|
| |||
|
Park Rangers Cut; Evening Patrol Slashed As recently as April Oakland had ten park rangers. Today there are only six. For years the rangers patrolled from 9 a.m. to 1 a.m. Today they are compelled to leave the parks unguarded at 8 p.m. So much for the claim, "Park rangers were restored." That is what councilmember Jean Quan said in her newsletter of June 16, 2005. One of Quan's staff wrote, "She led the fight to save the walking and school officers and park rangers." Around April the City began saying it would need to disband the park rangers. Public outcry compelled the city council to back off the abolition plan, but not before the threat of losing a job motivated three rangers (Abdullah Dadgar, Chan Lee and Themis Lonis) to take regular OPD officer positions. (Oakland Tribune, May 20, 2005.) Councilmembers were quick to call themselves good guys, maybe even heros. The truth is exactly the opposite. The council reduced the number of budgeted park ranger positions. As the City budget document later confirmed, "In the Park Ranger Unit, 2 vacancies are being eliminated ... leaving a total of 8 Ranger positions in place." (p. 15 of Transmittal letter) First you refuse to hire to fill vacant positions, then you wipe out the positions. And of the eight positions, two more are vacant as of today.
Among the six parks rangers employed, illnesses occur. One ranger is in the fourth month of a disability leave. As of today, two more rangers happen to be out. Today only three rangers are patrolling all of Oakland's parks, from Skyline in the hills to Sanborn Park on Fruitvale. (Excuse us. While cutting the ranger staff, the City renamed Sanborn to Josie de la Cruz Park.) The three rangers are on patrol from 10 a.m. to 8 p.m. When more rangers return to work, two will be put on swing shift patrol ending at 1 a.m. It's an unlikely throw of the dice that the park you dare to visit after 8 p.m. will get a quick check by one of the two swing shift rangers. Incidentally, from April, when the City began talking about abolishing the rangers, to the new budget on July 1 was less than three months. This means the City violated its contract with the rangers' association, which specifies, "The City agrees to keep Association advised of financial planning which contemplates reduction of personnel represented by Association at least six months in advance." (Article V, section B) Oakland once budgeted 21 park ranger positions. That was cut to 16, then to 10, and now to 8. This erosion is just another example of shrinking City services, even as the fees and taxes we pay go up. The understaffed police department is not likely to send regular officers into the parks. Thus, the council has created another unsafe area in Oakland. The first crime of the council was to slash ten rangers to six. The second crime was to claim, "Park rangers were restored." The council has made things worse than they were just four months ago, not better. Since when is such disdain and duplicity heroic? With enough rangers, we could stroll and picnic at ease. The parks should belong to us, not to robbers, players of illegal amplified stereo, and vandals. The case of the park rangers, like the three-year hiring freeze on the entire police department, shows that councilmembers do not care about public safety in Oakland. They will not say so openly; they might not even think so to themselves. Nonetheless, their actions show that public safety comes last for them – after giveaways to developers, after grants to scofflaw agencies like PUEBLO, after increasing councilmembers' staff and salary. And now they are engaged in denying Oakland residents the 802 officers required by Measure Y.
– August 1, 2005 |
