ORPN Home


Would you like one-sided, guaranteed access to hundreds of thousands of Oakland residents for your political campaign? That's what the ruling clique at City Hall got when it inserted a flyer (above) into everyone's garbage bill.

With the City's tree logo and "City of Oakland," no less.

What a strange thing, a campaign by City Hall. Presumably, the money to print the fancy flyer came out of your tax dollars. Who paid the extra postage, City Hall or Waste Management? We don't know, but a look at our garbage bill reminds us that we pay a ridiculous amount for a weekly pickup. The insertion of this flyer is just the byproduct of a sweetheart contract.

This is not democracy; it's brainwashing by an official oligarchy.

...And then City Hall decided it would enclose literature promoting a Yes vote with the mailing of the official ballots, but nothing that argues the case for a No vote. A letter of protest is to the right.

Council Asked for Fair Vote on LLAD Tax Hike

How would you feel if City Hall mailed you campaign literature for mayoral candidate Ignacio De La Fuente? Yet the City is moving to send you a fancy brochure for a Yes vote on a LLAD tax hike along with your ballot – but nobody's argument for a No vote.

Here is a letter sent to the city council's finance committee, which will consider the matter on March 28, 2006.

Dear Members of the Council's Finance and Management Committee:

Re: Democracy in Property Owners' LLAD Vote

You have before you a Recommendation: Adopt A Resolution Of Intention And Accepting The Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Preliminary Engineer's Report For The City Of Oakland Landscaping And Lighting Assessment District, Setting The Date For A Public Hearing, And Authorizing The Preparation And Mailing Of Notices And Ballots (06-0194).

In the materials for that agenda item it is shocking to find a graphic-rich brochure to be enclosed with the ballot, urging approval of a big jump in the LLAD tax plus automatic annual increases – but no provision for arguments opposing this tax hike.

In January, the City stuffed a fancy brochure into everyone's garbage bill that presented a highly one-sided view of the LLAD tax. Ironically, you sent this brochure, titled "Keeping Our City Bright, Safe and Green," just before a massive outcry about the lack of elementary safety nearly resulted in a state of emergency.

Whether the funds for producing and mailing the brochure came from the City, from Waste Management, or both, the mailing was improper in a democracy. It is unacceptable that City government would send rigged political advertising to voters. Yet the city administrator proposes to repeat this undemocratic procedure by stuffing government-sponsored campaign literature into the ballot mailing! I call on you to:

  • reveal the cost of the January brochure (design, printing, mailing) and who paid it;
  • scrap the brochure proposed to accompany mail-in ballots for the LLAD tax hike;
  • cancel any plan to contract the conduct of the property owners' vote to a private firm, instead keeping this vital function of democracy with the City Clerk or other office of Oakland municipal government;
  • direct the assigned City office to accept statements and rebuttals both for and against the LLAD tax hike and include them in the ballot mailing, similar to any California voter's pamphlet.

Sincerely,

Charles Pine

 
Council Rejects Democracy

The March 28 meeting apparently approved in full the undemocratic procedures for the approaching mail-in vote on a big jump in the LLAD tax.

Instead, the meeting frittered away time discussing dozens of performance standards, like keeping grass in the parks to a height of no more than four inches. Considering that the performance standard for Measure Y was 802 police officers but the City actually let employment fall by three dozen officers from the time the council wrote Measure Y to today, only a naive person would put any stock in paper standards for this property assessment.

Substantially the same letter as above was sent to all members of the city council on March 31, where the council persisted in doing all it can to rig the election.


– March 20, 2006; updated April 16

This page is from www.orpn.org