Jan 292014
 

If you are ever going to read one article one Oakland, this is the one you must read

If you dare to call yourself progressive, to think of yourself a progressive, then you must read it and think about it.

“There are two public/private worlds in Oakland existing in parallel to one another. Mostly white, fairly affluent people live in one, where they are focused on issues of expression and personal privacy—especially in cyberspace. The privacy battlefield of this group is theoretical. While there is much generalized surveillance it is not yet directed at this demographic in any copious way, and much of the focus is preventative to avoid a reality suggested by everyone’s favorite rhetorical device, George Orwell’s 1984. Oakland’s other world is populated by mostly Black, Asian and Latino people in the city’s poor and of color neighborhoods. Privacy in that world has an entirely different set of parameters and connotations.”

The Other Domain: Oakland’s Parallel Public/Private Worlds

 

Jan 262014
 

I was just looking through the City’s Spring Activity Guide.  There are tons of classes, trips and activities for seniors (defined as those 50 and over).

If you’re a teen or pre-teen, however, you are pretty much out of luck. Your choices are tennis, martial arts and jazzersize.  There is basketball for those under 15, and spinning and yoga for those above.   Your only other choices are belly dancing and cake decorating.

Another problem is getting to the classes. Most of the classes are at the Marina Community Center. Great if you live in the neighborhood or have a parent to drive you, but otherwise, you’re out of luck. No bus service at the time the classes are offered.

This is all to say that the City is not doing nearly enough to serve out children, in particular our teens. We have all heard that one of the biggest reason why kids get in trouble is idle time. This is particularly true for middle school aged kids. Why does the city insist in ignoring them?

The answer is pretty simple.  Seniors vote, teens can’t and parents don’t. If you want things to change and you don’t make it a priority to vote, please start. Only then will the politicians start listening.

Jan 242014
 

Ro Khanna

Here is Why

For the second time in less than two years, I am shifting my public support from a political candidate to his opponent.  I did it in 2012 when, after having endorsed Rob Bonta for California Assembly, I learned that Abel Guillen‘s political views more closely aligned with mine.  I am doing so again now, by announcing my endorsement of Ro Khanna, who is running against Mike Honda for Congress in CD 17.  My reasons for switching this time are very different.

I have the utmost respect for Mike Honda.  His record of supporting human rights and civil liberties, while advocating a progressive agenda,  is exemplary.  You can count on Honda to vote the right way almost every time.  Indeed, I think it says a lot that before this election, his biggest source of campaign contributions were human rights activists.

Honda, moreover, is an extremely pleasant legislator, well-liked by everyone who knows him.  He has done very important work, in particular seeking justice for Japan’s comfort women and standing up for American Muslims.  At first thought – and second and third and fourth – the idea of endorsing someone else seems crazy.  And, indeed, it has taken me several months of careful thought to come to this decision.

I’ve come to it because while I am deeply appreciative about everything that Mike Honda has done in Congress, I think that Ro Khanna can and will do even more.  Khanna is a one-in-a-generation sort of politician, a statesman-in-the-making who combines intellectual brilliance with a thorough understanding of our economic and political realities and a clear vision of what this country needs to advance.  He is pragmatic about what can be accomplished in our current political environment, has concrete plans on how to reach out to legislators from all political persuasions, but he’s clear as to what is not up for compromise (things like human rights or a woman’s right to choose).

More importantly, Khanna is both convincing and inspiring.  Khanna profoundly believes that the job of government is to promote the general welfare and it is a job it can get back to doing well.  He believes in the political philosophy of the founding fathers, and in their dream of America as the political heir to Athens.  When you hear him speak, his unique mix of optimism and pragmatism quickly becomes contagious.  I fell under his spell when I interviewed him last year and you can notice similar reactions in journalists and bloggers who’ve interviewed him at length.   It’s this effect which provides him with an ideologically-diverse base of financial and other support.   Watch, for example, how emotional football legend Ronnie Lott becomes when speaking to Khanna about his expectations for his candidacy.

It’s been difficult to ignore, however, the parallels between Ro Khanna and Barack Obama.  Obama also spun beautiful webs when running for office – he spoke about hope and restoring the rule of law,  only to go back on pretty much all of his promises as soon as he was in office.  Khanna started his political career walking precincts for Obama, and his current campaign is being run by Obama former operatives.  For months, I’ve feared that Khanna was also a con.

But fears are ultimately prejudices, and neither I nor the country can afford to dwell in them.   In reality,  Khanna has been consistent on the political philosophy he’s expressed throughout the years.  He first ran for Congress in 2004,  as a statement of opposition to the war on Iraq and the Patriot Act.  He has made it clear in interview after interview that he believes civil liberties are the cornerstone of democracy and that we must support them at home and abroad.   People whom I respect and have known Khanna for far longer than I, believe he is the real deal and offer their support.   Chief among them is Lawrence Lessig, a law professor and director of the Edmond J. Safra Center for Ethics at Harvard University.  Lessig is one of the foremost advocates of political reform in America, and has written and spoken widely on the corrupting influence of money in politics.  I respect his opinion greatly.  I also respect the opinions of teachers like Cheryl Cook-Kallio.  Ro Khanna started volunteering in her classroom almost a decade ago because, he told her, his life had been changed by a teacher.  She was proud to tell me how Khanna wrote a recommendation to the University of Chicago, his alma matter, for one of the students he mentored.  That student just graduated law school and passed the bar.

Finding a person with the intellectual acumen, knowledge base and political, social and ethical values that Ro Khanna spouts is rare.  Finding such a person who actually wants to get involved in politics and has the commitment and desire to make a difference, is rarer still.  Finding someone with all those qualities that can also inspire others is almost impossible.   As much as I like Mike Honda and appreciate the work he’s done, I want to see Ro Khanna have the chance to prove himself in Congress.  For that reason, I endorse him.

I am not thrilled, however, about some of the positions that Khanna has taken – for example, concerning Congressional pay – and I have been disappointed at some of the childish antics that both campaigns have displayed.  My public endorsement of Khanna will not prevent me from criticizing his policies and postures in the future.  It should also put any criticisms I make of Honda into context.

Marga Lacabe

 

Full Disclosure: Khanna was one of the several politicians and labor groups who contributed to the slate of candidates with which I ran for Alameda County Democratic Central Committee in 2012.

Jan 222014
 
John Perez

John Perez

Betty Yee

Betty Yee

Today I got a call from Assembly speaker John Pérez’ campaign. He’s running for State Controller and wants my vote for the Democratic endorsement.

My plan, at this point, is to vote to endorse Betty Yee. Yee is currently a member of the State Board of Equalization. I have heard her speak and she’s definitely a budget wonk. She’s had a number of budget-related jobs in the past, and she strikes me as someone who is careful and by the book. Still, I don’t know her very well.

Speaker Perez, OTOH, strikes me mostly as a political animal for what should really be a non-political job.

Still, I was elected to represent all Democrats in AD 18 to the Democratic Party and I’d like to hear from you whom you’d like me to vote to endorse and why.  You can e-mail me at margalacabe@gmail.com, tweet me at @SanLeandroTalk or comment on my Facebook page.

Jan 212014
 

turbineThe Heron Bay Homeowners Association is set to win the lawsuit they filed against the City of San Leandro, concerning the City’s decision to give a height variance to Halus Power Systems to build a wind turbine tower on their property, for research and testing purposes.  The HOA objected to the turbine for aesthetic reasons, but grounded their legal pleadings on assorted – though very weak – environmental concerns.  Still, the judge overseeing the case issued a tentative ruling (TR) granting the HOA’s petition that Halus obtain an environmental impact report  (EIR) on the project.  The EIR would cost Halus hundreds of thousands of dollars and may very well prompt the small wind turbine company to move out of San Leandro.

The City is challenging the tentative ruling and a hearing has been scheduled for February 11.  Judge Evelio Grillo, somewhat unusually, did not post the actual contents of the TR online and, instead, only e-mailed it to the lawyers.  It’s thus impossible to actually comment on his reading of the case.  However, it’s rare for a judge to change his position once a TR is filed.  Best known as the judge in the Jahi McMath case, Grillo has a reputation for being smart and “by the book.”  Still, the City’s attorney – in particular, Meyer Nave‘s Edward Grutzmacher, who seemed to be the principal litigator in this case – didn’t precisely  ingratiate himself to Grillo by getting involved in petty legal shenanigans early in the procedures.   Now, Halus and San Leandro taxpayers may be paying for their lack of professionalism.

When plaintiffs sue a city under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), they need a copy of the administrative record detailing all the  proceedings on the matter before the different City bodies. This has to be assembled and certified by the City and the plaintiff must pay for it. The City estimated that it would cost between $4800 and $6200, which the plaintiff’s lawyer accepted. The City started compiling the record, but did so at a slow pace.  There are  e-mails after e-mails from the plaintiff’s lawyer asking for updates on the status and cost estimates of the compilation.  Replies by Grutzmacher were less than responsive.   Finally, Grutzmacher said the record was ready but the HOA’s attorney could only have it  after delivering a $24K+ check.  He contended that it had taken 187 paralegal hours to compile the record, each charged at $125/hour.   He would not, however, give an actual accounting of how they came up to that amount and instead held the record hostage – though at one point, he gave the HOA’s attorney a one-time, take-it-or-leave-it opportunity to get the record for about $20K.    Finally, the HOA’s attorney had to ask the Court to force the City to give them the record.  The Court ruled that they could have it upon payment of $6200.

While I am the Heron Bay’s HOA number one critic – I thinks this lawsuit is an abuse of process, based purely on prejudice and animus by the HOA’s leadership -, the behavior of the lawyer representing the City was just as contemptible.  The impression I got after reading the e-mail exchange between Mr. Grutzmacher and the HOA’s lawyer, was very much that Mr. Grutzmacher was playing a game: first denying the HOA’s lawyer the information he needed, then holding the record hostage by demanding an absurd amount of money, and then, when the HOA’s lawyer asked for an explanation of the charges, by falsely claiming that the HOA lawyer wanted to get the whole thing for free.  Mr. Grutzmacher’s behavior on e-mails and pleas was not only childish, but offensive. We can speculate how the judge reacted to Grutzmacher’s attempt at gamesmanship.

We will not know Judge Grillo’s reasons for ruling for the HOA until the hearing – unless one of the parties decides to release the brief or some enterprising journalist goes to the trouble of obtaining it -, but we do know that it’s likely that these legal shenanigans will cost the taxpayers plenty.  If the HOA wins, the City will not only be stuck with having to pay its own attorney costs, but also the $25K Grutzmacher alleges it cost to assemble the administrative record.  It will also have to pay for the court costs and the HOA’s attorney’s fees, which are much greater than they would be if he didn’t have to spend countless hours fighting Grutzmacher over the administrative record. Once again, Meyers Nave profits from getting the City into a legal mess and the taxpayers are left to pay for it.

This was a case that the City should have won easily.   But Meyers Nave has shown that it either lacks the competence or the will to actually offer sound legal representation for the City.   Indeed, the tens of thousands of dollars their botched representation will cost this City in this case pales in comparison to the almost $3 million the City lost on the Faith Fellowship case, the $4 million+ it lost on the former Albertsons’ property case and the almost $8 million it lost on the King Family Trust lawsuit.   While these were all lawsuits that the City should not have had to face to begin with – and wouldn’t, if they had gotten competent advise from the let go -, Meyers Nave poor representation definitely did not help along the way.

I said it almost three years ago: “It’s time to fire Meyers Nave” and it’s even more true today.   San Leandro’s taxpayer money should go to pay for fixing our streets, housing our homeless and providing after-school activities for our children.  It should not go to pay for expensive lawyers who give the City bad legal advice, and then benefit when the City gets sued.