The Madness of Mayor Quan

Based on a recent interview given by Ms. Quan to the Mills College campus newspaper, I now suspect she may suffer from an affliction similar to that of King George III. She babbles incoherently, appears muddled in her thought process, and is apparently hallucinating and/or suffering from impaired vision. You can find the full interview here. http://www.thecampanil.com/2011/01/25/the-campanils-exclusive-interview-with-oakland-mayor-jean-quan/

When asked for her thoughts on my litigation, she first claims that I “didn’t support Measure Y to begin with.” Actually, Jean, I have repeatedly stated that in fact I did vote for Measure Y, because I wanted a community police officer for each beat. Not that this is what we’re currently getting, but I digress….

Next, she says: “…and she’s always been out there saying, ‘oh well, you could not have the money until you had 803 officers.’” No, I never claimed that. Actually, my first lawsuit alleged that the City should have been precluded from collecting Measure Y taxes unless it employed the 739 baseline staffing from 2004. The City, on the other hand, claimed that all that was required was “appropriation” for officers, as opposed to employment of actual officers. This nuance is entirely lost on Ms. Quan. The next couple of sentences are so incoherent I can’t even understand what she’s trying to say, but if you can figure it out, let me know.

She goes on to claim: “Cops tend to retire as soon as they can and go on to get a second pension, if they can.” The cops are gonna love you for that one, Jean.

Then she starts moaning about how difficult it was to recruit cops after Measure Y passed, with this zinger: “…was at the time when LA decided they were going to hire 10 thousand new cops, too, so it was very, very difficult….” Really? Hire 10,000 new cops? The entire force isn’t even that large. But hey, what’s a few zeros to a woman who drove the school district into bankruptcy, and is well on her way with the City?

She attempts to explain the most recent legal ruling as follows: “I was really happy because I had helped write it [Measure Y] and I was like ‘we wrote in recruitment and training for beat officers’, but her complaint was that the people we hired and trained didn’t become beat officers right away. But the point is that beat officers have to be more experienced officers. We used the new cops to back fill the older cops, who then became beat cops….. I would have spelled it out more, but it just never occurred to me that the judge would think that we could immediately hire these people to be beat cops…and that’s basically what the law suit was….” Wow. Did you, like, get that? OMG! She’s, like, totally incomprehensible. Maybe she was translating from Ebonics?.

But never mind her insufferable syntax: she’s completely off the mark, because that was never my argument at all. Rather, I argued that the City used Measure Y funds to hire non-Measure Y officers, and an equal number of veteran officers were NOT deployed to Measure Y positions. An Alameda County Superior Court judge ruled that there was no justification for the City’s actions in logic or in law. Moreover, there is nothing in Measure Y that refers to “recruitment and training,“ so she must be suffering from delusions. Not to mention, given the total disaster Measure Y has been, why is she still bragging about it?

Then she concludes with: “…basically, she wanted us to keep more cops and to not do the violence prevention program in all of her negotiations. So her whole thing was that she really wants more cops. She doesn’t believe in the violence prevention program and she was pretty outspoken against it during the original campaign.” First, she’s not supposed to discuss the negotiation process. But yes, I really do want more cops, and I have publicly stated that given our extremely limited budget, we should prioritize police over violence prevention programs, because we can’t afford both. But I had no involvement in the original campaign whatsoever. Sounds like she’s mixing me up with Charles Pine. For those of you who don’t know both of us, we don’t look anything alike. Except we’re both white. Maybe we all look the same to her? Or maybe the affliction she’s suffering from is affecting her vision. Hopefully her new trusted advisor, Rasputin Esq., will brief her on what my litigation is actually about (if he even knows), and counsel her to keep her trap shut in future.

Community Policing Compromised Yet Again

Oakland officials bamboozled voters into supporting Measure BB by promising a return of the community policing “beat” officers, otherwise known as “problem solving officers” or “PSOs.” Measure Y requires one for every beat in Oakland. Well, in typical Oakland fashion, they are trying to get around the requirements of Measure Y/BB by slashing the number of beats in Oakland from 57 to 35. Well, actually, it’s a done deal. Without any City Council action, without any public discussion, without any formal announcement, and without any updating of City websites.

For years, the beats in Oakland were divided into 57 regions. While some are geographically bigger than others, they were supposed to have similar numbers of residents. The impact of this decision is huge. For example, in Montclair, Beats 13X and Y are now just one beat. And they’re only going to have one PSO. What that means, in effect, is that the residents of Montclair are going to get half the level of service that they got before. Other beats, however, will get two PSOs, based on a “stressor” index. So apparently the more dangerous neighborhoods will get two PSOs.

While I can understand OPD trying to make the best out of its limited resources, the bottom line is that this is not what we voted for. When we voted, back in 2004, and again in 2010, there were 57 beats, and we were promised one officer for each one of these neighborhood beats. Now, our beats are twice as big, and many of us will be getting half the level of service we were promised. The beats are so big you can hardly call the area a “community” anymore. This is contrary to the letter and the intent of Measure Y. I mean, think about it. Why not reduce the number of beats down to three while they’re at it? Do they think that would be legal?

Given this new and obvious vioalation of Measure Y, it is no surprise that the City has tried to make all of this happen very quietly, with no fanfare or public discussion. Was it agendized for the Measure Y Oversight Committee? Of course not. Is it on the agenda for the Public Safety Committee meeting? No. Did the Neighborhood Watch coordinator know anything about it? No - she said I was the first person to mention it to her.

While the City is paying lip service to the concept of community policing, the reality is that this decision is legally indefensible, and seriously erodes the progress we have made in bringing smaller communities together for the purpose of fighting and preventing crime. Not to mention, the erosion of public trust in yet another violation of Measure Y.

Meet Your New Measure Y Oversight Committee Members

Two new members have been appointed to the Measure Y Oversight Committee. Oh, excuse me, I meant the "Violence Prevention and Public Safety Oversight Committee." Whatev. Anyway, you can check out their resumes here.

http://oakland.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=784965&GUID=FCD76D87-6431-47FC-B4FF-0698C81984E3&Options=&

Pretty impressive, actually. At least they graduated from high school. No seriously, they do have impressive resumes. But my issue is that everybody appointed to this committee seems to have a "violence prevention" bent. None of them are law and order types. No retired police officers. No police officers who live in Oakland but work in other jurisdictions. Nobody who actually has any insight whatsoever into how police departments should work or how community policing could and should work most effectively, from a police perspective. So when push comes to shove, on the MYOC, nobody's really interested in "diversity." As long as you believe these "programs" will "prevent" crime, we can just ignore the police component of the voter-approved mandates. Which by the way, continues to occur.

Measure Y (and its evil step-son, Measure BB) requires that community policing officers serve "solely" the residents of their own beats. It requires that at least six officers be assigned to a special, Measure Y funded "crime reduction team." But despite the specific language of Measure Y, and clear guidance from the court on this issue, the City reassigned numerous problem solving officers away from their beats to other duties; one PSO was assigned to a gang task force for 6 months; another was reassigned for at least three months; another was assigned as a field training officer for three months. And the CRT positions? Never filled, except for three months. Does the MYOC address any of these issues? Never. I looked at their agenda for tonight. Hogwash. Not even worth watching on KTOP. The committee continues to be a sad joke.