My biggest continued annoyance with Oaklandside is the credulousness with which they treat random advocacy orgs. They had objective falsehoods in a piece on Ceasefire for SIX MONTHS before they corrected it and even post-correction they obfuscated the actual findings of the report they discussed.
Thank you for this article - I've been warning my neighbors not to take the Oaklandside seriously because they operate more as a propaganda outfit than a "neutral" newspaper.
Their quote, "...amplify community voices..." is laughable because their platform is given to a select few that share the same opinions, stances, etc...
In my opinion, the Oaklandside stands in the way of residents and small businesses that deserve a functioning city hall that is responsive to all Oaklanders.
Today, our Oakland responds to the unions, non-profits, and politically aligned organizations.
The FLSA overtime rate was completely ignored by the previous city administrator. The city auditor did an excellent analysis for DOT and OPW. The same analysis most likely applies to OPD overtime. The short version is the city is paying more than 1.5x for overtime, and the city council never approved this. Aside from that, OPD gets an overtime budget every year. They just need to stick to their budget.
Josh -- Thank you for your comment. As a former long-time department head in other cities, I agree that departments should stay within their budgets. However, I also believe that a city and its police department are obligated to protect residents and businesses from being victimized by crime when it happens -- and crime happens a lot in Oakland, far more than in other comparable cities.
As Mandal's article notes, the city council finance and management committee reported that "overtime is primarily driven by staffing shortages and operational demands." It also notes that OPD's true operational strength is currently only around 546 sworn officers on active duty -- far below the authorized number of 678 officers, even further below the 700 officers promised to voters in Measure NN (2024), and further still below the 877 officers recommended in an official city council study published last year.
Furthermore, the article notes that interim police chief James Beere has explained that "overtime is often less expensive than hiring additional officers because vacant sworn positions generate salary savings that offset overtime costs," and that "overtime paid by third parties, such as the Oakland Coliseum and special events, is reimbursed to the city’s General Fund rather than OPD’s operating budget, making overtime accounts appear more overspent than their actual net fiscal impact."
Yet, as Mandal points out, none of this context—including OPD’s own explanation for overtime spending—is discussed in the Oaklandside article.
Thank you again for your comment; the discussion, as always, is appreciated.
The time to have those discussions is during the budget process too, which I believe is happening now. Chief Mitchell did a nice job projecting OT needs versus just reacting to everything that was in front of him. Chief Beere does a good job as well managing his resources. I’m not a proponent of vacant positions being a financial cushion though. If you need contingency funds, create them. Don’t rely on vacant positions as some sort of deferred spending account.
Too often, “public safety” was used to justify overtime, and the budget would be blown out of the water. That is common in many cities. Who will argue against additional “public safety”? It is quite a business model. If crime is up, more money is needed to bring it down. If crime is down, more money is needed to keep it down. I’m not a cop and will never run a PD. From my vantage point, Chief Beere does a good job with OPD financial operations.
I’m just curious when anyone will pay attention to the FLSA OT issue though. A lot of attention is being given to the number of overtime hours being worked. No attention has been given to the overtime rate being paid. More OT hours could be worked (more “safety” for the people) if the rate had not been inflated without council’s approval.
When can we expect either Oakland Report or Oaklandside to look into that issue? It’s out in the open through the audit of the DOT and OPW FLSA OT.
My biggest continued annoyance with Oaklandside is the credulousness with which they treat random advocacy orgs. They had objective falsehoods in a piece on Ceasefire for SIX MONTHS before they corrected it and even post-correction they obfuscated the actual findings of the report they discussed.
Thank you for this article - I've been warning my neighbors not to take the Oaklandside seriously because they operate more as a propaganda outfit than a "neutral" newspaper.
Their quote, "...amplify community voices..." is laughable because their platform is given to a select few that share the same opinions, stances, etc...
In my opinion, the Oaklandside stands in the way of residents and small businesses that deserve a functioning city hall that is responsive to all Oaklanders.
Today, our Oakland responds to the unions, non-profits, and politically aligned organizations.
The FLSA overtime rate was completely ignored by the previous city administrator. The city auditor did an excellent analysis for DOT and OPW. The same analysis most likely applies to OPD overtime. The short version is the city is paying more than 1.5x for overtime, and the city council never approved this. Aside from that, OPD gets an overtime budget every year. They just need to stick to their budget.
Josh -- Thank you for your comment. As a former long-time department head in other cities, I agree that departments should stay within their budgets. However, I also believe that a city and its police department are obligated to protect residents and businesses from being victimized by crime when it happens -- and crime happens a lot in Oakland, far more than in other comparable cities.
As Mandal's article notes, the city council finance and management committee reported that "overtime is primarily driven by staffing shortages and operational demands." It also notes that OPD's true operational strength is currently only around 546 sworn officers on active duty -- far below the authorized number of 678 officers, even further below the 700 officers promised to voters in Measure NN (2024), and further still below the 877 officers recommended in an official city council study published last year.
Furthermore, the article notes that interim police chief James Beere has explained that "overtime is often less expensive than hiring additional officers because vacant sworn positions generate salary savings that offset overtime costs," and that "overtime paid by third parties, such as the Oakland Coliseum and special events, is reimbursed to the city’s General Fund rather than OPD’s operating budget, making overtime accounts appear more overspent than their actual net fiscal impact."
Yet, as Mandal points out, none of this context—including OPD’s own explanation for overtime spending—is discussed in the Oaklandside article.
Thank you again for your comment; the discussion, as always, is appreciated.
The time to have those discussions is during the budget process too, which I believe is happening now. Chief Mitchell did a nice job projecting OT needs versus just reacting to everything that was in front of him. Chief Beere does a good job as well managing his resources. I’m not a proponent of vacant positions being a financial cushion though. If you need contingency funds, create them. Don’t rely on vacant positions as some sort of deferred spending account.
Too often, “public safety” was used to justify overtime, and the budget would be blown out of the water. That is common in many cities. Who will argue against additional “public safety”? It is quite a business model. If crime is up, more money is needed to bring it down. If crime is down, more money is needed to keep it down. I’m not a cop and will never run a PD. From my vantage point, Chief Beere does a good job with OPD financial operations.
I’m just curious when anyone will pay attention to the FLSA OT issue though. A lot of attention is being given to the number of overtime hours being worked. No attention has been given to the overtime rate being paid. More OT hours could be worked (more “safety” for the people) if the rate had not been inflated without council’s approval.
When can we expect either Oakland Report or Oaklandside to look into that issue? It’s out in the open through the audit of the DOT and OPW FLSA OT.