|
March 7 Rally Has Council Scrambling
The spontaneous, growing movement for a massive March 7 rally demanding peaceful neighborhoods ("Enough Is Enough!) has already won its first victory: Councilmembers Brunner and De La Fuente have introduced a resolution on the subject. (The complete text is below.)
Although the resolution acknowledges the serious issue of more than 100 officer vacancies, it is incorrect and insufficient on several points.
- The resolution says only "four Measure Y officers have been hired" of the 63 owed. Actually, Measure Y tells the City to maintain 739 officers with general fund money before the 63 are added. Otherwise, our new taxes just free up general funds for councilmembers' other pet projects. Oakland is several dozen officers short of 739, as it has been for well over a year.
- The resolution admits, "the City of Oakland is widely believed to be underpoliced compared to cities of similar size." Yes, people do believe Oakland is underpoliced, no thanks to the councilmembers. Why does the resolution talk about what people believe, when understaffing of OPD is simply a fact? The councilmembers need to accept the reality of understaffing.
- Originally, the resolution's first action item directed the city administrator to get involved with the problem and speed up hiring. By Feb. 23, De La Fuente and Brunner had revised the action items, putting full responsibility on the city administrator (as opposed to the police department). Both versions are given below, but it does not matter. A year ago on Jan. 31, 2005, the city administrator issued a press release claiming, "As many as 105 trainees / officers would be hired this year, to fill vacancies and increase sworn staffing." To the contrary, police staffing declined. Police academies are hard pressed to overcome the steady loss of officers who retire and resign, sick of a dysfunctional department. What confidence can we have in a directive to the same city administrator to do the same thing all over again?
- The resolution has no action item for hiring non-officer employees that the police department needs along with more police. As of Feb. 4, 2006 the department had 25 such jobs vacant: dispatchers, evidence technician, records clerks, etc. Evidently, it is our judgment to decide whether Brunner and De La Fuente wrote the revolution in haste, or they simply intend the whole resolution for show.
- The concluding action item "directs staff to immediately begin as many training academies as necessary to bring the Oakland Police Department up to its current authorized strength as soon as possible, but no later than January 1, 2007." We cannot settle for City Hall's judgment of "as soon as possible." They want us to wait quietly for a year, at which point they can tell us they tried, but it simply wasn't possible.
In addition to the defects of the proposed resolution, it omits two important points.
- While the City collects the Measure Y tax but fails to provide officers, where is the money going? It should be escrowed until it can be used in a way that really strengthens police staffing, not substituted for general fund purposes. As noted above, until the City gets to 739 officers, it has no right to the Measure Y money.
- Nothing even hints at a goal and a plan beyond the stop-gap target of 802 officers. The last we heard from City Hall was this declaration from De La Fuente by his aide: "It is prudent to support Chief Tucker's statement that in order to know whether or not he needs more officers, he must first have a fully staffed police force of 803 (which we are still working on), operating at the highest levels of efficiency. ... Once Oakland has a fully staffed police force of 803 officers, and we are clear they are being deployed most efficiently and effectively, if we then still need additional officers, then Councilmember De La Fuente is prepared to push for the hiring of more police officers." (Post to PSA 4, Feb. 1, 2006)
Oakland needs at least 1,100 police officers. We need a credible plan to get there.
Trying to Kill the March 7 Rally?
It is a victory for the people of Oakland that Brunner and De La Fuente came out with this resolution.
Last July, De La Fuente told people at a special hearing on Measure Y, "The citizens did not expect 802 the next day." Councilmember Quan said, "We can't manufacture officers overnight." (Montclarion, July 8, 2005). She went on, "Over the next two years, the new Measure Y money which the city will receive in January 2006 will allow the chief to hire and train 63 new officers." Now, a resolution is talking about ten months to hire more than 100 officers. Although the flipflop does not bode well for sound thinking, at least it shows the councilmembers know that "just wait" doesn't cut it.
Councilmember Brunner wrote in a broadcast email today (Feb. 16), "The resolution has already gone to the Finance Committee, and is scheduled to be heard by the full City Council at our Tuesday, March 7th meeting." That's curious, because the finance committee met on Feb. 14, and the resolution is not shown on its agenda. The council's calendar on the Web shows no further meeting of the finance committee before March 7, although there is a crowded joint meeting of the redevelopment agency, the joint powers financing authority, and the finance committee. Was the finance committee meeting simply an anxious conference between De La Fuente and Brunner as they scrambled to get something out before the March 7 rally?
Oakland insiders always talk about consultation and collaboration. No one we know was consulted about this resolution. Brunner has all but declared it finished and done.
It would be a mistake to conclude that council members have changed their direction 180 degrees overnight, that they are finished playing games with our tax money.
We need to keep pressing our point. We need to keep circulating the petition for a fully staffed police department. We need to show up in big numbers on March 7 and do exactly what we planned all along: make it loud and clear that we do not have peaceful neighborhoods, that we are not getting the public safety we are already paying for.
By more than coincidence, we suspect, the council is set to adopt the resolution on ... March 7! We must be at our rally to say, we need not only words, but action. We need more accountability for our taxes in general, and for the Measure Y money in particular.
Resolution Calling For Full Staffing Of The Oakland Police Department
(As published by Jane Brunner for herself and Ignacio De La Fuente)
WHEREAS, in the City of Oakland's 2005-2007 Budget, the Oakland City Council, in an effort to ensure that we have safe, thriving neighborhoods, allocated funds for the hiring and deployment of 802 sworn positions in the Police Department; and
WHEREAS, as of February, 2006, despite the funding allocated by the City Council last year, there are still 109 sworn vacancies in the Oakland Police Department; and
WHEREAS, in November, 2004, the voters of the City of Oakland passed Measure Y, the Oakland Violence Prevention and Public Safety Act, taxing themselves to pay for 63 Police Officers to protect their neighborhoods; and
WHEREAS, as of February, 2006, only four Measure Y officers have been hired, meaning that 59 of the sworn vacancies in the Oakland Police Department are funded by Measure Y, despite the fact that taxpayers have already begun paying their assessments; and
WHEREAS, despite these significant shortages, there are only about 40 cadets currently in the Oakland Police Department's training academies, with a smaller number expected to graduate due to attrition. If all current trainees become Police Officers, we will still have 69 vacancies; and
WHEREAS, even at its fully authorized strength, the City of Oakland is widely believed to be underpoliced compared to cities of similar size; and
WHEREAS, this failure to fully staff the Police Department has a wide array of negative consequences in our city, not the least of which are the decline of public safety in our communities, significant budgetary impacts for the City of Oakland as a whole, and increasing distrust of the City of Oakland among taxpayers; now
[First version:] THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council directs the City Administrator to work with the Police Chief to take immediate steps to hire to fill the 109 vacancies outlined in this resolution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council directs staff to immediately begin as many training academies as necessary to bring the Oakland Police Department up to its current authorized strength as soon as possible, but no later than January 1, 2007.
[Second version:] THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that it is the policy of the City Council that the Oakland Police Department
be fully staffed as soon as possible, but no later than January 1, 2007, and that the City Administrator, in
accordance with her duty pursuant to City Charter section 504 to execute this policy and enforce the full staffing
of the Oakland Police Department by January 1, 2007.
How A Retired Police Lieutenant Reads It
This resolution is absurd. It is nothing more than our politicians trying to deflect the responsibility for the situation away from them, and put it on the Department. They should add another WHEREAS to their resolution, "WHEREAS, since we the City Council decided to spend our money on other things for the last several years, and neglected the Police Department, and allowed it to deteriorate to this pitiful level of staffing;..."
– Retired Lt. Brian Thiem, post to email list, Feb. 18, 2006
CPAB Chair Tries to Squat Between Chairs
The Brunner-De La Fuente resolution is not doing well. Criticism is coming in from all quarters, even from the usually supportive chair of the Community Policing Board, Mr. Don Link. In a long post to an email group, Link lays out nearly a dozen reasons why the resolution is misconceived.
Then comes the zinger. Out of the blue, Link turns to the petition and March 7 rally that crystallized the outrage among Oakland residents. Indeed, the petition and rally motivated the miserable Brunner-De La Fuente resolution, a desperate attempt at placating the masses. But Mr. Link concludes, "I do not support either the resolution or the petition because both imply that OPD, or the city, are dragging their feet in the recruitment and training process. From my vantage point, neither is the case. It's almost like piling on."
The petition and rally are necessary steps to setting Oakland government right. Without expressing the demand that public safety must be the first priority of city government, we cannot make any progress. Without getting organized, we cannot take steps toward forcing the City to change its course. And indeed, this is a clash, not a collaboration. The councilmembers are addicted to political pork in the form of grants to favored program operators and favored developers. The councilmembers refuse to use Oakland's budget for public safety and efficient infrastructure. Until the people compel a change in direction, there will be no change in direction.
Popular action alarms Mr. Link. So on one hand he criticizes a resolution that everyone else is criticizing in order to maintain some credentials. Then he puts the resolution and the wonderful upsurge of ordinary residents on the same level. Instead of signing the petition like hundreds of other people, he slanders it as "piling on."
Mr. Link was named chair of the CPAB by the mayor. That arrangement could use a change, too.
– Feb. 16, 2006; updated Feb. 18
|
