire/Planning Departments will use the Cultural Plan map as a "resource" for code enforcement action is unknown, but considering they have taken action based on Facebook events, it is not impossible.

Posted by Sarah Lockhart on 10/10/2018 at 3:40 PM

Re: “Soundwave Redefines the Who and Where of Sound Art

It would probably be more accurate to say, "comes back to Oakland" as Soundwave actually had events in Oakland back in 2004.

Posted by Sarah Lockhart on 10/02/2018 at 8:05 PM

Re: “Why Derick Almena Deserves the Most Scorn

To a certain extent, blaming the City for the fire, is akin to blaming the police for not arresting the drug dealer who sold heroin that caused people to OD. On a structural level, yes, the state apparatus is responsible for the suffering. But the thing is, most of these spaces and the people who run them, know that what they are doing isn't legal, and actively avoid getting caught. It's the game we've played for years.

And it isn't exactly true that city officials have turned a blind eye until now. It's an easier story to tell, but it's not accurate. Every few years, they'd make an example of some space, and OPD or the Fire Dept. would show up and kick people out. But this level of enforcement wasn't a priority for the City. I remember a cop once told me, when he was responding to a complaint about an illegal warehouse party, "Someone just got shot 5 blocks from here. I don't want to waste my time with your party. Just don't make me come back."

Posted by Sarah Lockhart on 11/29/2017 at 11:12 AM

Re: “Oakland Metro Operahouse Claims Harassment by a Neighbor, Who Says the Music Venue is Breaking the Law

Dear Mark Kraft: you obviously don't know very much about code compliance. A cabaret license is the exact license nightclubs are required to get.

Posted by Sarah Lockhart on 06/22/2017 at 1:12 PM

Re: “City of Oakland Poised to Give Public Land to Nonprofit that Improperly Received $710,000 in County Funds

I hope they didn't pay James Cahill of Pilar Consulting Services very much to prepare that 990, because he obviously doesn't know what he's doing in that regard.

There are numerous questions that have "no" answers, where the answers should be "yes" (as in "no" would raise a red flag).

There are fields that should have descriptive sentences but instead have minimal text. The program service accomplishments should say things like, "We provided # of services to # of people in # of locations" - at minimum. The answer should not be "charitable" - one word, charitable. It's obvious that the preparer not only didn't know what he was doing, but couldn't be bothered to read even the basic instructions on the form itself.

There are boxes that should be checked that aren't (the treasurer should be an individual trustee as well as an officer, the same as Elaine).

There is no data shown on the return for 2014, which should be present as the organization states it existed in 2014. Perhaps the preparer didn't do the 2014 return, but he should have obtained the information from the organization.

Also, considering they report property tax expense, the fact there is nothing on the balance sheet for fixed assets, is another red flag of incompetence. The $11k spent on "Information Technology" would also generally result in fixed assets.

Going through this 990 more closely, it is actually quite impressive how incompetently it was prepared. The Public Support % on Schedule A should be 100%; instead it is shown as 0%.

The statement of program service accomplishments shows $5100 in expenses but "0" for grants, where, on the functional expense page, the $5100 is listed as being entirely grants given to domestic individuals.

As far as there being no details of the Other Fees, it is possible that it was detailed on an attached page that did not make it into the archived version. I've seen that happen before. However, this just looks like more evidence of negligence on the preparer's part.

The fact that almost all the expenses are put under "management and overhead" is something that is a red flag for mismanagement. However, based on the overwhelming lack of competence in the overall tax preparation, to me, this doesn't indicate mismanagement, just an incompetent tax preparer.

Posted by Sarah Lockhart on 06/20/2017 at 9:55 PM

Re: “Oakland Tenants Say Eviction Notices on Rise After Ghost Ship, Call on City Hall For Moratorium

does this tenant protection actually apply if the property was rented for commercial use and the lease specified no residential use was permitted? My pessimistic nature is skeptical.

Posted by Sarah Lockhart on 12/14/2016 at 1:25 PM

All Comments »

Readers' Favorites

Most Popular Stories

  • The Express' November 2018 Endorsement Guide

    We endorse Schaaf, Ezzy Ashcraft, and Butt; along with Fortunato Bas, Thao, Middleton, and Whitaker for Oakland council and Knox White and Oddie for Alameda council.
  • Oakland Organic Gardener Wins Battle Against Roundup

    Diane Williams fought for two years to stop Oakland Unified from spraying the likely carcinogenic herbicide. And, finally, she was vindicated.
  • A New Berkeley Council?

    With two longtime councilmembers retiring and two vulnerable newcomers defending their seats, half of the city council could be gone next year.
  • The Fight Over Rent Control

    Tenants are pushing to repeal the 1995 Costa-Hawkins Act, which strictly limits local rent control. But landlords are spending big to beat Prop. 10.
  • Savage Love: Jacks

    Navigating professional relationships at sex parties.

© 2018 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation