Discussion about this post

User's avatar
ResistProgressivePolicies's avatar

I agree with most of what you have stated. The battered voter syndrome is interesting, but I think maybe misses on a few points, IMO. Oakland loves to stand on their history, being a town of activism and protest. This permeates every facet of policy in Oakland. Everything is wrapped in progressivism with no rational thought to how far we have progressed, and is it too far? We have the city's major unions and SEIU dumping thousands of dollars into radical candidates who promise more to the unions (behind closed doors) and run on niche policies. No one runs on competence. No one in Oakland's elected government is ever asked about how much money (taxes) they spend and on what. Does MACRO meet any statistical level of success? Do the various NGOs operating on City grant money showing success? Why are Unions still demanding to work from home, depriving the City residents the services they pay for.

When I hear people complain about some billionaire buying elections, I wonder why SEIU and other major unions are not tossed in with that thought.

Oakland's cancer is their misplaced belief that more progressive policies will fix what is wrong. Until the voters demand more from elected leadership, Oakland will continue to slowly die.

Josh Rowan (on my own time)'s avatar

I truly enjoy Gotham Oakland. I can’t say I always agree with the Mr. Scott’s perspective, but it is always a perspective that causes me some discomfort when in my comfort zone. I write this comment as a free American citizen, but I have a job that involves leadership and transportation for the city. I draw on some of that experience, but I speak for myself, an Oakland resident. I am not born and raised in Oakland, but I am a resident according to the US Constitution.

Shortly after Mayor Thao issued her executive order to ramp up encampment sweeps, I had some events that sharpened my perspective on this issue.

I was directed by a high ranking city official to be more aggressive with the sweeps. Many don’t understand the nuance when it comes to towing vehicles in Oakland. My team tows abandoned autos (think no people inside the vehicle). Specifically, I was told that my team of parking control technicians “need to start knocking on RV doors and telling the mother f&ckers inside to get out.” I refused to put my people in danger like that. We developed a department policy that a vehicle with a person living in it was a “vehicle encampment.” That proved to be a critical decision in how auto encampments are addressed by the city. My team deals with steel, not people.

During that time, I asked the question, “Where are they supposed to go?” Let’s say we do yank the “mother f&ckers” out of their RVs and leave them standing on the side of the road. What is next? Where are they supposed to go?

Around that same time, Mr. Scott posted an episode of Gotham Oakland, and he was rightly quite critical of the executive order. He even asked, “Where are they supposed to go?” OK. I wasn’t alone. Two people had the same question - Seneca and me. We might both be crazy, but we had the same question.

Within a few weeks, I received a call from a pastor at a local church who asked me to pay a visit. I like to get out to see things firsthand. What did I see? I saw an RV parked adjacent to a church (and across the street from an elementary school) with a “business” name spray painted on the side of the RV - The Boom Boom Room. This RV was clearly operating as a brothel and needed to move ASAP.

One size doesn’t fit all.

I would encourage everyone to read the current encampment management plan. The current policy is silent on vehicle encampments. My department policy seems to have forced the issue, and it’s an issue that needed to be addressed. What do we do when an RV can be a home, a meth kitchen, a chop shop, or a brothel? It’s a complex situation.

Please also read the sections about high sensitivity zones and low sensitivity zones. The theory is that encampments can exist in low sensitivity zones as long as certain conditions are met. This is an important point that we will get back to later. This point is also at the heart of any encampment strategy. It’s important to understand.

Lastly, read Council Member Houston’s Encampment Abatement Policy. For anyone who has been paying attention, CM Houston and I won’t be going to a ballgame together any time soon, but I appreciate that he is trying to add specificity and clarity to the policy, especially in an area where the current policy is silent - RV/auto encampments.

Please read CM Houston’s draft EAP. I’m not going to make any comments. Read it for yourself. Make your own judgement. Don’t listen to what your friend tells you about it. Don’t listen to what you hear on social media. Read it. Pay extra attention to low sensitivity and high sensitivity. This is the crux of the issue.

Let’s get back to the Sheng Thao executive order sweeps. I do have a few comments here:

- the sweeps have been a failure; other cities seem to be able to sweep people out of town; Oakland moves them to another part of town

- there is no definition of success; the executive order was literally just a do something to do something initiative; there is no definition of success; there are no operational metrics to measure effectiveness; it is literally chaos

- my team has mapped low sensitivity and high sensitivity areas according to current policy; it’s worth looking at; 95% of Oakland is high sensitivity; pay close attention to the low sensitivity areas as that’s important for EAP (spoiler alert….the low sensitivity areas are mostly in D6, D7); let me say that again; if we relocate people from high sensitivity to low sensitivity, we are moving them to D6/D7; look at the map; judge for yourself.

- the current executive order sweeps moved people from LOW sensitivity to HIGH sensitivity.; we moved people the wrong direction; we moved them from mostly industrial areas to residential and commercial areas; we also drove them deeper to the east

Let’s say we shift from the current position that an RV/auto with a person in it is an encampment (my policy definition) to the opposite position that an RV/auto with a person in it is just an RV/auto.

Let’s also say we have the OPD resources to immediately sweep every RV and auto encampment. Let’s get all the tents and shanties too. The right of way has been totally cleared.

What have we not addressed? PEOPLE. Where are they supposed to go?

This is a timely and critical question for me. Yesterday, my son and I had to dodge an individual smoking meth at our bus stop. There was no tent, auto, or RV - just a sleeping bag. After we get off the bus, we navigate daily puddles of human urine and now have a gentleman who sleeps in the ADA ramp on Franklin/11th. He uses a backpack for a pillow - not even a sleeping bag.

I believe we actually need two plans. Let’s debate this EAP. It might be the right position on RVs and autos. It certainly has more merit than the empty, fraudulent ethics complaint the council member submitted against me.

Let’s also develop a plan for supporting the people the EAP is going to leave wandering the streets of Oakland like an episode of the Walking Dead.

Where are they supposed to go?

19 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?