City council debates funding for violence prevention programs
on January 18, 2012
Violence prevention programs funded by Measure Y are working, according to a report presented at the Oakland City Council meeting on Tuesday night. But not well enough, councilmembers and speakers from the public responded.
“We can not ignore that we have had an increase in violent crime,” said councilmember Desley Brooks (District 6), “and so we can not continue to do the same thing the same way and expect that it’s going to be a different result. And there lies the problem—we continue to do what we’ve always done.”
The council approved a three-year funding cycle for Measure Y—the anti-violence, voter-approved initiative that provides $19 million annually for violence prevention programs, and police and fire services—that will extend through 2015, the final year of the initiative. The report estimated the annual revenue for those years will be about $22 million, which would then provide about $4 million to fire services, more than $11 million for police and about $6 million for violence prevention programs centered around youth.
Tuesday’s discussion centered around authorizing funding for the violence prevention program aspect of Measure Y, though the opportunity to talk about the initiative allowed those present to criticize all aspects of it. Councilmembers criticized Mayor Jean Quan for not better explaining her “100 Block” initiative, which Quan has said will concentrate police efforts on the 100 blocks in Oakland where 90 percent of the violent crime occurs. Supporters of Occupy Oakland railed against the Oakland Police Department for alleged brutality. And dozens of public speakers asked the council to spare from cuts the position of a re-entry specialist who would help the formerly incarcerated transition back into society.
The council approved a resolution to fund Measure Y that struck any reference to the mayor’s initiative. Councilmembers Ignacio De La Fuente and Brooks were especially critical of the plan, which they said hadn’t been properly vetted by the council. Quan, who usually attends city council meetings though she is not required to do so, was not present at the meeting Tuesday night.
“I don’t know what the 100 blocks are, I don’t know what the plan is,” Brooks said. “The last time I saw the mayor on the news talking about the 100 blocks, she said it was a concept. I have no clue what this is.”
Councilmembers criticized the Measure Y report, which was presented by Sara Bedford of the city’s department of human services for not including more statistics on just how the initiative is helping to reduce violent crime in Oakland. While the report noted that violent crime across the board has decreased since the last three-year funding cycle, gun violence is on the rise. Councilmember Rebecca Kaplan (At-large) called gun violence “our crisis” and noted that there is no city-wide strategy to combat the problem, or public safety in general, and advocated more of an effort to get illegal guns off the street.
“How does this Measure Y money fit in to a bigger strategy is missing, and that’s specifically the fault of people working on Measure Y,” Kaplan said. “The question is really ‘Where is the big picture strategy?’”
Supporters of Occupy Oakland also used the opportunity to talk about dealing with the OPD, which they characterized as violent. Two people were arrested at an Occupy-supported rally against police brutality on Saturday night in the latest clash between protesters and police. “Giving more money to the police department to decrease crime or decrease violence is not working,” said Oakland resident Jessica Hollie, an Occupy supporter. “They are in effect the ones increasing crime and increasing violence and inciting riots. That’s exactly what’s happening now.”
In other business Tuesday night, the council approved spending $1.3 million in city funds on fixing up the abandoned 16th Street train station project. After the redevelopment agency was disbanded, the city had until February 1 to decide if it wanted to spend the money in order to receive a matching grant of $1.3 million.
Oakland North welcomes comments from our readers, but we ask users to keep all discussion civil and on-topic. Comments post automatically without review from our staff, but we reserve the right to delete material that is libelous, a personal attack, or spam. We request that commenters consistently use the same login name. Comments from the same user posted under multiple aliases may be deleted. Oakland North assumes no liability for comments posted to the site and no endorsement is implied; commenters are solely responsible for their own content.
Oakland North is an online news service produced by students at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism and covering Oakland, California. Our goals are to improve local coverage, innovate with digital media, and listen to you–about the issues that concern you and the reporting you’d like to see in your community. Please send news tips to: firstname.lastname@example.org.
[…] http://oaklandnorth.net/2012/01/18/city-council-debates-funding-for-violence-prevention-programs/ […]
Its funny how the council says there is no strategy, yet they cannot implement any new strategies when they are presented with them!. Whatever happened to the loitering ordinance? Could have been a huge tool to help CSEC, not to mention other benefits. AND, this has gone to the Public Safety Council that Rebecca Kaplan is on, so she is really part of the problem if we don’t have a good public safety strategy. Tired of hearing people state the obvious and then not be able to make a decision for action when the time comes.
I am so tired of hearing these people state the obvious and then not be able to make a decision for change when presented the opportunity. What ever happened with the loitering ordinance??? I believe it was voted down, then went to the Public Safety Committee and was never taken back up. Rebecca Kaplan and others on the Public Safety Committee are responsible for that, and really are sacrificing public safety, just because they don’t want to sit through another long meeting and debate on this issue. Not right.
For pure entertainment, read some of the Measure Y “independent” evaluations.
I particularly like the tabulations of self-serving questionnaires of program participants who were asked how effective the program has been for them.
It makes some of the worst examples of school testing look like hard science.
-len raphael, temescal
Len Raphael is more than right on. Measure Y specifically requires that evaluations be made of the rate of reduction of crime and violence in Oakland. The existing evaluation does no such thing. Voters passed Measure Y because they wanted violence to go down significantly. Violence has not diminished in any observable way and has remained at the long-term average of 105 murders a year. No one in City Hall wants to own up to this.
Where are the 2010 and 2011 evaluations? The latest one linked on that page was from 2009.
[…] organizations are working in similar ways to bring down the level of gun violence among minors. Oakland’s Measure Y dedicates about $5 million annually to programs targeted at young people, some specifically at youth violence prevention. In part, this money funds street outreach […]