Oakland City Council
This was not a boring year for members of the Oakland City Council.
In sessions that were at times rough and tumble, Council hacked its way through many policy items, including specific reform measures for the troubled Building Services division.
However, many issues were left high and dry, including finance reform and public safety. Meanwhile, the Council struggled with Occupy Oakland and the its ability to speak in a unified voice was all but absent during most of the year.
Going into 2012, can Oakland's City Council develop long-range policies that addresses key issues including the city's budget and its public safety? In order to do so, they'll have to begin to work closer together and make some unpopular decisions. It also will have to have a better relationship with the mayor, which is currently pretty frosty.
Here's how the City Council did last year and the direction it should take in 2012:
Oakland finances
Since the budget passed in July, the City Council has been nearly silent on the issue of the city's finances, except to say that next year's budget is expected to be tougher than this year.There was little attempt by City Council to address Oakland's long standing debt problem, which at $2 billion will only grow worse the longer it is ignored. Clearly reform measures need to be put in place regarding the cities budgeting process, but it's unclear if Council will put any energy behind this issue.
Council will not be able to stand on the sidelines for much longer. Many key decisions will need to be made in 2012 if the city is able to get back on its feet. Now that residents have rejected a parcel tax for the second year in a row and the city has already negotiated new contracts for its workers, Oakland will be limited in what options to explore in order to address some of its financial challenges.
Leadership and decorum
On many occasions last year, Oakland City Council meetings resembled a bad reality soap opera. Oaklanders do not hold back when they speak to Council, and many people are not afraid of dressing down Councilmembers in a vicious style.
But don't feel bad for our elected officials because they give as good as they get. Almost every Council session has at least one spurt by Councilmember fighting with some segment of constituents in the audience or someone standing at the speaker forum.
Sometimes a thread of a fight between the audience and Councilmembers goes all the way through the meeting. At most meeting, Councilman Larry Reid has no problems with threatening to use Oakland police to "clear the chambers." Sometimes a speaker is in fact removed, but they're usually allowed back in.
Councilmembers also spent a fair amount of time in 2011 arguing and correcting each other on a variety of issues and parliamentary procedures.
All of this yelling and threatening has a way of making the Council look unfocused with little leadership at the helm. Oakland City Council will need to rise above the taunts, forgo the threats and concentrate on developing policy.
Occupy Oakland
City Council clearly has a bi-polar relationship with Occupy Oakland. On one hand, all of Council professed to support free speech and many of the issues publicly associated with Occupy Oakland. Some members, in the early days of Occupy Oakland, camped out or spent serious time at Frank Ogawa Plaza.
But, since the Nov. 2 General Strike, Council has, for the most part, been critical and combative with Occupy Oakland. In recent weeks, the group has been especially harsh in criticizing encampments, Occupy Oakland's decision to shut down the Port of Oakland and the effectiveness of its Nov. 2 strike.
The result has been a lot of angry words exchanged at Council meetings with OO participants, ruffled feathers of some labor leaders and no actual policies that address real issues around the local movement.
Like Mayor Jean Quan, Council will need to come to terms with the fact that Occupy Oakland will be a part of the city's landscape for the foreseeable future. Many Councilmembers have tried to connect with Occupy Oakland by speaking aobut their progressive roots, but stories about the 1960s don't work with the group. Occupy Oakland works unlike any movement before. If Council wants to develop policies around stopping the demonstrations and encampments, they will on some level have to work with Occupy Oakland participants. Further fighting and attempts at developing aggressive policies to stop Occupy Oakland will only backfire.
Public safety
The city saw a big spike in murders and gun shootings this year. Property crimes also were at high levels, yet the City Council did not have a unified public safety policy that addressed these problems. While Quan has her "100 Blocks" plan and she held a safety summit, the Council did not hold a special meeting or create a plan to deal with crime. In 2011, some Councilmembers spoke passionately about restorative justice, while others focused on getting more police officers on the street. In the end, nothing new was developed.
One of the biggest public safety proposals that was put forward last year was focused on enforcing loitering laws, imposing night curfew for minors and expanding gang injunctions. The public safety measures, which were proposed by Councilmen Larry Reid and Ignacio De La Fuente, ended up getting deferred back to a Council committee.
What is the Council's strategy for combating crime? It will need to work with the mayor, the police chief and local social organizations to begin to figure out how it will deal with crime in the city. Otherwise we'll see a scatter-shot approach with little success.
Jennifer shows her pro-OO bias by putting the blame for a lack of communication only on the City Council when, it has been reported by the Tribune, Chronicle & several TV reports, City Officials attempted repeatedly to communicate only to be rebuffed by OO.
I believe our City Council should be criticized for many things, namely being one of the few cities with a worsening crime rate (that is also the worst in CA). But it takes a radically left wing group to make this City Council appear either Centrist or even pro-business (even though their policies have driven out many many employers).
And it takes a biased journalist and blog to attribute most of the fault on the City Council for lack of communication with a group that either refused to communicate, broke store windows, forcibly occupied a public space for it's sole use, and has refused to listen to any constructive criticism esp. about it's violent ways.
It's too bad as the OWS message is at it's base a positive one. But it's methods are mostly negative, and it's broader message has become entirely unfocussed.
Livegreen accuses the author of failing to note that O/O rebuffed attempts to communicate, but fails to note that the city officials who were rebuffed were not Council members, but members of the City Administrator and Mayor's office and OPD.
Correct me if i'm wrong, but this article is not a referendum on O/O, it's an analysis of the City Council which includes (among other things) the Council's response to O/O, which thusfar has not resulted in any new policy, as the author correctly notes.
Eric
I don't think one can pick and choose which branch of the local government to communicate to. That's unproductive and unrealistic. Mayor Jean Quan, OPD, and City Administrator take on more criticism because they are the executive branch. It was the Council Chamber who came down decisively to evict OO from the Plaza via the Lake Merritt Press Conference. All regional and local news organizations and personal accounts reported Mayor's branch of the government bending out of their way to accommodate OO but it was rebuked at every turn.
I am coming to the conclusion that Occupy Oakland is unable to articulate or communicate its wants in an adult manner. It spend time wading into local politics targeting Mayor Jean Quan for revenge. Its recent disruption of the Commonwealth Club event and the shouting inside Council Chamber, threatening more demonstration unless it gets its way is an example of its naivety. The Mayor and the City have gone out of their way to accommodate OO. Unfortunately the controlling, radical elements of OO can't see beyond its own rhetoric.
Leslie, i think you might be missing the point somewhat. The topic is the City Council, not Occupy Oakland. say what you will about O/O (and i'm certainly not going to suggest that they have been entirely effective at communicating), but the question we should be trying to answer is, has the Council shown the necessary leadership required of elected officials?
So far there's been mixed messages, a lot of chest-puffing and political maneuvering, but no actual policy in regard to O/O. That's why Jennifer said Council was "bipolar."
If we examine the facts, we find that the Council did not make any attempts to communicate with O/O. Also, there were just four council members who spoke out against O/O at the press conference you mention, which is short of a majority. Therefore, Council as an entity did not resolve to evict O/O -- in actuality, that decision was made initially, on Oct. 25, by the City Administrator. You may also be getting your dates confused, because O/O wasnt actually evicted for good from Ogawa Plaza until Nov. 14, weeks after the press conference, by the City Administrator and the Mayor on the grounds of public safety. Council did not make that decision.
So, have they shown leadership on the O/O issue? You tell me.
Hi Eric
Quote from Mercury News.com on the Lake Merrit Press conference(Oakland Tribute, Cecily Burt, Nov 9, 2011), "At one point, the business leaders and council members, who along with Reid included Libby Schaaf, Desley Brooks, Patricia Kernighan and Ignacio De La Fuente, shouted back: "Occupy Oakland must go!" This quote is also on OO website.
That's 5 council members (majority)shouting together. I think the method and timing of the execution is under OPD control so there is no contradiction between order given on Nov 9 and execution on Nov 14. We all know it was the murder in front of Tully's Coffee that triggered it.
I think most council members has told us their point of view on OO. Nadel and Brunner are being mocked by conservative as "idiot" for siding with OO, recall action is underway for Mayor Jean Quan with support from the conservatives (the 1%) and OO. Curiously I have not heard a "beep" from Kaplan so no criticism can be launched at her. There's a famous Woodrow T. Wilson quote, "If you wnat to make enemies, try to change something."
I look at what happened last year as a demonstration of the democratic process rather than a lack of leadership.
Hi Kevin
You are spot on. That's what the Mayor is doing.
But you must have missed the activities that happened in District 6, 7 of the last year.
All district in Oakland had a Town Hall within half of a year of Mayor Jean Quan's election. The City and BBBON organized 3 community clean ups. The one in early 2011 was huge; 7 tons of garbage picked up.
The Mayor's Christmas Toy Drives, for the 1st time were bought to East and West Oakland.
I can go on....