City Council

Jul 292014
 

These are Mike Katz-Lacabe notes/tweets on the July 28th San Leandro City Council meeting on the Marina/Shoreline development and expansion of the San Leandro Police Department headquarters. These notes are provided because the Council no longer produces minutes of its meetings. Once again, Mike Katz-Lacabe and Mia Ousley were the only two City Council candidates present at the meeting.

San Leandro City Council work session on shoreline fund and police space needs starts now – without Councilmember Michael Gregory.

San_Leandro_Marina_07829Marina

Dredging needed for channels to San Leandro Marina every 4 years and berths every 8 years.

Siltation rate for San Leandro marina is 8 to 12-inches per year.

Harbor operations at San Leandro marina have a net loss of more than $400k per year. Fund is $2.5 million in the hole.

Shoreline operations generated $335,000 in 2013-14. Includes tax generated by San Leandro Marina Inn and restaurants. $94k expected this year.

San Leandro shoreline fund expecting $84k in net revenue this year. Outstanding debt is nearly $9 million.

Amortized over next 10 years, the annual unfunded liability for the San Leandro Marina is $3.2 million, including dredging of $1.5 million.

130 of 462 berths at the San Leandro Marina are occupied. 26 berths are occupied by San Leandro residents. 11 are live-aboards

In April/May 2012, average depth in channel to San Leandro marina was 5.9 feet, according to Army Corps soundings. 3.9 feet at fuel dock

San Leandro shoreline fund debt is about $1.9 million for Cal Boat Loan and $7 million to city’s general fund.

Download tonight’s presentation on the status of San Leandro’s shoreline fund.

Earliest that construction on San Leandro Marina project could begin is estimated at February 2017.

Projected lifespan of San Leandro boat harbor without dredging is another year or two before boats have problems getting in and out.

Mayor Stephen Cassidy: Why is there no federal money for dredging? A: Disappearance of earmarks & Army Corps budget priorities.

San Leandro city staff on possible ferry: Sea of parking with a dock. Might not be seen as a good thing by residents.

Dwight Pitcaithley: Costs are formidable. “It’s not going to be an easy thing.” “You could privatize the channel.” Marina needs a benefactor

Dwight Pitcaithley is making a documentary on the San Leandro Marina that he will put on YouTube.

San Leandro Marina supporter: “The decision is pretty much made… The Marina is sentenced to death.” Put this on the ballot.

San Leandro still has an estimated $2.5 million expense for disposing of dredge spoils from 2009, when the Marina was last dredged.

Bella Comelo Why cannot the Marina issue be put on the ballot? Let the people decide.

Note that dredging (or lack thereof) of the San Leandro Marina only affects the boat harbor. Park and other areas unaffected.

San Leandro Councilmember Diana Souza: most people want to keep the marina. “Everyone of us would love to have the marina there.”

San Leandro Councilmembers Souza, Prola, and Lee seem resigned to the demise of the boat harbor. Lee says $1,500 to $2k per boat in costs.

Bella Comelo, If the City Council wants to put it on the ballot, they can.  Survey from 2007 showed not enough support to financially support Marina.

San Leandro Councilmembers Ursula Reed and Pauline Cutter also resigned to demise of boat harbor. Reed says money needed for roads.

Mayor Stephen Cassidy: advisory vote would get lots of support. But what then? Tax to support marina requires 2/3 vote, which previous poll shows would lose. Favors vote on planned development, but that wouldn’t save boat harbor. Also mentions need to maintain roads.

slpdbadgePolice Department Expansion

San Leandro City Council now onto police department space needs.  Current bldg built in 1967; seismic upgrade in 1995.

San Leandro Capt. Lemmon: If there was an earthquake like there was in 1989, we wouldn’t be able to operate at needed capacity.

San Leandro PD: Needs Assessment report had 3 options to construct a new police bldg from $60 to $71 million (2009 $) to address needs.

San Leandro PD expansion options: Address top 5 deficiencies at $6.4 million or address top 3 deficiencies at $3.8 million.

San Leandro PD expansion ranked #2 capital improvement project after street repair. Possible funding: Measure Z sales tax increase.

Mayor Stephen Cassidy questions how San Leandro City Council can decide on PD expansion options without knowing about how it will be funded.

San Leandro Councilmember Prola supportive of $6.4 million option and gym for police department expansion.

All San Leandro Councilmembers support the $6.4 million SL police dept expansion. Cutter/Prola express concerns if taxes fail in Nov.

San Leandro Councilmember Ursula Reed on PD United for Safety event: “I was hoping to win something, but that didn’t happen”

Mayor Stephen Cassidy notes that surveillance cameras approved last week have microphones. Asks for update/clarification on audio surveillance.

San Leandro City Manager says that staff will come back with recommendations on audio surveillance.

Mayor Stephen Cassidy wants to name street after Officer Dan Niemi, who was killed in the line of duty July 25, 2005.

Jul 242014
 

The July 23rd Council meeting went extremely long. Mike had gone to speak in favor of a strong privacy policy for surveillance data, and didn’t get to do so until nearly 11. Before that he tweeted from the meeting. My comments are in italics. The Tweets have been organized by subject. Follow him @slbytes.

The only City Council candidates present at the meeting were Mike Katz-Lacabe and Mia Ousley.

San Leandro City Council to discuss Heron Bay wind turbine lawsuit in closed session on Monday 7/21.

Surveillance camera policy is on the agenda for Monday night’s 7/21 San Leandro City Council.

Councilmember Jim Prola is absent from tonight’s San Leandro City Council meeting.

pickardCongratulations Officer Pickard for being recognized as the City of San Leandro employee of the quarter!

Kinkini Banerjee & family accept Proclamation from Mayor Cassidy declaring Aug. 2014 as Indo-American Heritage Month.

Kinkini is one of my best friends and I love her, but I wonder why India West was not invited to receive the proclamation or at least attend the ceremony. India West is the largest Indian-American newspaper in the US, and it’s based in San Leandro!

LINKS shuttle

San Leandro LINKS shuttle: 6.25 mile loop, 23 stops to connect W. San Leandro to downtown BART. Hours: 5:45am-9:45am and 3-7pm

Bike racks added in past year. Avg. 737 riders per day. 191,646 total riders in 2013.

Goals for San Leandro LINKS: shorten route to reduce time, reach Marina Sq./Auto Mall, service to Westgate, Kaiser, 21st Amendment Brewery.

Proposed change to San Leandro LINKs to meet goals: split route into north and south routes to reduce wait and trip times.

Proposed change to San Leandro LINKS will cost: $50k from City, $165k more from business improvement dist. & $130k more from grants/business

Mayoral candidate Diana Souza sounds supportive of San Leandro LINKS. She voted against it on 3/16/09.

Former San Leandro Councilmember Gordon Galvan is Exec Dir of San Leandro Transportation Mngmnt Org, which runs LINKS shuttle.

Mayor Cassidy wants to add San Leandro to the LINKS shuttle name a la “Emery Go Round” since the City will be partially funding it.

Diana Souza had been very critical of the LINKS shuttle until now. Her change of face is interesting. Gordon Galvan, who not only runs the shuttle but is also a lobbyist, was one of main contributors to Cassidy’s campaign.

Liens

San Leandro City Council voted 6-0 to impose liens for non-payment of bus. license fees, garbage fees, sidewalk repairs, and code compliance.

Among those with liens imposed by San Leandro for non-payment of business license fees: Diana Souza campaign mgr Charles Gilcrest.

I was at the council meeting last year where the Council voted to place liens and one of the business owners who appeared complained about the cumbersome system for paying business license fees, the immediate fines and lack of communication from the city. Apparently things haven’t changed as there were many liens imposed.

Floresta Gate

Much discussion about a gate for the Floresta Gardens neighborhood.

Karen Williams of Floresta Gardens asking for gate to reduce crime from non-residents. City discourages gates communities.

San Leandro City Council approves gate on Caliente Drive for Floresta Gardens neighborhood 4-2. Gregory and Lee vote no.

Facebook comment: A neighborhood in Fremont was asking for a gate along the Alameda Creek a few years ago. After a few months of curfew enforcement and checks at the location of concern we found most of the trouble actually originated from the HOA family members and guest.

Public Comments

First speaker addresses issue of children arriving in US from Central America.

Second speaker supports San Leandro Marina. Work session Mon. 7/28 on marina and shoreline.

Marijuana Dispensaries

San Leandro selects ICF International to help craft dispensary selection process. Mass. paid $335,449 to ICFI for similar work.

San Leandro Councilmember Diana Souza recuses herself because son works for pot dispensary that will apply for San Leandro dispensary.

Nothing in the government code requires Souza from disqualifying herself from this situation, but she doesn’t want to be in record voting against medical marijuana facilities. Alas, she has been on the record speaking and voting against them before. Souza, however, did not feel she needed to recuse herself on a vote concerning the property belonging to her own campaign manager.

Surveillance Cameras

Next up: vote on 36 cameras to monitor San Leandro City Hall and other city properties.

Mayor Cassidy clarifies that the upcoming vote does not approve a policy or anything to do with public surveillance cameras.

San Leandro Councilmember Benny Lee asks about backup of the data and whether backups are encrypted: Answer from staff: I believe so.

San Leandro City Council candidate Mia Ousley notes deficiency in draft surveillance camera policy and confusion about the agenda item.

San Leandro City Council votes 6-0 to approve $156k contract with Odin Systems for City Hall cameras. Not sure if it was sole source contract [later confirmed it was].

Pittsburg PD purchased cameras from Odin Systems. SLPD Chief Sandra Spagnoli used Pittsburg as example of video surveillance success.

However, San Leandro had greater reduction in crime without cameras than Pittsburg with cameras.

Odin Systems recently “donated” 60-inch monitor to Pittsburg PD, which paid thousands for cameras from them

No bid contract approved by San Leandro City Council Mon. 7/21 includes cameras with microphones for audio surveillance [which is unconstitutional].

Facebook comment from Mia Ousley, who was also at the meeting:

Only 3 people spoke out at last night’s meeting — all against the policy as is. However, in a confusing intro, Mayor Cassidy said the Council was not voting on a potential future plan to increase the number of cameras, which is what was written in the printed or online agenda. He said that information was only in the title and was misleading. However, I don’t see it that way at all, so it’s unclear to me what the Council actually unanimously agreed to — just replacing the current cameras at our Civic Center or a plan to install cameras at other areas in the city in the future. So I decided to address that issue anyway, saying oversight must be by a neutral party, and that decisions should come from the City Council, which would allow thorough vetting by the public.

Mike Katz-Lacabe agreed, and also discussed additional security and privacy issues that were not addressed in the proposed policy.

Darlene Evans was the only other speaker on the topic, saying her bike had been stolen from the library, where there was a camera, but the officers there told her spiders covered the camera and they couldn’t see anything.

Jul 212014
 
Tweets by Mike Katz-Lacabe

Tweets by Mike Katz-Lacabe

The San Leandro City Council no longer keeps minutes of its meetings. Anyone interested in what transpired has to listen through hours of recordings. There is no way to search through them either.  San Leandro Bytes editor Mike Katz-Lacabe (who is currently running for City Council) sometimes tweets from the meetings.  I’m going to start collecting his tweets to serve as the record the City Council does not want to keep. The tweets are slightly cleaned up for ease of reading.

Mayor Cassidy notes that San Leandro City Council voted to extend Measure Z (.25% sales tax) and increase to .5% mainly to fund roads.

San Leandro Town Hall meeting starts with update on Marina & Davis freeway overpass construction project. Summer 2015 ETA for completion.

Pile driving complete on San Leandro Marina overpass. Pile driving starts in August for Davis overpass: 7am to 3pm.

Question to CalTrans: Can you do something about timing of lights on Marina Blvd in San Leandro? Traffic there is horrible.

CalTrans response from Scott McCrank: We agree. We’re looking at it, but “only such green time that can be allotted.” We’re brainstorming…

San Leandro Town Hall meeting has nearly 60 attendees and about 15 City staff.

Police Chief reports that crime in San Leandro is down 7% from last year. Note that this matches regional trend.

Former San Leandro CM Howard Kerr supports increasing sales tax to 10% or more to fund more police, surveillance in streets, neighborhoods

San Leandro CMs Benny Lee, Jim Prola ,Diana Souza supported Measure Z in 2010 and support doubling

Commenter at San Leandro Town Hall: Look at cutting city government, including red light cameras, before increasing sales tax.

Dwight Pitcaithley at San Leandro Town Hall: Why aren’t voters being allowed to vote on the fate of the San Leandro Marina?

Mayor Cassidy responds to Pitcaithley: We don’t have a final plan for the San Leandro Marina yet. EIR is currently underway.

San Leandro Comm Dev Director Cynthia Battenberg notes that public wants boat harbor, but not enough to pay for it. From 11/2007 Godbe poll.

Leo West at San Leandro Town Hall: Measure Z was supposed to be a temporary tax & now it’s for 30 years. Says supporters of Measure Z lied.

Mayor Cassidy to West: We eliminated utility user tax rebate for large businesses. Spent money wisely. Doing same work with less staff.

Two more supporters of a boat harbor in San Leandro speak of a lack of vision, the marina as a gem in the Bay Area, & resident support.

Mayor Cassidy response to question from Justin Hutchison: City is working on free wifi in downtown San Leandro.

Mar 142014
 

police-beat-marijuana-patientBan extends to e-cigarettes, Public not given notice

UPDATE: After I sounded the alarm on this issue, Mayor Cassidy took the item off the agenda for the March 17th meeting.  He claims that the prohibition of smoking/vaping marijuana in multi-family homes was included by mistake.  He says a revised ordinance will come back for a vote in April.  The revised ordinance, however, is also injurious to medical marijuana patients, as they will not be able to take their medicine safely when they’re away from their homes.

The San Leandro City Council sneaked a very controversial issue into its agenda for Monday March 17th’ meeting: a total ban on marijuana smoking in multi-family housing buildings.  The ban extends to widely-defined public spaces and places of employment.  It would leave detached private homes  as the only places in San Leandro where a patient could legally smoke marijuana.

The new ordinance, which  expands the definition of smoking to include using an electronic cigarette or vaporizer, allows the District Attorney to charge violations as misdemeanors.   It also imposes criminal liability on landlords or property owners who knowingly permit smoking anywhere where it’s illegal. This means, that if a landlord finds out that a tenant in a multi-family dwelling smokes marijuana, he will have to get the tenant to stop or risk prosecution himself.  This is likely to result in landlords turning in tenants to the Police or evicting them to avoid being prosecuted themselves.  Caretakers can also be criminally prosecuted,  as the Municipal Code already says that “causing, permitting, aiding, abetting, or concealing a violation of any provision of [the anti-smoking law] shall also constitute a violation.”

While prosecution is at the discretion of the DA, the City is able to assess fines.  Enforcement of the smoking ordinance, moreover, is in the hands of the San Leandro Police Department, which does not have a good reputation for fair enforcement of the law.  The code, moreover, allows for private prosecution of the anti-smoking ordinance, so anyone who has a problem with someone they know to smoke marijuana and live in multi-family housing, can use the law to harass them.

The new ordinance will continue to permit smoking tobacco in multi-family housing and hotels, but would ban the use of e-cigarettes, in all public and semi-public areas where tobacco smoking is prohibited now.

As troubling as the ordinance itself, is how it’s being passed.  It was added to the consent calendar for the City Council’s next meeting, meaning that it’s meant to be voted on without any discussion by City Council members and without the opportunity for community members to give their input.  This may still be changed, if the Mayor or a Council member moves to take the item off the consent calendar, but that is not guaranteed.

Moreover, the description of the ordinance in neither the agenda nor the staff report prepared by City Attorney Richard Pio Roda, disclose the actual effect of the ordinance.  The full explanation/justification for the marijuana ban in the report is as follows: “Another change is that the existing ordinance is amended to clarify that smoking marijuana is not permitted at certain “exempt” locations where smoking is allowed, such as the golf courses located within the City.”  It’s only by looking at the list of “exempt locations” in the Municipal Code – not quoted in the staff report – that the reader will be able to tell that these include multi-family housing.

However you look at it, this ordinance will deeply restrict the individual rights of e-cigarette users, medical marijuana patients, caretakers and property owners.  To pass it without any discussion or notice to the pubic is unconscionable.  I asked Mayor Cassidy to take it off the consent calendar to no avail.

To express your views on this ordinance, please attend the March 17th City Council meeting at 7 PM at the San Leandro City Hall. In addition, please e-mail the City Council.

What the Ordinance Does:

– Treats e-cigarettes as regular cigarettes, and vapor as smoke.

San Leandro Municipal Code 4-12-105 n-and-o currently define smoking as

“possessing a lighted pipe, lighted cigar, or lighted cigarette of any kind, or the lighting of a pipe, cigar, hookah, shisha, or cigarette of any kind, including, but not limited to, tobacco, or any other weed or plant”

and tobacco as

“any substance containing tobacco leaf, including but not limited to cigarettes, cigars, pipe tobacco, snuff, chewing tobacco, dipping tobacco, bidis, or any other preparation of tobacco.”

The new ordinance replaces the two articles above with the two following ones:

Smoke means the gases, particles, or vapors released into the air as a result of
combustion, electrical ignition or vaporization, when the apparent or usual purpose of the
combustion, electrical ignition or vaporization is human inhalation of the byproducts, except
when the combusting or vaporizing material contains no tobacco or nicotine and the purpose
of inhalation is solely olfactory, such as, for example, smoke from incense. The term “smoke”
includes, but is not limited to, tobacco smoke, electronic cigarette vapors, and marijuana
smoke. The term “smoke” also includes vapor generated through the use of an electronic
cigarette in any manner or in any form.

Smoking means engaging in an act that generates smoke, such as for example:
possessing a lighted pipe, lighted hookah pipe or shisha pipe, an operating electronic
cigarette, a lighted cigar, or a lighted cigarette of any kind; or lighting or igniting of a pipe,
cigar, hookah pipe, cigarette of any kind, or any other weed or plant.

– Continues to prohibit tobacco and marijuana smoking in public places, places of employment and some other areas

MC 4-12-200 bans smoking in enclosed public places, places of employment and enclosed spaces that share an air-space (e.g. through a window or door) or a ventilation/AC/heating system with an enclosed public place or place of employment.

MC 4-12-205 bans smoking in unenclosed public places, places of employment, service/ticket/boarding/waiting areas, parks, playgrounds, athletic facilities and the sites of public events.

– Public places are defined (MC 4-12-105-i)  as “any place, public or private, open to the general public regardless of any fee or age requirement, including, for example, bars, restaurants, clubs, stores, shopping malls, stadiums, parks, playgrounds, taxis, and buses.”

– Places of employment are defined (MC 4-12-105-g) as “any area under the legal or de facto control of an employer, business or nonprofit entity that an employee or the general public may have cause to enter in the normal course of operations, but regardless of the hours of operation, including, for example, indoor and outdoor work areas, construction sites, vehicles used in employment or for business purposes, taxis, employee lounges, conference and banquet rooms, bingo and gaming facilities, long-term health facilities, warehouses, enclosed common areas of multi-family housing buildings, and private residences that are used as child care or health care facilities subject to licensing requirements regardless of their hours of operation”

– Enclosed spaces are defined (MC 4-12-105-3) as spaces that are partially or totally covered and have more than 50% of their perimeter area walled in (e.g. a covered porch) or that are open to the sky and have more than 75% of their perimeter walled in (e.g. courtyard)

– Continue to permit tobacco smoking in private residential units, tobacco shops and two golf courses.

The language of MC 4-12-200 would make it illegal to smoke in most apartments, condos and even townhomes with a common area, including a car port.  For this reason, the code (MC 4-12-210) establishes an exception for smoking in private residential units. The exception also extends to smoking in tobacco shops, up to 25% of hotel rooms and two golf courses.

– Prohibit smoking or vaporing marijuana in private residential units in multi-family housing

The exception that allows people to smoke cigarettes in their apartments or condos will explicitly exclude marijuana.

– Prohibits Landlords from knowingly permitting marijuana smoking in their property.

Property owners are already prohibited from allowing tobacco smoking in areas where the City prohibits smoking (MC 4-12-400).  This would extend that prohibition to allowing marijuana smoking.  Given that cigarette smoking is permitted in private multi-housing homes, this actually creates a new and cumbersome legal liability on landlords and property owners.   For example, if an elderly relative is staying with you while undergoing cancer treatment and they use marijuana to deal with the nausea, you would have to stop them from doing it or risk being prosecuted for a crime.  A landlord who finds out one of their tenants smokes marijuana, might need to evict them or call the Police on them to escape criminal liability.

– Treats Recreational Marijuana and Medical Marijuana identically

The ordinance does not distinguish between a patient smoking legally obtained marijuana and a person smoking marijuana recreationally.

– Does Not Prohibit Marijuana Edibles

Patients will continue to be able to consume edibles that include marijuana or marijuana extract/oil.  However, not all patients are able to consume marijuana in this manner.

Feb 062014
 
Emergency Services Director Renee Domingo speaking to the City Council

Emergency Services Director Renee Domingo speaking to the City Council

City employees in Oakland and San Leandro appear to live and work by the motto “it’s better to beg for forgiveness than to ask for permission.”  While most city councils rubber stamp whatever proposals city staff puts before them – an easier task than actually reading and analyzing long and boring reports -, some proposals are so clearly contrary to the public benefit that they are not politically tenable for council members to knowingly pass.  In those situations, staff – most assuredly with the blessing of the City Manager/Administrator – may give the Council an “edited” version of the facts behind it.   Whether the purpose is to deceive council members or provide them with plausible deniability can be discerned by how the member react once the true facts are uncovered.

Oakland city staff’s quest to build the Domain Awareness Center (DAC), a facility that would centralize the feeds from hundreds of cameras and license plate readers throughout the City, is a perfect example of how this works.  Internal e-mails obtained through the California Public Records Act make it clear that the actual purpose of the DAC is to track and subvert the activities of political protesters and labor activists in the city and port of Oakland. However, in public meetings, both staff and Councilmembers have only referred to the alleged crime-fighting uses of the DAC.   Finally, at the last meeting of the Council’s  Public Safety Committee,  Emergency Services Director Renee Domingo, who has spearheaded Oakland’s DAC project, was forced to admit that there is no data showing that existing DACs in other cities have helped to either reduce or solve crimes.

While there might be some room for argument about whether misleading the Council as to the purpose for the DAC is actually “lying”, it is absolutely clear that Ms Domingo deceived the Council about Science Applications International (SAIC)the company that was hired to build the DAC.    SAIC is a large military contractor which, among other things, works in the development, building and deployment of nuclear weapons.  Under Oakland’s 1988 anti-nuclear ordinance, the City cannot award contracts to any company that is involved with nuclear weapons.   Internal e-mails show that Domingo was aware that this was a problem in February 2013, but she didn’t mention anything about it to the City Council and the Council indeed went on and hired SAIC to build the first phrase of the project.  According to Domingo, she first heard about SAIC’s non-compliance in August,when activists brought it up – but that’s contradicted by the e-mails alluded to above.

Domingo is now proposing that the Council contract with called Schneider Electric to build phase II of the DAC. A simple google search of “Schneider Electric” and “nuclear weapons” leads to marketing materials from the company where it describes one of its main applications a being “nuclear weapons handling systems.”  It’s still unknown whether Domingo failed to do her due diligence or just hoped that activists wouldn’t find out.

No member of the Oakland City Council has held staff accountable for deceiving  them and for having the City knowingly enter into a contract that violated the City’s own laws.  Councilmember Dan Kalb campaigned on “restoring trust in City Hall“, and yet he has meekly accepted staff’s unethical behavior seemingly without a second thought.   While Kalb is not for re-election, his colleague Libby Schaaf, who has also failed to question staff over their duplicity, is running for Mayor of Oakland.  Her “no need for accountability” attitude is echoed by incumbent Mayor Jean Quan.

Things are no better in San Leandro.  Chief of Police Sandra Spagnoli routinely gives the City Council information that she knows to be false.  She has lied about things as easy to verify as the number of license plate scanners the Department has and the effects of realignment in the City.  But she also gave the Council false information about marijuana, the number of complaints they get about chickens and the dangers of overpollination.  A few months ago, the City had to settle a lawsuit brought by men after the Chief issued a press release falsely accusing them of attempting to engage in public homosexual sex.

Not only does the Chief routinely lie to the City Council, but she has also broken the law.  In 2012, the Chief was caught using Police Department staff and resources to get citizens to lobby the City Council against a proposed marijuana dispensary.  That violates both the San Leandro Municipal Code and the California Government Code.  Though City Council members are well aware of the Chief’s unlawful attempt to manipulate the democratic process, they have not called her on it.  This year, both Mayor Stephen Cassidy and Councilmember Pauline Cutter are running for re-election.

The Chief is not the only “truth impaired” member of staff in San Leandro.  When City staff decided to change the Zoning Code as a tactic in a pending lawsuit, city they explained the change as being a “routine update of the code” and only acknowledged the actual motive behind it after citizens like me brought it up repeatedly at public meetings.  After the acknowledgement, Mayor Stephen Cassidy made some noise about being more open with the community in the future, but did not take staff to task for their repeated attempts at deception.

It’s difficult to know what we can do to restore ethics and accountability in City Hall – both in San Leandro and in Oakland.  Electing the right people has to be part of the solution, but candidates with integrity are few and far between.   My strategy – exposing bad behavior at City Hall -, has seldom been an impetus for change.  Is local democracy just broken and, if so, can it be fixed?