Yaaaaaay! Just... yaaaaaay!

Glad you're back and as feisty as ever.

You forgot to mention how Jerry violates OMC every time he drags poor Dharma around the lake. And has anyone seen him pick up after that dog? Or is that Jacques' duty?

Yaaaaaaaay!

Drat and dagnabbit! I was going to write about Jerry and his pooch problem for my other column. This column is specifically about Politics (see name for helpful clue).
I thank you for the very kind Yay!! I feel warm and tingly all over.

This is the funniest, most interesting piece of commentary I've read in many years. Who are you?
Who cares -- keep it up.

J --

Two points:

1. This is the Peanut Gallery. Dharma and Jer deserve mention on a main page.

2. The story is too good just to tell once.

Nice to see you have a new fan!

(We'll send you new stuff in a couple of days.)

Chis D., unfortunately, is a friend who was here this afternoon and doesn't count as a new fan. Sneaky woman!

It's about time! I'm so inspired I might actually write a column!

Even old friends should be required to write fan letters once in a while.

Nice surprise to see your name on the Quan/Stein article. I remember enjoying immensely your feisty, informative Montclarion columns from a few years back. I was very sorry to see you suddenly "disappeared" from that paper which began churning out mostly feel-good pap.

I got to this website from a Google search for "ebonics Jean Quan", wanting to refresh my memory on who did what (I was out of the country at the time). 'Enjoyed your perspective very much, but you're perhaps a wee bit fond of exclamation marks (really, four????)

I want to urge you to vote NO on EE. Please read the text of it carefully. It is really a terribly written piece of legislation. Sounds good, warm & fuzzy (who would be against anything "Just" as in "Just cause"?). This isn't good for anyone, including tenants. I have been a tenant all my life till 2 years ago (I'm in my mid-40's). I manage apartments. I feel lucky to have a well-rounded perspective - from the vantage point of tenants, landlord/management & homeowners.

EE will limit eviction for cause only: Cause means one cannot evict a problem tenant unless the situation falls into one of eleven very specifically-worded reasons. One, for example, is if a tenant is creating a nuisance to other tenants. However, if a tenant is renting a single-family residence, there ARE no other tenants. This tenant could be making life a living hell for his neighbors (who are not tenants, so not covered by EE) & an owner would NOT be able to evict because this particular situation isn't covered by the modifier-packed language of the proposed measure.

Perhaps the worst thing is that every "just cause" must be provable in a court of law. This would require, in most cases, tenants testifying against a problem tenant (living in the same building). I can assure you, both as a long-time tenant and as a manager, this won't happen. Good tenants are scared and intimidated by bad-behaving tenants. Good tenants will suffer in silence until they can move out at the first opportunity. Even as a manager, I have been loath to take necessary legal action because of threats of physical and legal attack (and in one case, an incident of assault on me by a drug-dealing, gun-toting tenant).

RIGHT NOW there's a law prohibiting raising the rent for 2 years following a no-cause eviction. As for protecting the elderly, anyone involved in the industry knows that elderly are highly prized as tenants: they, as a group, are prone to be very stable long-term tenants, not likely to engage in illegal activities, have a revolving door of roommates, throw wild & noisy parties, do physical damage to property, etc.

More affordable housing is needed. EE will scare off potential housing providers, making things worse.

I'm glad I discovered this website & look forward to reading more insights from you on the local scene.

Monica Berson

What's wrong with multiple punctuation marks??!!??

WAKE UP!!!!#@$%!&^***(_)!!!!!!

Now, now. Monica is right about multiple punctuation marks
--three should be the limit.
Monica, thank you for your comments. I am now more confused than ever
about EE.
Thanks, too, for remembering the Montclarion days. I was cancelled after 2 days
by a new editor (now long gone) because he said my columns were "too one-sided";
that the Montclarion wanted "to work with business and City Hall"; and because
"your columns take away (reader) interest in our news stories." There was
a fourth reason, but what could top #3? A few months later
OaklandNews was born. Our columnists are sacked if they aren't feisty,
well-informed and pro-neighbrhood. Wait til you see Jane Powell's next column!

Jane has a new column coming?????

When? When? When? When?

And when is the second Jeannette column coming out?

And we need new jokes!

Um, Jane's column has been here for 2 days. The angel who designed
this new Web site thought that it would be "intuitive." He was wrong. So
I need a refresher class in getting Jane, Jokes, Hugh, Ralph, Bill -- everybody-- on line,
and that depends on his schedule. My column is 1/2 done.
We love you Kije!

I am curious about David Stein's "absolute integrity". We received a campaign letter from him indicating that he had the endorsement of the Green Party. When we checked with the Green Party, we were told that nothing could have been further from the truth.

The letter you refer to never says or hints or any such thing that the Green Party
endorsed Stein. It says that he shares many of their goals. The letter is signed by Carl Pope,
the Sierra Club's executive director, because Pope thinks Stein is by light years the
better environmental candidate and the better candidate overall.

Here is the letter in its entirety:

Dear Green Party Voter:

On November 5 we will choose District 4°¶s next City Councilperson. Although there is no Green candidate in the race, there is a clear choice. That is why we strongly support DAVID STEIN for City Council.

David is a lifelong resident of Oakland with a strong record of progressive politics and reform that spans three decades. David has never held elected office, but rather has focused his energies on grass roots and community organizations and neighborhood groups. Community leaders recognize him as the candidate who can facilitate change by bringing people together.

Melanie Sweeney-Griffith, who ran against David in the primary, endorsed David, stating: °ßDavid Stein is a long-time community leader, who has invested time and effort into making Oakland a better place to live. In my opinion, there is simply no alternative to David.°®

David endorsements include COOS (Citizens for Oakland Open Space), Danny Wan, Oakland City Council, Susan Duncan, Trustee, Peralta College, Doug Linney, Director, EBMUD, H.E. Christian (Chris) Peeples, President, Board of Directors, AC Transit, and John Sutter, Director, East Bay Regional Park District.

David supports the principles of the Green Party. His work has included:

Ñh Three terms on the budget advisory committee
Ñh President, Friends of Oakland Parks and Recreation
Ñh Board Member, Marcus A. Foster Educational Institute
Ñh Chair, Oakland Partners in Education

David will bring real expertise and experience to the City Council.

We hope that you will vote for DAVID STEIN FOR CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT 4 ON NOVEMBER 5, 2002. If you have any questions for David, please contact him directly by phone (510) 326-8898 or e-mail David4Council@aol.com.

Carl Pope, Gary Sirbu
Executive Director, Sierra Club* Past Chair, California Common Cause*

*Organization name for identification purposes only

This is NOT the letter to which I referred, it was sent during the primary campaign. Unfortunately, we recyled the letter in February and therefore I don't have the exact text. The implication of a Green Party endorsement was so strong as to prompt our call to the party for clarification. At that point I knew nothing about David Stein except that he had been endorsed by our megalomaniacal mayor.

If elected David Stein will immediately become the most competent, knowledgeable and effective member of the City Council . Given Oakland's electorate's track record, however, I fear that Jean Quan might be elected as she clearly would fit right in with the rest of the dim bulbs on the council. Stein is light years ahead of Quan on policy, finance, overall planning and vision. And when he speaks he is comprehensible unlike Quan who talks on and on without ever making any sense whatsoever. She is ponderously boring and uninteresting as well.

Measure FF and the accompanying measures might not be the perfect solution but without an infusion of bodies onto the force OPD will collapse from overwork and stress. Employment in Oakland will benefit only those who are qualified. Oakland has an enormous number of undisciplined, illiterate, unskilled adults who are literally unemployable and will be unlikely to benefit when the economy rebounds (which it will, undoubtedly). Jobs is only a solution for people who are employable. Those who oppose Measure FF might have a different opinion when the savagery and chaos which is now occurring in East and West Oakland makes its way up into the hills. Which it will if left unchecked. Like it or not without adequate police protection crime will continue to increase; almost exponentially.

Think about this: Six years ago Oakland finally had enough money to fully fund its police force. And yet every year for the past 6 years we have been between 95 and 105 officers short.

Every year for 6 years we have heard the same excuses: cadets are stolen after the academy, cops are wooed to other cities, cops retire.
San Diego is of comparable size and does its police work with fewer cops. We have a city manager who promptly took uniformed officers and sent them to Oakland Airport after Sept. 11, where they have remained. He did this even though Sheriff Charley Plummer had the people and the plan to supply a full staff to the Airport.

I think we have a huge _management_ problem here.

Finally, there is nothing binding about how measure FF money would be spent. Want to bet that Jerry finds a way to funnel some of it to his military academy or arts school?

Stumbled upon this site. Two things your readers should know about EE: Jerry Brown is not against it. John Russo is not against it. Neither has taken a position on the Measure. The Landlords sent out a mailing to everyone in Oakland stating that Brown was against EE. They lied. You can find out for yourself by calling Brown's office.

I stumbled upon this site while trying to find something on the internet which gives arguments against EE. While I do not believe that property owners should take evicting someone lightly and I am glad that the rent ordinance prevents evictions in order to raise rents, I am adamently against EE. It is not good for Oakland. I think it will ultimately hurt many who the supporters of EE say it will help. It is not a good initiative.

Just Cause does sound warm and friendly and EE will probably get yes votes from many who would not vote for it if they really understood what it says. I wish that everyone would read the whole initiative and not just the ballot information.

Did we dream it, or did Wilson Riles come out in favor of CC (Strong Mayor) on his show today?

Did he get confused (as Jerry hopes voters are confused) that a "no" vote means an end to Strong Mayor? Because it doesn't....

All politicians support SM because they all dream of being mayor.
Sick, isn't it?

Except that Wilson was adamant during his campaign for Mayor that he would allow Measure X to sunset.

Who got to him? Is it because he's a principal at an Oakland school now, and needs to play footsie with the Mayoral Sasqwatch?

No you didn't dream it. Wilson was very much in favor of Strong Mayor, Measure CC, on his show today. In fact, he came across like he's always been in favor of it. He seemed enthusiastic about it as well. The only thing he seemed to be pushing harder was measure EE.

For what it's worth, Wilson always favored strong Mayor. He favored Strong Mayor back when he ran for Mayor in the early 1990s. For him it's not an issue of who is Mayor -- unlike everyone else (including me) Wilson doesn't see this as a referendum about Jerry, but as an issue about how the government should be structured. (He's wrong about that too, but that's a separate issue.)

During the campaign Wilson said he was going to let the Mayoral appointees to the School Board sunset. He said as little as possible about Strong Mayor because he knew most of his supporters and staff disagreed with him.

On other news, it is important that everyone know that not only has Nancy Nadel denouced the mailer that uses her picture against Measure EE, stating "I unequivocally support Measure EE," but also Danny Wan -- no friend of the Measure -- has denouced the mailer linking the "Yes on DD" and "No on EE" campaigns. He has also fired Larry Tramutola, the biggest scun in Oakland politics and the consultant who prepared these mailers. There will be a press conference at City Hall at noon today in regard to this.

Kenny

Jeanette:

I want to refer again to the article you posted, "The Tipping Point."

When I go to it in you newsletter, all I get is the first paragraph. Can you fix this?

On our MGOTalk chat program we are having a vigorous discussion on crime in Oakland. I want to cite that article and maybe use some quotes from it.

Thanks

Robert

Click on the headline of the story or the MORE... link. That will give you the full story