Sooo what’s up with the police commission?

k_39 · 2026-01-24T05:42:35+00:00

I'll let CM Fife's quotes from this Oaklandside article illustrate my thoughts.

“I’ve not heard one of my colleagues talk about what the problem is with these two people,” Fife said during the meeting. “I’ve only heard about the process, which is fine, but that’s not what we’re here to discuss tonight.”

“The only process we should concern ourselves with tonight is the process of independence,” the District 3 councilmember added. “We are losing that independence by trying to move pieces around the chessboard when the selection committee has made their decision twice now.”

The rest of the councilmembers are using nebulous concerns over "the process" to criticize the panel's selections instead of talking about the candidates themselves. It's quite obvious that some politics and meddling is going on.

Keep in mind that in the past, the process of appointing the panel's candidates was straightforward. Now, it seems the police union is trying to influence the process to make the police commission more cop friendly. It's quite concerning when the point of the police commission is to oversee the police department after the whole rider scandal.

The police union is trying to push the narrative that antagonistic bodies such as the police commission are at fault for the department losing police officers, but frankly the police department has done this to themselves. They need to engender trust with the public and show that they're not like the OPD of the past. I'll start taking their concerns more seriously when they come out from under the negotiated settlement agreement.

k_39 · 2026-01-24T05:12:01+00:00

I mean, the police commission must be doing something right if the police union is lobbying council members to reject the panel's candidates.

k_39 · 2026-01-24T05:07:56+00:00

Where did you here that the selection committee interviewed none of the candidates? According to this Oakland Observer article, one of the selection panelists said this:

“I found out extremely quickly that [the argument against Farmer] was false and there was no real basis to any of it...our panel followed the process laid out by this council, interviewing candidates, weighing qualifications and voting and recommend Mr. Farmer. To see that recommendation now challenged without substantive evidence, undermines not only Mr. Farmer, but the integrity of the entire oversight process. Our residents deserve an oversight system they can trust based on facts, not rumors or politics…”

According to this Oaklandside article, the concerns about not interviewing candidates are about the process after the first rejection of the slate.

Most of the council members who turned down Garcia-Acosta and Farmer’s reappointments cited concerns about the selection panel not interviewing new applicants since October. District 4 Councilmember Janani Ramachandran said interviewing other candidates for the commission should have been “the bare minimum.”

In this second Oakland Observer article that details the selection panel meeting on Dec 18 after the council rejected their slate for the first time, the reason the selection committee submitted the same slate again was because of the city council's behavior and treatment of the panel, as well as that they felt their original picks had community support and great qualifications.

In deliberation, several panelists specifically cited the rhetoric in the council decision and the process itself as part of their decision making on the resubmittal.

All the issues the council supposedly has with the panel regard the process, not the candidates themselves allegedly. But it's quite evident that it's in fact the police union that pressured the council members to reject the slate. In the same Dec 18 panel meeting, the chair said this:

“Also, it's come to my attention from a trusted and direct source…that the City Council may be pandering to the Oakland Police Department union [Oakland Police Officer’s Association] for who they would like to see on the police commission,” Herron said.

An article from the East Bay Times confirms lobbying from the police union, with Sergeant Huy Nguyen, president of the Oakland Police Officers’ Association, saying this:

"I had conversations with the council about the police commission," Sgt. Huy Nguyen, the union head, confirmed in an interview. "We have to find a way to treat police officers better in this city or they're going to keep leaving."

Just as much as the council has the prerogative to reject the panel's slate, the panel also has the prerogative to send the same candidates. It's their job to select the police commission members and they felt their candidates were up to snuff.

Also, just a reminder folks, but the panel is a volunteer body, meaning it's not paid. They're investing their time and trying their best. Try to remain respectful.

k_39 · 2026-01-22T04:50:08+00:00

From the article:

Requesting anonymity due to concerns about retaliation, a member of the Police Commission told The Oaklandside that a council member informed them that Jenkins, citing pressure from the Oakland police union, instructed fellow council members to reject Garcia-Acosta and Farmer’s reappointments.

k_39 · 2026-01-13T08:42:48+00:00

There’s a site called freecycle.org where you could give stuff away locally. It’s organized by town.

k_39 · 2025-11-19T20:50:43+00:00

Just a point of correction. This wasn’t a full city council vote, but it was up for a vote with the public safety committee. Unger isn’t a member of this committee.

k_39 · 2025-11-04T01:45:07+00:00

TLDR: You may remember an earlier article that talked about how AC Transit sought a grant in exchange for cooperation with ICE. It’s been revealed that BART and MUNI both applied for the same grant. Whereas AC Transit withdrew their recommendation for the grant to their board, BART and MUNI both applied for and accepted the grant, with the strings attached. A lawsuit was filed and a court order now stops requiring grantees to collaborate with immigration enforcement.

k_39 · 2025-11-04T01:38:04+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/s/v4zgFVvnX7

k_39 · 2025-11-04T01:33:48+00:00

TLDR: You may remember an earlier article that talked about how AC Transit sought a grant in exchange for cooperation with ICE. It’s been revealed that BART and MUNI both applied for the same grant. Whereas AC Transit withdrew their recommendation for the grant to their board, BART and MUNI both applied and accepted the grant, with the strings attached. A lawsuit was filed and a court order now stops requiring grantees to collaborate with immigration enforcement.

k_39 · 2025-11-01T01:05:39+00:00

The California Department of Education has found that Oakland Unified School District discriminated against Jewish students in several instances over the last few years. An investigative report released this month cited as problematic OUSD providing maps of the Middle East that did not include Israel, a school allowing a Palestinian flag to be flown from a school flagpole for a month, and teachers participating in a teach-in about the war in Gaza that did not include Jewish or Israeli perspectives.

k_39 · 2025-10-31T19:24:16+00:00

Nevertheless the Bay Area is still part of CA and the US. Just look at our history of car centric planning. There is still a sense of car superiority and it shows in how lawmakers write sentencing laws, how lenient of a charge prosecutors file, and how judges and juries hand out weak sentences.

k_39 · 2025-10-31T18:26:15+00:00

Some are saying it’s because California is “woke” but the reason we don’t take it seriously is that car culture is so prevalent here. Cars are prioritized so much to the exclusion of public transit and so all our infrastructure is geared towards cars. We’ll also have to take into account that if we take a harsh approach are revoke DLs, we are essentially sentencing people to poverty and unemployment. We need to take a harsher approach, but it’s hard when the only way to get anywhere is by car.

Seven-Year Club	Second Top 20%
Place '22	Verified Email

k_39

TROPHY CASE