Oakland's Crime Reduction Problem is Unique

From what the Mayor and Chief Jordan say about their proposed contract that includes ex NYPD and LAPD Chief Bratton, it appears that Bratton and other associates at Bob Wasserman's firm would be hired to develop a comprehensive long term crime reduction plan.  It's hard to say that with certainty because our transparent officials have not provided residents with a copy of the proposed contract and only gave one to the Public Safety Committee members just before their meeting this past week.

A comprehensive crime reduction plans means something very different in Oakland than it means in NYC or LA.

In the NYC years of Bratton under Mayor Giuliani, a crime reduction plan = changing how NYPD was organized, managed, deployed, staffed, and trained.

Judging from Bob Wasserman's (Chief Bratton's boss for this contract) description of Bratton's very successful work in LA as Police Chief, a big part of Bratton's success did come from his working with local residents to address their complaints about the interaction of LAPD with residents and complying with its Federal consent decree.

Our problems are not unique, but the divisions here between residents who emphasize crime reduction via more and better policing as compared to more and better social programs are.  In NYC or LA the arguments are mostly over how policing should be performed, not if.

NYC does not have the equivalent of a Measure Y parcel tax which dedicates 40% of the tax to violence prevention programs.

NYC and LA (have to check) don't have a Kid's First law that mandates a fixed percentage of city revenue to kids' programming.

While Bob Wasserman emphasized that getting community input and buy-in was a crucial part of the planning process, nowhere did he mention whether his consulting team would be delivering a plan that included anti-violence or job training or even anti-recidivism programs.

Whether one thinks those programs are or are not a necessary part of any crime reduction plan for Oakland, a high percentage of residents do feel that way.

There is no way any consultant is going to help residents reach consensus on the right balance between policing and programming in a few months no matter how many community meetings are held and how good the consultant is at listening and mediating when those Oakland fault lines have existed for decades.

Limit the scope of the contract to improving the operation of OPD. Decide whether Bratton is crucial or not. Then approve it or not and move on to how to pay for the solutions we want.

Next, our elected officials with our Mayor in the lead have to tackle the truly difficult problem of reaching a consensus on the right balance between programs and policing for Oakland.