Dellums Budget Cuts Police

Oakland mayor Ron Dellums delivered his proposal for dealing with the City's budget mess on Sept. 26, 2008. In a cover letter he writes that his top guiding principle is, "Public safety will remain a number one priority."

Dellums' proposal gives the lie to his introduction. Among his proposed cuts to police service are these:

• Dellums would liquidate the Park Ranger unit entirely. This group of officers does more than protect us in the parks. Because they enjoy a bit of autonomy in the police department, they have developed alternative approaches to public safety. While police chief Tucker constantly reorganizes the department, this unit has maintained continuity.

  Dellums' budget does not propose to cut the political staff that city councilmembers gave themselves early in 2007. He would rather take out the Park Rangers.

  Supposedly, problem-solving officers will take over park duties. The mere suggestion is ludicrous. If there is one example of a cut that must be stopped, it is this one. Keep the Park Ranger unit alive!

• Dellums would eliminate two dispatchers, the people who take 9-1-1 calls. Residents already run into five- and ten-minute delays trying to get emergency help. Maybe residents will hear a telephone menu instead. "If you have a burglar at your back door, press 1..." Resident presses 1. "Please engage the burglar in a discussion of social justice issues while remaining on the line..."

• Dellums would eliminate two service technicians. He proposes that residents file reports of crimes at one of two "kiosks" to be set up in police headquarters and Eastmont station. Hey, if we do not receive crime reports, crime must be going down!

• Dellums would cut a crime lab technician. He warns that this "may result in additional overtime," but...

• Dellums would cut 44 percent of all officer overtime hours. With the slight uptick in police staffing this year, the hope is that less overtime will be necessary – but the budget proposal has no formal commitment on this point. Police staffing will most likely drift down in 2009. With no money for officer overtime, the streets of Oakland will be left even more open to robberies, muggings, and burglaries for all who care to indulge themselves.

(Story continues below.)

Just some of the public safety cuts in Dellums' budget proposal

The scandal of city administrator Deborah Edgerly, eventually fired after doing years of damage to municipal government, has come home to roost. Dellums refused to confront her from the start of his term. She led other managers to copy her corrupt ways. She protected those who made alliances with her.

The city council went along with Edgerly. This past Spring, for example, Edgerly assured everyone the city budget was doing fine. She simply grabbed $30 million from reserves to cover up systemic problems. The finance chair, councilmember Jean Quan, went along with Edgerly. Now Quan tells us she warned all along that there might more cuts in the Fall. That is mere talk. The council agreed last Spring to maintain an unsustainable rate of spending by drawing down reserves, perhaps because three incumbents faced challengers in the June primary. Quan either participated in financial trickery – or did not even know it was happening.

A mayor committed to basic services for Oakland, public safety first, would take a completely different approach than Dellums. Here are some things a real mayor could do about the budget:

• Cut from the top, not from the bottom. Last November city auditor Ruby submitted a report that revealed millions of dollars in luxurious perks and bonuses enjoyed by top managers. For example, one is "Management Leave" cash to "make up" for being in a position that does not accrue overtime. Hey, managers know when they take the job that they will have evening meetings and such. It's part of the job, and it's built into a generous salary.

  Of course, a mayor who demands dedication from top managers could not easily charge the City for thousands of dollars in fancy hotel and flower expenses as mayor Dellums has done.

• Look beyond City staff. The crowd of programs operated by private agencies on City grants and contracts needs to be told their grants will be reduced ten to fifteen percent, too.

• Set real priorities. Basic services come first. Yes, there is a nice Chabot planetarium up in the hills, although it serves visiting students from Contra Costa County as much as it receives Oakland youth, but the City cannot subsidize it right now. A real mayor would work through the muck of details in order to find many such cases.

Keep the Park Ranger unit alive!

Vote No No on Measure NN and Measure OO!

We want new leadership committed to public safety, basic services and clean government!

"Restoring" Park Rangers Means Cutting Them

Councilmember Quan wrote that under her budget proposal adopted by the council, "We restored the following positions: all 3 park rangers (with a cap on overtime)." (Quan newsletter, Oct. 25, 2008) Actually, she eliminated five of the eight rangers in the budget. The reference to "all three" rangers is a misrepresentation.

True, five of the positions were vacant. The rangers were working overtime in order to cover for 35 to 40 shifts per week. The city council reduced this total to 15 shifts per week or less.

A support group for saving the rangers spelled out the effect of the cut:

Rangers will no longer work nights;

Rangers will no longer work days on Saturdays;

Rangers will no longer work at all on Sundays and holidays;

If a Ranger is sick or on vacation, there will just be no Ranger;

When there is a special event in the park, Police Officers will work, at a cost of about 30% more than a Ranger;

There will no longer be any office staff at the Ranger Station to answer the phone, or give information or get assistance for people calling or coming to the Ranger Station.

Quan and the council played the same game three years ago, cutting the Rangers from ten at the time to eight, when there were two vacancies. The scheme is obvious: the City simply refuses to fill certain budgeted positions, then eliminates them from the budget. The Ranger unit once had 21 officers, but the council, nearly all seats held by the same occupants for six to fourteen years, has whittled the Rangers down to three. Unless there is a massive popular revolt in the next two years, the Rangers will pass into history with one more round of duplicity.

Cuts and lies – these are the stock in trade of the city council when it comes to basic services. For example, when the Landscape and Lighting Assessment (LLAD) began in 1989, the City had 82 gardeners. When the council tried to rig a LLAD tax increase this past Spring, there were only 63 gardeners. Pay more, get less, while top executives, their deputies, and council members feather their nests.

Meanwhile, mayor Dellums said that he will make the minor reduction that the council proposed in his office, but by reducing the staff of the city administrator rather than the fawning courtiers surrounding his honor.

Reader Comments

DEEP-SIX THE COUNCIL'S PARTY BUDGET!

Mayor Dellums: Want to make a dent in the deficit without cutting Rangers and 9-1-1- dispatchers – which we need more of, not less of?

Please tell our City Council members to reduce by 75% their luxurious allowances for "political staff" and office facilities and administration. This is running us an incredulous $250,000 to $500,000 – per councilmember! And what are they doing with it?

If Jean Quan's frequent, colorful, photo-filled newsletter is to be believed, they are all busy making cash grants, providing staff time and resources to plan and "volunteer staff" weekly street festivals, buy "delicious barbecue," and organizing "Octoberfests" complete with beer. Stop the lavish spending on weekly parties and festivals that do nothing but court votes.

Neighborliness is fine, but our councilmembers have got it all wrong. Slash their "party budgets" and tell them all to get to work!

And please do the same, Sir!

– A resident of council district four