THE ADULTS STEP IN
It’s doubtful that politics brings out more silliness
in the human character than any other human endeavor–it just seems that politicians,
and the people they employ, seem so much more intent than anyone else on broadcasting
the odd things that are sometimes on their minds.
And so, in response to a recent UnderCurrents column criticizing the Jerry Brown
Administration, we have Dave Grenell, Aide to Mayor Jerry Brown, writing a letter
to the last Daily Planet that “Despite his celebrity, the Mayor does not surround
himself with guards, handlers and chauffeurs. He refuses to isolate himself from
citizens on the street. He recently called his staff at 10 p.m. on a Saturday night
to report that a dozen bulbs needed to be changed on Lake Merritt’s ‘Necklace of
Lights.’ Such interventions on the Mayor’s part are not unusual.”
One wonders why Mr. Grenell bothered. His letter was appearing about the same time
that California voters were roundly rejecting my long and many criticisms of Mr.
Brown if even they read any of them, predictably electing the former governor, former
secretary of state, and outgoing mayor by a 57 percent to 38 percent margin over
Republican State Senator Chuck Poochigian.
Still, when your defense of your two-term tenure as mayor is that you walked around
the city in the evenings making sure the lights were turned on, you know you’re working
on a thin résumé.
Meanwhile, I’m not sure how long Mr. Grenell was on the team, but actually Mr. Brown
once surrounded himself with at least one guard, chauffer and handler, the since-disappeared
Jacques Barzaghi, who once received a concealed weapons permit through the Oakland
Police Department in order to carry out those duties. Mr. Barzaghi, who seemingly
could not be physically separated from Mr. Brown from the early 1970’s on, left the
country and disappeared from public view about the time Mr. Brown’s Attorney General’s
campaign was gaining public attention. Mr. Barzaghi, it seems, was a political albatross
and embarrassment because–while on the job given to him by Mr. Brown–he had been
reprimanded and punished for sexually harassing City of Oakland staff members.
Interestingly, Mr. Barzaghi surfaced in the newspapers again about the time it became
apparent that Mr. Brown was a shoo-in for the Attorney General’s office, talking
to a Los Angeles Times reporter by telephone from his new home in Morocco
about the sexual harassment charges.
In any event, now that the children have gotten through playing with Oakland’s problems,
it’s time for the adults to step in and clean up the considerable mess left behind.
Even before his scheduled inauguration in January of next year, incoming Mayor Ron
Dellums has been attempting to deliver on his campaign promise for a more inclusive
Oakland government, first over the summer organizing task forces of active and interested
citizens to work up policy recommendations in several areas of city life, then convening
a series of mass workshops this fall to open up the conversation to a larger layer
of citizens.
The efforts have met with some grumbling, of course, as is our right. Oakland grumbles
with the best of them.
Last September, San Francisco Chronicle East Bay columnist Chip Johnson wrote
in a column called “Dellums’ Panels Are Hush-Hush” that he was having difficulty
finding information about the task forces. Mayor-elect Ron Dellums… said [the task
forces] would be a completely open government process,” Mr. Johnson wrote. “But the
people serving on those committees since Dellums' election have not been announced.
And while some of their meetings have been held on the third floor of Oakland City
Hall, very little information has been released to the public–or to the media. …
As with the fraternal order of Masons, you apparently have to be a member to know
what's going on.”
Given that the task forces involved close to a thousand volunteers, and given that
Oakland is a town irredeemably addicted to political gossip, it’s difficult to see
how a newspaperperson of Mr. Johnson’s caliber could not track down information about
task force activities.
And, in fact, a week later, Mr. Johnson admitted that in response to his “Hush-Hush”
column he “received so many e-mails, phone calls and comments from participants in
the citizen task forces created by Oakland's Mayor-elect Ron Dellums that it's only
fair to devote more space to the process.” And though his second column on the task
forces was equally as critical of the process as the first, to his credit, Mr. Johnson
did grudgingly admit that the Mr. Dellums’ “task-force project is a purely democratic
exercise, not one of the 800 applicants was rejected,” also noting that “no one can
say is that there was a lack of interest in the mayor-elect's task-force project.
The council chambers were absolutely packed for the first meeting of the groups,
and organizers ran out of pencils, introductory folders and other supplies.”
What was true of the task force process–an abundance of interest–was also true of
Mr. Dellums’ “Neighbor to Neighbor” mass strategy sessions last month.
Held in various sections of the city in late October (Calvin Simmons Middle School
and Castlemont High School in East Oakland, Oakland Tech in North Oakland, and McClymonds
in West Oakland), the gatherings invited citizens to share their thoughts and ideas
on a wide group of topics ranging from health care, economic development, housing,
diversity, and transportation to education, arts, youth affairs, and public safety.
The idea was to have members of the various mayoral task forces come and mainly listen
to the conversation, taking back information on community attitudes and policy and
implementation suggestions to the task forces.
Mr. Dellums himself has been conspicuously absent during the Neighbor-to-Neighbor
meetings, and that has prompted some grumbling, at least in some quarters. On one
local email list, one woman, saying that she supported Councilmember Nancy Nadel
in last June’s election, wrote that “Dellums–like most other smooth-talking politicians–likes
to use homespun phrases like ‘neighbor to neighbor’ but it takes a bit more than
that to deal with the myriad crises that face Oakland today. Besides that, when my
neighbors plan a neighborhood meeting, my neighbors actually show-up.”
The sentiment is understandable. After the Jerry Brown years there is considerable
touchiness in Oakland about mayoral accessibility, and not having been in close proximity
to Ron Dellums for many, many years–members of Congress, after all, do most of their
work in Washington–Oakland residents have a right to wonder how extensive will be
the ability to have direct citizen communication with the newly-elected mayor. We
won’t know that for a while.
The Neighbor-to-Neighbor meetings, however, were not the proper forum for direct
chats with the mayor. They were designed for citizens to break up into small meetings
and speak among themselves, to ourselves, and had Mr. Dellums begun wandering in
and out of the meeting rooms, it would have led some to the conclusion that the time
for “important” pronouncements were only when the new mayor was present, and the
time when he was not was just so much wasted space. Keeping away–while trusting his
aides to get back unfiltered reports to him–was probably the best thing Mr. Dellums
could do to keep the mass meeting process going.
Citizen participation is, however, a dangerous leap for any officeholder who does
not intend on keeping it up. For many years, the average Oakland citizen has been
shut out of much of Oakland decision-making, relegated to two-minute presentations
before City Council to speak on too many issues that were long-ago decided once the
pay-to-play big boys and girls in the business had their input and say. By operating
on a whomsoever-shall-let-them-come policy so early in the process, Mr. Dellums gives
Oakland citizens the distinct impression that they have a right to be heard on and
participate in city decisions. History has taught us that once having taken hold,
such a notion of democratic rights is hard to take away, even by the ablest politician.
We know Mr. Dellums to be a keen student of history, and so we can only assume, for
the present, that he intends to keep his “inclusive government” word.