Oakland: Hot Spot For Tourists

 

“We’re more than just movie stars and surfers!”

(from a Chevron ad promoting CA…or was it a CA ad promoting Chevron?)

  If you live, as I do, in Oakland, CA, you probably took one look at the title of this post and thought WTF? OAKland for tourists? According to the New York Times it is. The newspaper of record recently named Oaktown #5 (out of 45) of the Best Places to Visit in 2013. They adore the restaurants, and they’re willing to ignore crime statistics in order to enjoy a fine meal.

Oakland toted up 131 murders in 2012, the most since 2006 when 148 people were taken out by their fellow citizens. For a California comparison, in the same year 46 people in San Jose met the Grim Reaper through acts of violence, and in San Francisco the number was a mere 68.

 

Most geographical areas around the globe go generally unnoticed—towns and cities with no outstanding distinctions. Some gain reputations for one or more defining characteristics. Oakland is unusual in that its rep varies depending on who you’re talking to. When I first moved here from high-rent SF 20 something years ago, my sister convinced my mother that I was surely ducking bullets night and day. After my mother came and saw for herself – and canceled her SF hotel reservation when she didn’t see any bullets – she told my sister I lived in “a nice neighborhood.” My sister’s response was “There’s no such thing in Oakland.” At the other extreme, my politically active NY friends think it’s “cool” to live in Oaktown. Me? Let’s just say I’d move back to SF in a New York minute if I could afford it. In fact, had I the time, energy and head space I’d reverse the equation and move back to New York in a San Francisco minute. And it’s not bullets I’d be fleeing; it’s piles of garbage and dog shit on cracked sidewalks. It’s the drunks, crazies, and fights on the bus. It’s the loud musical sounds blasting from idling cars outside my building. I cannot imagine anyone purposely taking a trip here to see…what? A replica of Jack London’s cabin on JL Square? Fairyland, overstepping piles of goose turds along the way?

The article didn’t actually name Jack London or Fairyland, it heaped praise upon Oakland’s restaurants and cocktail bars. Where? I wondered, running through my mental data base of one Chinese, one Mexican, and a dozen sushi places. To be fair, I don’t eat out often enough to make an appraisal—so I’ll take the newspaper’s word that  Hawker Fare, “a casual spot serving Asian street food” and Plum, with its adjacent cocktail bar, serve food delicious enough to travel for.

To my mind, however, delicious food does not a great vacation make. There’s little to see in these parts, and violence lurks, barely beneath the surface. Oakland’s a poor and broken city. Not that I adore the state of California itself–I’ll  always be a New Yorker at heart. But my personal bias isn’t what made the place dysfunctional; it’s the other way around. Even during my first 8 or 10 years here, when I was having a blast with new people, new work, new ideas and ways of being, I could still see the dysfunction. It’s in the state initiative process, as many political analysts have pointed out. It’s in Proposition 13, which deprives California of much-needed funds. It’s in corrupt governmental agencies, and less-than-rigorous honesty on both an individual and collective level. It’s in a failing school system and a crumbling infrastructure. Precarious bridges. Feuding neighbors. Honking horns, sideswipes and even shootings on the freeway. Unsafe walking conditions, with drivers running red lights and hitting pedestrians. In 2009 California led the nation with over 550 death-by-drivers, according to the Governors Highway Safety Association. That same year, four states–California, Florida, Texas and New York–together accounted for 41% of U.S. pedestrian fatalities.

Some of my information comes from random, unsaved newspaper stories. Some of it comes from bartenders and cab drivers.  Speaking of which—it’s bad enough that AC Transit (the bus system) is barely functional, but you can’t even count on cabs in this burg. I’ve been stranded on street corners with my grocery bags because the cab I called found a more lucrative fare on the way to pick me up. I’ve had drivers get hopelessly lost and expect me to pay for the extra mileage.  I come from New York, where if I want a cab I step off the curb and raise my arm. Here the drivers aren’t ambitious enough to ride around looking for fares; I have to take a bus to a BART station, where the cabs line up and wait. The reason for this? From what the drivers tell me, it’s a crooked system under which the many company names—Friendly Cab, Veterans, Yellow Taxi—are actually all part of the same conglomerate run by the city and manipulated to line certain pockets. I’m not accusing anyone of anything here; I’m just repeating information given me by several different drivers.

A young woman I know visited NYC for the first time when she was 15. When she came back I asked her what she liked best. “The pizza?” She shook her head. “The museums?” No again. Suddenly her face lit up, and she said with obvious admiration, “The public transportation system!” In a similar vein, last year in Costa Rica I took cabs everywhere for a mere pittance and no tips allowed. Taxicabs were everywhere–outside grocery stores, cruising past bus stops–they even outnumbered personal vehicles.

Imagine a family from New York trying to wave down a cab to take them to one of Oakland’s much-touted restaurants. But then again, tourists are insulated almost everywhere—here in Oakland they’ll stay at the Marriott downtown, or at a bay front hotel on Jack London Square, and the front desk will call for their cabs as needed. After all, a lot of tourists visiting New York see nothing beyond the Disney store on 42^nd Street.

One thing you can’t miss in Oakland, though, is its diversity, which attracted me from the get-go. I remember the first time I ate at Scott’s on JL Square, and was pleasantly surprised to see a variety of people of different ethnicities. In most cities it’s not that common to see people other than white ones at middle-class venues, and I really liked Oakland’s mixed atmosphere. (For breakdowns of ethnicity among Oakland’s population, see Wikipedia.)  After two decades of living here though, the most tangible result I can identify from this diversity is isolation: my neighbors–primarily Hispanic, Afro-American, and Filipino–don’t understand me and I don’t understand them. In terms of daily reality, they are completely uninterested in me: they don’t say hello in the morning, and sometimes look away if I do.

Meanwhile I’ve detected a slight thaw lately in black-white relations. It helps that we speak the same language. Warning: Here comes a RANT! Unlike most liberals, I am a staunch believer in learning the predominant language of the country in which one chooses to live. I cannot stress how strongly I feel about this. It’s discourteous and dismissive not to learn the language of the land you live in; I wouldn’t go live in

My grandmother on the right.

France without speaking French. My own grandparents, who came here from Poland via Ellis Island as teenagers, never learned to read English. They spoke it, but for their entire lives the only newspaper they read was the Daily Forward in Yiddish. I remember being appalled even as a child: they were the only people I knew who couldn’t read English. I thought they were stupid because of it. I no longer think they were stupid—but I do think they were wrong. Very wrong.

So, in closing this post, I just hope the Oakland City Council doesn’t sue me for unsubstantiated allegations. And, as much as I like receiving comments on my blog, I hope hate mail doesn’t come pouring in. I hope my activist friends don’t tie me to a chair and lecture me for my political rehabilitation. And I hope I don’t have to flee Oakland, where I can at least afford the rent, and where I feel a kinship with some of my financially challenged neighbors. Now that I’ve ranted and got some stuff out of my system, I realize I kind of like it here after all; there’s a free-floating artistic vibe here, evident, for instance, in the colorful street murals. So I hope I haven’t scared off any tourists—we need their bucks. Come on down, people! The weather’s fine!

Plastic Bag Legislation

The time has come to speak my mind on a subject of great consequence to us all as individuals, as a nation, and as citizens of Planet Earth. The subject I refer to is plastic bags, toxic to birds, fish, and other living creatures. It seems to have reached the tipping point, what with cities and counties throughout the country passing piecemeal legislation banning them.

In California, legislation to ban plastic bag usage has been debated for several years. In 2010, a bill backed by grocers and then-governor Arnold Schwarzenegger didn’t make it past the legislature due to opposition from—who else?– the plastics industry. The first state to ban plastic bags was Hawaii. San Francisco was the first city, in 2007.

In Alameda County where I live a law took effect this January 1^st prohibiting food stores from packaging goods in plastic bags. A good law, a sensible law; who doesn’t want to save the poor little fishies who mistake these bags for food and choke to death on them? It’s a kind law, a progressive law. Or so I thought. Like most people I didn’t pay attention to other aspects of the law. Either that or I have a more simple mind than I thought I had. It never occurred to me that banning a product would mean doing anything besides removing it. As it turns out, in addition to the plastic bag taboo—in food stores, that is—customers who forget their tote bags or don’t have any or for any reason don’t wish to hang their purchases  around their necks are welcome to a paper bag—for ten cents. I asked one cashier where the money goes. To the state, she said uncertainly. For what? Nobody seems to know. As I’ve so often observed, most Californians don’t care about small inconveniences; it hadn’t even occurred to them to raise the question.

But I am still a die-hard New Yorker, and I care. I would like to know the rationale behind this fee for paper! One cashier said she thought it was a way of encouraging consumers to recycle by bringing their own bags. I ask you: when did ten cents ever change anyone’s behavior? Those who’ve been recycling bags all along will continue to do so, and those who haven’t are unlikely to start doing so for the money.

Another thing: I’ve always used the plastic bags I get from stores–when I forget to bring my totes–as garbage bags. I cannot understand people who carry on about the dangers of these bags, yet go out and buy plastic garbage bags. Where’s the logic here?

And one final irony: When I bought a mug and some other chatchkalas at Pier One, they put my tissue-wrapped purchases into a plastic bag.

“I thought you can’t use plastic,” I said to the cashier.

“That’s only in food stores,” she replied.

If this is true, then the whole thing is just plain absurd.

If it’s not, well, where are the Plastic Police when we need them? Never mind the plague of violence in Oakland—they’re pushing plastic at Pier One! For the sake of the fish, get an undercover team out to Emeryville post-haste!

Related articles

• How the Plastic Bag is Suffocating the Planet [Infographic] (urbantimes.co)
• Should We Get Behind Plastic Bag Bans? (naturemoms.com)

Post Election Post

 

 

My blog post of yesterday was probably one of the most precise expressions of my state of mind that I’ve ever written down. Like a lot of people I spent election night monitoring results on my computer, streaming PBS and watching tweets roll by, the latter endlessly amusing. A lot of journalists were tweeting; one of them noted “Florida’s giving me a heart attack.” Before he or anyone could melt down over that gun of a state, however, it was all over but the shouting: Obama was called pretty early, before 9:00 here in California. Of course, the Mitt didn’t concede right away, so I didn’t hear Obama’s speech ‘til my middle-of-the-night bathroom summons.

They’d been telling us all along it was going to be sooooo close, which got me and a lot of other people nervous. For what seemed like hours that infernal map blushed as if deeply embarrassed. Since I tend to forget that only about six people live in each of those red states, I was gnawing on my fingernails, wishing I’d done some phone calling for the Dems, worrying about yet more material deprivation in my future…and then suddenly Pennsylvania goes for Obama, and then another populous state, and Hey will you look at that! He’s Still the One!

My whole body collapsed right here in my chair. I hadn’t realized how tense I was, but when my muscles let go in relief I knew I’d been terrified about this election. Sure, we’ve had presidents as bad as Mitt Romney—Reagan, GWBush (The Nitwit)—but none of them were emboldened the way the Republicans seem to be nowadays. I might be wrong, but I suspect that a right-leaning president would do a lot more damage today than in the past. More than The Nitwit? I ask myself. Yeah. He was incompetent, but as I said, he wasn’t operating within the same toxic atmosphere; it was only just developing when he was in power.

But it’s a moot point. Not only did Obama win, he won big. The Reps are gathering in groups, scratching their heads and yelling at one another. They lost big among young people, Hispanics, and women. Doh! No young woman in 2012 is going to vote for a man or a party that calls pregnancy by rape a God-given blessing. No Latino worker is going to vote for the party that expects him to “self-deport.” These guys better get their act together or else, as their own Michael Steele and conservative think tanker Norm Ornestein are saying, they’re going to become fully irrelevant and unelectable.

 

You Must Remember This

John Nichols, a writer for The Nation, said on Democracy Now this morning that people, particularly progressives, need to understand this was a big win, and pressure President Obama to use the mandate for real change. It matters a lot, says Nichols, that he didn’t just crawl into the Oval Office or squeak through by a few lousy points. Florida’s results aren’t in yet, and neither are those of Washington State and a few other places, but Obama’s ahead mostly everywhere, and by the time the counting’s done he’ll have at least 100 more electoral votes than Romney.

How this works: The bigger a President wins, the more support he has from the voting public, and the more permission he’s been tacitly granted to implement the agenda we endorsed. As Nichols pointed out, Obama’s not a big progressive; he’s not even a liberal. He’s a centrist, on top of which he has a strong tendency to compromise. The only way he’s going to be emboldened—like a Republican in similar circumstances would be—is if the people who voted for him put on the pressure. One president, I think it may have been Lyndon Johnson, told those who voted him in that now they had to make him do their bidding. We need our leaders to lead us—and they need us to push them to lead. When they enact the policies we want, they’re not being radical or despotic: they’re doing what they’re supposed to do.  That is how it’s supposed to work. Our representatives represent us. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

Meanwhile…

Happy Days Are Here Again / The skies above are clear again / Let’s sing a song of cheer again!

A bit of music trivia: Happy Days Are Here Again was written by Milton Ager and Jack Yellen in 1929 and used in the film Chasing Rainbows, as well as in dozens of other movies. It was the theme song for FDR’s 1932 presidential campaign and as a jumpy jingle became the unofficial song of the Democratic Party. In 1962 Barbra Streisand came along and rearranged it as a torch song for her first commercial success. Brilliant and beautiful. Check it out.

 

Report on the California Props :

Proposition 30: YES. Endorsed by Governor Jerry Brown, this prop temporarily increases state sales tax and income tax on individuals making over $250,000 to avoid “trigger cuts” to the state’s public education system.

Proposition 31: NO.  Would have created a two-year budget cycle for state government, allowed the governor to cut the budget in fiscal emergencies, and required performance reviews in state programs. This was a blatant anti-union proposition, and big money came from out of state to support it (currently under investigation).

Proposition 33: NO. Would have required insurance companies to set rates based on previous insurance history of drivers with better rates for drivers who had insurance in the past.

Proposition 34: NO.  Would have repealed California’s death penalty and replaced it with life in prison without parole. Death penalty will still be used in CA.

Proposition 35 : YES. Increases prison terms for human traffickers. Does a lot more than simply punish traffickers. This prop is a perfect example of the problems inherent in the initiative process. This looked good—after all, who’s not against human trafficking? But these are complex issues and the prop was written in such a way that most people did not see its flaws. While legal experts pointed them out, none  organized or gave money towards stopping its passage—because again, who’s going to come out looking like they’re pro-trafficking? So a bad law was passed by a wide margin (80%).

Proposition 36 : YES. Changed the “Three Strikes” law so that life-in-prison sentences only apply if the third conviction [strike] is “serious or violent.”

Proposition 37: NO. Would have required labeling of genetically-modified food and prohibited it from being labeled “natural.” The food industry, especially the Monsanto corporation, spent over $20 million to fight this measure. They won, we lost. Watch what you eat–if you can tell what it is!

Proposition 38: NO.  Would have hiked up state income tax for 12 years, allegedly for education.

Proposition 39: YES.  Requires multi-state businesses to pay income taxes based on percentage of sales in California.

Proposition 40: YES.  Keeps the California State Senate lines as they were drawn by the California Citizens Redistricting Commission in 2010.  Rep. Barbara Lee supported it.

Related articles

• Obama victory songs: Mariah Carey, Jay-Z and other new music to flag-wave by (o.canada.com)
• Florida still counting votes but not crucial this election (tbo.com)
• Why I Don’t Give a Crap About Voting (alienredqueen.wordpress.com)

Pity The Pedestrian

I Pity the Pedestrian
(To the tune of  “I Pity the Poor Immigrant,” with apologies to Bobby D.)

I pity the pedestrian
who wishes he would’ve stayed home
who uses his feet to go everywhere
and ends up tired and alone.
That man who must outrun the cars,
who’s always out of breath
who passionately hates traffic
and likewise fears his death.

I’ve said it before, I’ll probably be saying it until the day I die: walking around these California streets is a dangerous business. We’re never going to resolve the carbon emissions problem until everyone gets out of their cars – but they won’t get out of their cars as long as walking and public transit remains inconvenient and dangerous.

I have many pet peeves relating to drivers, traffic, and the organization of a state and society geared towards the pleasure and efficiency of individual travel by wheel. One of these is the practice of parking a car at the end of a driveway so it takes up the sidewalk, forcing pedestrians into the street to pass. The other day I was on my way to the bus stop in the rain when a man parked his car, blocking the entire sidewalk, just as I approached. When he got out of the car, I asked, “Do you have to park on the sidewalk?” I admit this wasn’t the most tactful way I could have put it – but it wasn’t the nastiest either. Certainly it did not warrant his immediate response, which was : “Fuck you! Fuck you! I got kids in the house! Fuck you!”

Is this any way to speak to a lady? An old lady, at that? And what was he implying? That he didn’t want kids to have to walk in the street, I suppose – but the hell with the old lady? Fuck him! “Pig!” I shouted back.

Other threats to walkers are bicyclists who ride on the sidewalk. I’m reluctant to ‘dis bicyclists, who are doing their part to save the planet – but they’re supposed to use bicycle lanes. True, not every street or road has a bicycle lane – another travesty – but plenty of bikes have whizzed past me, grazing my arm or leg, even in places where lanes were clearly defined. Bicyclists are considered a vehicle, like a car, and subject to the same traffic laws. The Oakland Municipal Code, Section 10.16.150, prohibits sidewalk riding:

“No person shall ride a bicycle which has wheels of twenty (20) inches or greater in diameter or a frame of fourteen (14) inches or greater in length on any sidewalk within the city.

This prohibition shall not be applicable to Oakland police officers operating a bicycle while engaged in their assigned duties.”

(Note that state law does not regulate bicycle riding on sidewalks—this is left up to individual cities.)

To report violations, call the Public Works Agency at (510) 238-3983 or visit their website.

Finally, this isnt exactly a complaint, but I wish we had more trees in my neighborhood. Trees give us shade and improve air quality, especially helpful in the summer. It turns out that the city will plant a tree upon request, something most people aren’t aware of. Online I discovered that the City of Oakland will plant a free sidewalk tree to any homeowner willing to care for it. Visit their website for more information and to download the tree planting request form. Or contact Robert Zahn at Oakland Public Works Agency Tree Section, (510) 615-5852.

Let’s Make the World Safer for Pedestrians!

Related Articles

• Bike Lane Battle Crosses GWB Into Hoboken (newyork.cbslocal.com)
• How to Pedestrian Like a Pro (treehugger.com)
• Journeys, Destinations, and Quality of Life (Dom’s Plan B)

Generation of Hypocrites?

Image via Wikipedia

Californians are polling against the Proposition to legalize marijuana, with 49% saying they’ll vote against it. The majority of naysayers are over 39 — the generation that started a few political movements and trends with a little help from our leafy friend. What’s goin’ on?

I can only guess, and I’m guessing it’s the old Do As I Say, Not As I Do syndrome: now parents, the Boomers don’t want their kids to smoke pot. I’m always hearing and reading confessions by these people about how they lied when their kids asked them if they used to get high.

It’s the same syndrome as having their erotic videos sent wrapped in plain brown paper, or telling the kids they’re looking for something lost in the sheets when they get “caught.”

Obviously I think all this is thoroughly reprehensible, and don’t need to explain, or to lecture, because the truth is self-evident, and I’m weary of my own soap box. Just for the record, though, I for one am thrilled I’ll be able to vote for legalization of marijuana in my lifetime, after all those years when I was a criminal, worrying I’d be thrown into jail. Of course, that was part of the whole experience: I remember my first few highs, imagining the newspaper headlines:

“MOTHER OF TODDLERS CAUGHT SMOKING POT: NEGLECTED CHILDREN ASLEEP UPSTAIRS!!”

Maybe that’s the real reason people are Just Saying No: they don’t want to deprive their kids of the full marijuana experience. Sure.

November 4th Addendum: I read in the SF Chron today that the growers opposed legalization because they don’t want their prices to go down. Ah, Greed! Greed is Good? Also, some are paranoid and wary of government regs. I don’t like it.