A reader informed me that some viewers might not know who this is a video of, it’s Pat Bail of the “Slate.” Enjoy!
If you cannot view the video, visit StoptheSlate at YouTube.
Don’t thank me for this, thank the Stop the Slate Collective. 
October 23, 2006
104 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Outstanding work for all of Alameda to see what the Slate really believes in. This has all the markings of being an exclusive whites-only town if the Slate has its way. Not everybody can bankroll $100k into an election campaign as Pat Bail did the last time (and LOST, if I may add). Slate’s claims run hollow by the day.
So much for NIMBY’s claim of Pat Bail having done yeoman community service. Bah! Humbug!
Comment by Richard — October 23, 2006 @ 4:56 pm
the old and established activists in town (we are used to stuffing envelopes and maybe phone banking and precinct walking,) have not learned to use the power of the web in campaigns. This kind of posting knocks my socks off–The big quetion is how do we move it on -I forward stuff to my list, but it is just because I do it, and not because anyone or any group says to do it.
Comment by Barbara Kahn — October 23, 2006 @ 5:21 pm
Wow. All I can say is wow. That was some of the most disgusting, hateful language I have heard in a long time. NIMBY, step and defend this please. After this, I can’t believe anyone with any compassion can vote for Pat Bail, if not for the slate.
I understand that Pat Bail is not showing up for the Renewed Hope candidates night. no surprise there, since she wouldn’t want to be cohorting with the dregs of society.
Excellent job on this, Lauren, I hope this gets wide and prominent play between now and Election Day.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 23, 2006 @ 9:12 pm
I agree…Wow..Sometimes some very good people just get in bad situations. Many have turned their lives around after a little help. Where is her heart? And sometimes some very good people have good jobs which don’t pay as much as others (such as teachers, daycare workers, food industry workers, ect… They are important to society and Alameda and they deserve opportunities also.
Isn’t she suppose to represent all of Alameda not just those who can afford it. After listening to this, I can’t believe anyone would support her.
Comment by Joe — October 24, 2006 @ 7:59 am
For those that are just discovering YouTube, here’s
a good NY Times article on YouTube usage in politics:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/20/weekinreview/20lizza.html?ex=1313726400&en=a605fabfcb81eebf&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
Comment by Dave S. — October 24, 2006 @ 9:03 am
Thank you for that reference. I am a user, but have no idea of how to harness this power.
Does anyone know how to find out how many homes in Alameda are wired? and how do all those people who send me unwanted email find my address? There will be another election in 2 years, and someone could make a difference by putting together a computer network of some kind of progressive people to work out strategies for using it locally. I think you are all here on this blog somewhere.
Comment by Barbara Kahn — October 24, 2006 @ 9:24 am
The former homless housing at the base generates a HUGE portion of APD’s calls. She has a point.
Comment by dave — October 24, 2006 @ 10:07 am
Why is Piedmont more expensive than Eastmont? Why is Nob Hill more expensive than Bayview? Why is Maui more expensive than Alameda?
The expensive places are that way BECAUSE THEY ARE MORE DESIRABLE. One way to make an area more affordable is to make it less desirable. While that is not necessarily always the outcome of so-called “affordable housing” it has a fairly dependable record across the nation for many years of making the area around it less desirable.
Given the current council’s tone deaf incompetence, it is not unreasonable to suspect any of their housing schemes to turn out this way.
Why risk that?
Comment by dave — October 24, 2006 @ 10:13 am
It takes an election for prejudices to show …
dave’s comments above illustrate this to a point. Hey, if you want a whites-only enclave, how about going back to the segregation days? I’m sure you’ll fit in there perfectly alongwith NIMBY and your fearless leader!
Comment by Jamal — October 24, 2006 @ 10:29 am
Where did I mention race, Jamal?
Are you saying that supporting Measure A and safe clean streets is racism?
Comment by dave — October 24, 2006 @ 10:52 am
You ain’t fooling nobody with the code words!
btw, that “dregs of society” remark is as classless as you can get from Pat Bail. Still you align with her?
Comment by Jamal — October 24, 2006 @ 11:18 am
Did not say agree or align, I said she had a point. Next time you see an APD officer, ask him/her. They will tell you the same thing re: the base homeless hosuing.
What do you mean by “code words”?
I could point the Racist finger at you, since you seem to assume that low income people are non-white, but I don’t. But maybe I should, cuz you sure sounds like a racist.
Comment by dave — October 24, 2006 @ 11:35 am
Dave,
A couple of requests.
Define HUGE (your post #7).
Please confirm your assumptions with a command level police officer (Lt. or better)that has overseen Alameda Point.
Come back when you have a response. Thanks, and have a wonderful day!
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 24, 2006 @ 12:13 pm
As I have said before, the issue here may have more to do with class than with race. Maybe some people really don’t care about creating “a whites-only enclave,” but they would be perfectly happy to see Alameda become an enclave exclusively for the rich. This may not be a racist sentiment, but is this truly our shared vision for the future of Alameda?
Comment by Michael Krueger — October 24, 2006 @ 12:28 pm
Michael’s comments are on the mark. People like dave (keepmeasurea) are all for making Alameda the next Danville. Pat’s “dregs of society” says it all!
Comment by Richard — October 24, 2006 @ 12:49 pm
re 13
I was told that by an APD officer who is an acquaintance of mine. He is not command level.
The specificity of your post indicates that you have other information, or at least the name & number of such an officer. If so, please post, I’d be interested in both.
Comment by dave — October 24, 2006 @ 12:53 pm
Dave (Howard, keepmeasurea): don’t you already have all the “info” re: Alameda Point in a powerpoint? And, while we’re at it, how’s the stalking coming along?
Comment by Richard — October 24, 2006 @ 1:32 pm
I am not keepmeasurea, I’m just plain “dave.” It was a very popular name back in the day…
And I am weary of being painted a racist becasue I like & want to preserve the quality of life in Alameda. We bought here because it is Alameda. We didn’t buy a condo in Emeryville, a tract house in Brentwood, or a fixer in East oakland. We bought here for the quiet, clean, safe and lovely streets and the good schools.
Please tell me what is wrong with wanting to preserve my property value and quality of life. It does not make me a racist, classist or any other “ist.”
Labeling me such makes a “ist” or two out of you…
Comment by dave — October 24, 2006 @ 1:55 pm
Dave,
Nothing is wrong with wanting to preserve your property values. But gues what. THEY AREN’T THREATENED. That is the issue here. Pat Bail isn’t worried about property values. She doesn’t like the poor. She doesn’t like someone who is from a different background, different socio-economic class than herself. Over half the residents at APC are youth. Most of the families are there as a result of domestic violence. They have been traumatized beyond tolerance. And Pat Bail is so scared of them that she is considered becoming armed and putting up barbed wire. Well, if it keeps her fenced in, I’ll pitch in for the fence poles.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 24, 2006 @ 8:13 pm
Barbara has a good point (#6). Perhaps a little ubuntu might help?
Comment by Alameda — October 25, 2006 @ 7:54 am
Ubuntu it is! But the Slate will hardly recognize the concept even if it is plastered on a billboard in front of their homes!
Comment by Jamal — October 25, 2006 @ 8:26 am
As a linguistics student, I am amazed at how popular the term ubuntu has become ever since Clinton spoke about it.
Ubuntu definitely describes what is lacking in Pat Bail and by extension, the slate.
Comment by Marie — October 25, 2006 @ 1:49 pm
Regarding the crime at APC, David Howard posted some numbers on Don Roberts page that show SIGNIFICANT problems there. Now I know many here reflexively dislike Howard and Roberts, but don’t let that cloud your judgement. If the numbers are in fact accurate, admit the problem is real. If you disbelieve the numbers, show some proof that they are erroneous.
Re 19 from Doug Biggs:
Maybe MY property values are not threatened by APC but someone’s are. Answer honestly: how would you feel about APC as your next door neighbor? Answer honestly.
If you wouldn’t want that, as few would, it takes some nerve to preach that others should.
Alameda has retained its quality of life through dilligence and commitment. Oakland is a city with a serious violent crime problem, as well as many other problems. That Alameda, a mere football field from Oakland, has managed to avoid many of these problems is testament to its citizens’ commitment to the community. Measure A is one example, there are many others.
You don’t have to like Pat Bail or agree with her characterizations of people, and indeed I’m not sure I’ll vote for her, but she has a valid point about the issues at APC.
And I have a valid point about preserving Alameda’s quality of life.
Comment by dave — October 26, 2006 @ 6:15 am
We do indeed need a little Ubunto here.
I live west of Webster (call me IMBY). We chose to buy here because it was the only really diverse neighborhood in Alameda (before fair housing laws) and we felt that it fit with our values to raise our children in diversity. There are problems in every neighborhood (in some, children have to deal with snobbery and ostracism in their schools because of their differences or just not measuring up), but rather than casting out those who are different, we have a responsibility as human beings to work together for solutions.
Comment by Barbara Kahn — October 26, 2006 @ 7:47 am
Dave,
As has been pointed out more times than I can count. One cannot take David Howard’s “analysis” at face value. He has yet to put together a factually based argument on any issue that I have seen.
I’d spend some time running the numbers before you use them to back up your own opinions. (just a word to the wise).
Comment by John Knox White — October 26, 2006 @ 8:11 am
I do not live in Alameda but I am very outraged about how Alameda Point is being handled. It was a good idea, to house homeless and provide them with a place to recieve services so that they can once again become productive members of society. That is NOT at all how it has turned out-for the most part. It is a place where cockroaches are in abundance, children are dirty, underfed and not watched closely by the adults. It is a place where the adults are not watched closely by those who are there to “help” them and are instead pulled from the bushes drunk in the middle of the day, Alameda PD conducted at least once raid of one unit and came up with a few probation/parole violations and alot of prescirption drugs, a place where rent remains unpaid but the place is still theirs, a place where you can have four bedrooms and two baths for just yourself and your pardners, a place where the case managers say one thing and then do nothing. There is the lady upstairs who does not pay rent and has not been evicted either-this is a common theme. Yes it is a scary, scary place and there are other neighborhoods in other cities that I would feel safer in, No doubt it has an effect on property values-a concern to those of us that actuallt OWN property because we have worked for what we have.A process server told me that he was afraid when he was over there because “It looks like an abandoned crack house” “The whole place looks like one of the old projects in Oakland” and this from a man who goes into not so nice neighborhoods. No doubt in my mind that APC is heavy into enabling and codependency-something those that are supposed to be running it should know about. I am not a racist-so we can end that idea here-why is it always about ethnicity? Anyway maybe it is more about entitlement-are certain people entiltled to sponge off the rest of society while those of us that have jobs and own property clean up after them forever? Are we supposed to be ok with oour property values declining, our kids being unsafe, our tax dollars being misused? If APC was truly a place that looked like it was helping in a effective manner I would PERSONALLY help in any way that I could, but it is not. Are those people that are supposed to be helping these people to be held accountable for their inept handling of things? APC was a good idea that has gone wrong and needs to either be stopped or revamped and run by those that know how to handle things. APC is a crime infested, cockroach infested GHETTO.
Comment by Patricia — October 26, 2006 @ 8:41 am
Mr. White, show me your numbers and your analysis, and your proof that Mr. Howard is so wrong. It takes more than your dislike of him, it it also takes facts.
I’m a numbers guy by both habit and profession. I emailed Howard asking for his, I’d like yours. I’m able to compare and understand which set is more accurate.
Comment by dave — October 26, 2006 @ 8:51 am
Patricia:
That is a long list of very specific complaints. Did you experience these first hand, or did you hear from others? Please tell us what is your direct experience w/ APC.
Comment by dave — October 26, 2006 @ 8:55 am
I assume that Mr Doug Biggs will discover who I am on his own so i guess it does not matter that I reveal more of how i know what I know. No I did not ever live at APC but my son, wife and four grandchildren did. My son and grandkids are no longer there thankfully. So yes it is first hand knowledge even tho I am not a resident. i also have hard copies of two letters from APC-one outlining lease violations at a specific unit and the fact that “…the ATF were at your unit, conducting an ivestigation…” this is dated August 21, 2006 and then another from Jospeh Rodriguez, Support Services manager stating that a number of “lease violations…including unwelcome guests, violence, broken windows, damage to the unit…”. Much of my knowledge comes from phone calls from the “case manager” Lisa Soriano who since last June called me regularly to give me “updates”.
My son was incarcerated in June for domestic violence-I will not hide facts on any of this-and it turns out it was a good thing-since leaving APC he is clean of drugs and alcohol, working and establoshing himself as a productive memebr of society. He was urged to sign a “Statement of Relinquishment of Rights to Residency” (of which I have a copy) by the case manager and he did so-one of the better ideas that APC had.
Comment by Patricia — October 26, 2006 @ 9:10 am
After some thought I need to add here that my issue is not with my daughter in law-or her choice of lifestyles because my hope for her is to get clean and live as a productive member of society and have a long, healthy happy life with her children-they love her very much. My contention is that she cannot get well in a place such as APC and that it is the inept handling of people and their lives that is my issue. My other issue is the misuse of property, money and time by the so called “case managers” and directors of this project. I lived in Alameda as an infant and then again when I first married, my father worked in Alameda at the old Todd Shipyard for 30 years-as did my grandfather-so I do have ties to Alameda and the East Bay-areas such as APC are not a bright spot in our landscape-they are an embarrassment-not because of who lives there, but because of how it is run. Like I said before it was a good idea that went very wrong and now we are all paying for it-some of us personally, soem with our property values, some with our health and safety and all of us with our tax dollars…
Comment by Patricia — October 26, 2006 @ 9:30 am
Dave, feel free to dig around the archives on this site and Alameda Musings to see my analysis of Mr. Howards Factually incorrect assertions about the funding of beverly Johnson’s 2002 campaign. (He changed his website based on it).
One need look no further than his factually incorrect assertions about Doug Linney, Mike Vernetti, Helen Sause and others for other examples. Add to that his famous assertion that tube traffic is worse now than it was when the Navy was here (Thanks for the link to the debunking of this ridiculousness Lauren).
I have no feeling about David Howard personally. What I don’t like is his bogus use of “facts” to justify predetermined outcomes, even when the actual facts say no such thing.
As the old saying goes, “Fool me once….”
Feel free to run with the data, it’s a free country. I’d just be careful if you actually think it’s true before vetting it yourself.
Comment by John Knox White — October 26, 2006 @ 9:34 am
But don’t take my word for it.
The Watch Lt. for the Alameda Point Area says Mr. Howard’s analysis is “Completely erroneous.”
Mr. Howard assigns all crime at Alameda Point to APC, though much of it is not derived there. When looking specifically at crime stats for APC (which Mr. Howard does not do), Pt. 1 crimes are down 69% over last year and Pt. 2 crimes are down 41%. (Sept. 06 data).
Both Arrests and calls for service are down both over the last year and over the past 5 years.
Comment by John Knox White — October 26, 2006 @ 10:10 am
re 32
Where is this date? I tried to APD web page, could not find it.
Comment by dave — October 26, 2006 @ 10:43 am
DATA, not date === oops
Comment by dave — October 26, 2006 @ 10:43 am
For news that really matters, some of our youth are showcased in the latest edition of the National Sierra Club magazine on stands now. The article talking about their efforts to improve nutrition is at http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200611/produce.asp
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 26, 2006 @ 1:38 pm
What a happy life-not at all my experiences with the APC. People hanging off of balconies swearing at one another-slinging racial slurs back and forth. THo to be fair there are, there has to be, people there that want to have a decent life-just that only those who can initiate things on their own will succeed as the infrastructure is wobbly. What about the cockroach infested apartments? The baggies laying around? Needles and syringes where the little ones can get them? Empty 40’s containers? That is the real news-that is the reality. This cannot be sugar coated to make it easier to swallow.
Comment by Patricia — October 26, 2006 @ 2:14 pm
Patricia, you don’t live here but yet to claim to Don Roberts that your tax dollars are being wasted? Not to take away what you are saying … but sounds like you are relying on 2nd hand info?
Comment by Jon — October 26, 2006 @ 2:24 pm
Do only those that live in the city of Alameda pay taxes to the county and state? If that is the case I have been getting taken for sometime now. No I do not live in Alameda, I live in San Leandro and NO my info is not second hand it comes straight form experience and the mouths of APC’s “case managers” and residents. The actions and reactions of others effects everyone else in one way or another. Or did I not realize that only those that presently reside in Alameda have a voice?
Comment by Patricia — October 26, 2006 @ 2:30 pm
Dave, straight from the Lieutenant’s mouth. Sorry, can’t help you any further than that. I’m sure if call, he’ll tell you the same thing.
Comment by John Knox White — October 26, 2006 @ 2:32 pm
What is the Lt’s name?
And does he cite a reason for the decline in crime? More agressive patrols? Change in population?
Comment by Dave — October 26, 2006 @ 2:36 pm
I think Lauren did a wonderful job of describing the challenges we face, and showing the compassion we as a community should have in her post about the blame game. http://laurendo.wordpress.com/2006/10/26/blame-the-victim She has provided good references for anyone really wanting to understand best practices for helping to end family homelessness. Another one I would put out is the Corporation for Supportive Housing, http://www.csh.org
Patricia, I respect you and your family too much to want to discuss their issues on the world-wide-web, and I am confident in our programs and staff to know that what we are doing out here is working and making a difference in the lives of most residents we serve.
Dave, I can practically guarentee you I live closer to APC than you do. I like having APC as my neighbor.
We are a very open community, and provide numerous opportunities for people to learn more about our neighborhood. We have a community garden open to all, we have a plant nursery selling plants every Saturday (shout out to any bayporters on the native plant committee – its time to think about your fall planting!!). We have community breakfasts every Wednesday. On Nov. 4th we are having a block party to celebrate the success of our bicycle recycling project.
Want to learn more about our community? Come on by. Want to continue to throw rocks and casting aspersions? Great, rocks make nice borders for our pathways, and our plants can always use some more manure.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 26, 2006 @ 3:30 pm
Doug,
I did not feel I was throwing stones, rather I was only repeating what a policeman told me & what I have read about the place. I can see however how my words would be taken that way, and I apologize for any hurt.
I also commend your turn-the-other-cheek response in post 41. You are obviously a decent human being.
I have never been to APC. Closest I ever get is Rosenblum, but on my next bike ride I will check it out.
You refer to the community as “we” — are you a resident or a staffmemeber?
—-
WRT to Patricia’s posting about crime & drugs at APC, I notice you did not specifically refute them. If they are untrue or overblown, say so. If they are accurate, can you at least understand why many people would not want that in their neighborhood?
And WRT post 40, what would you say the reason is for the drop in crime?
And such a large pctg drop in crime indicates that crime may once have been rife but has now been calmed. (not necessarily, just one possible scenario) Is that the case? If so, Mr Howard may be simply out of date than out of his mind.
And notice that I asked for numbers & evidence re: crime. I like to think that even at my age I can still change my mind when evidence calls for it.
Comment by dave — October 27, 2006 @ 9:52 am
I can give dates, times and arrest numbers for several crimes in the APC neighborhood. As recently as two nights ago there was one of the apartments taped off by the police. Drug use I have seen first hand and could also give names, dates and drugs used sold or bought.
Comment by Patricia — October 27, 2006 @ 4:24 pm
I can give dates, times and arrest numbers for several crimes in the APC neighborhood. As recently as two nights ago there was one of the apartments taped off by the police. Drug use I have seen first hand and could also give names, dates and drugs used sold or bought. My statements are neither unture nor overblown. How is an 8 year old picking up used syringes and needles out in front of his unit? Or the girl upstairs yelling at another for an unpaid drug buy? Or what the police hauled out in a raid? Or the letter from APC outlining many of the things I have stated? Are the case managers liars then too because they wrote the letters.
Like I have said APC was a wonderful idea that has been mismanaged and is growing out of control.
Comment by Patricia — October 27, 2006 @ 4:26 pm
Dave,
I am a staff member, but part of our mission talks about being one community. We try to make as little distinction as possible between staff and residents.
Many of our residents are survivors of domestic violence and out of concern for maintaining privacy and safety, and because like any other resident of Alameda, they also deserve respect, I will not discuss specific incidents. For that reason I can also not release crime stats for APC specifically. You would be amazed at how an abuser can use the tiniest piece of information to track someone down.
APC was established in 1999 and in my opinion the drop in crime is for 2 reasons – one is the excellent rapport our community now has with the police. We have some of the best community oriented police officers I have seen anywhere. The second equally important factor is that as residents live here longer they become much more community oriented and become more self responsible.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 27, 2006 @ 4:50 pm
If I am not mistaken, the Alameda Point Collabrative properties will be conveyed to the collaborative, through no-cost, fifty-nine year leases, once the land is turned over to the City. I point this out so everyone can focus their energy on solutions.
Comment by Alameda Joe — October 27, 2006 @ 5:48 pm
Alameda Joe,
If the city can’t come to some sort of agreement, it has been reported the Navy may action off the Point which the APC may be thrown out as well as all of the other plans Alameda has for the land. Doug Dehaan says he knows we have been to slow on developing the base but he has been grandstanding this hole time he has been on the City Council…he abstains on votes saying he doesn’t have enough information while everyone else does. He votes yes and changes his mind. I wrote several letters telling him I supported the Theatre, but he changed his mind for a few while thinking they were a majority. From my experience this is completely not the case…a very small group with loud voices voiced their oppinion and wanted the rest of us to stand behind it. Hopefully they will realize after the election a lot of us are not anti everything.
Comment by Joe — October 27, 2006 @ 7:59 pm
Just to clarify, APC has already been granted the 59 year leases, action that the navy may or may not take will only impact the rest of the point.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 28, 2006 @ 6:07 pm
Doug
I was listening to the Bernie Ward (God Talk) program today and they were talking about Thanksgiving and we have a lot to be thankful for so would it be better to donate some money for your community get together or to have a family over for Thanksgiving dinner?
Comment by Joe — October 29, 2006 @ 10:44 am
Thak you for the very kind offer, Joe! We have a community dinner on Wed. the 22nd, and a donation to that would be well used, but even more important, joining us for the meal would be wonderful way to build community. On thanksgiving day, most of our families want to have the pleasure of having thanksgiving dinner in their own homes. Something that many of us take for granted. Again, Thanks for your compassion.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 29, 2006 @ 11:07 am
Joe, Christ Episcopal Church also holds a large community thanksgiving that is always in need of donations and volunteers. While I never want to turn down a donation to our program, I also think they do a remarkable job of bringing resources together to build community, and it would be a wonderful way to help bring Alameda together by getting involved.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 29, 2006 @ 11:17 am
Doug,
Thanks we will come and join on the 22n’nd if there is room. We will also send a check for $100 to help regrardless…God has blessrd us and we would like to help someone else. (it may not be huge but hopeully it helps). Just let me know where to send it.
Joe
Comment by Joe — October 29, 2006 @ 6:43 pm
Doug,
By the way, there are only 2 of us and we can bring a salid or something else…let us know.
Comment by Joe — October 29, 2006 @ 6:56 pm
John Knox White – send me your data, I’ll take a look at it.
My analysis is clear – I compared “sector 5″ vs. rest of Alameda. Alameda PD defines “sector 5″ as “Alameda Point.” The reporting districts go into further detail as to the specific locale of the report. I have not yet delved into that detail of the reporting district codes per crime report, but who else is living at Alameda Point???
Send me your data. Send me your source. Don’t tell me to contact the Lieutenant – send it to me yourself. Doug Biggs privately told me that the data he received is ‘confidential’ and that he couldn’t share it with me. Baloney – it’s public data, covered by the California public records act.
John Knox White – if you have this data, it can’t be ‘confidential’ as you have no basis to be party to it despite your role on the transportation board – share your source data with me. Have the watch Lt. contact me. Mr. Biggs knows my address, my email is posted on my web site.
Have your watch Lt. Mark Landes contact me and share the data – go ahead, prove me wrong. I’m willing to listen if you put up something to listen to other than posturing B.S.
It’s funny, only one person I’ve seen posting on this blog has asked me for _my_ source data – and none of them are John Knox White, nor Doug Biggs, nor Barbara Kahan, nor Alameda Joe, nor the Alameda point watch Lt.
A former city council member wrote to me that:
“When I was on the Council, we received reports from the police in closed session. It was deemed politically incorrect to announce publicly the crime rate at Harbor Island and the Homeless Collaborative. At the APC there was an average of numerous police calls per unit per month.”
As for erroneous information – Doug Biggs posted on this forum, and in email to me that no housing was going up on contaminated land. One visit to City Hall West and one email to the Alameda Sun, and *bingo* the truth is published in the Alameda Sun – 37 low-income homes going up on ‘dirty land.’
Who’s mis-leading who???
Comment by keepmeasurea — October 29, 2006 @ 11:47 pm
Check Status of Request with the City of Alameda
« View all my requests
Case Number: 15711 Sent on: 10/29/2006 22:50
Request Type: Question Topic: Police Services>Administration
Location of Request:
My Original Request
Please forward this request to Alameda PD Lt. Mark Landes.
I want to see the data compiled for Sector 5 (Alameda Point) and specifically for reporting districts related to Alameda Point Collaborative.
I made a request through Beckie McWilliams for crime data for 2005 on all sectors and I peformed an analysis. Many people on Alameda public forums, including APC director Doug Biggs are refuting my analysis but citing “confidential” data and citing Mark Landes as the keeper of said “confidential” data.
There is no such thing as “confidential” data when it comes to data compiled by a public service. I want to see the reports pepared for alameda point collaborative and Doug Biggs, and compare to my own analysis of the data I collected from Beckie McWillimas at the info desk at the police station.
I want to know what’s really happening at Alameda Point and at Alameda Collaborative when it comes to crime reporting.
Comment by keepmeasurea — October 29, 2006 @ 11:56 pm
Hey, David “the stalker” Howard is back! Why don’t you disclose:
1. you are the campaign manager for Slate
2. why you picked on a toddler by publishing her website to spite her parents. Have you no sense of decency?
btw, Barbara Kerr has no moral standing after her posturing on the HI eviction.
Comment by Chris — October 29, 2006 @ 11:57 pm
Chris –
1) I am NOT the campaign manager for the slate.
2) Lauren Do and Ben Kruger (married people) are hypocrites – slamming other people in Alameda for being “elite” while they themselves live in a $1M market-rate Bayport home and brag on their blogs about a $40K BMW with sports package and plead for donations to the BMW driving school. They brought their own kid into it when they posted her pictures and identified her as a ‘codeslinger’ like her dad. Hey, if the kid can sling code, she can defend herself in this forum.
Comment by keepmeasurea — October 30, 2006 @ 12:02 am
And by the way – don’t change the subject.
John Knox White and Doug Biggs – send me your data from Lt. Mark Landes.
Doug – it can’t be ‘confidential’ as you told me if John has the data. JNW has no more basis to have it than I do.
Comment by keepmeasurea — October 30, 2006 @ 12:03 am
Again for the record, Lauren and I are fortunate and unlike the slate and its supporters want others to be able to live in nice neighborhoods and make improvements to their current situations.
Mr Howard has no decency and is just another slate naysayer who attacked my baby girl. He, like Pat Bail, can not hide what they are!
Comment by Ben Kruger — October 30, 2006 @ 7:40 am
To quote a famous politican of the past: “There are three types of lies – lies, damn lies, and statistics”. Keepmeasurea is master of stretching the data to make point. In his analysis of crime data, he takes the 350+ crime reports from sector 5 and extrapolates it against the rest of the island. The result, for example, 4 crime reports of narcotic parapheralia in sector 5 turns into a conclusion that more than 10 times as many narcotics reports in Alameda Point than for the rest of the Alameda. Statistically correct perhaps, but as meaningful as the political ads we are seeing for Prop 87.
Comment by Alameda Joe — October 30, 2006 @ 8:03 am
Howard the Stalker:
That comment by yours (59) speaks for itself. You expect a toddler to defend herself against a big fat bully like you? Even if that was a joke, it is pretty grotesque. But we are not surprised: it’s the same old sewage special we’ve come to expect from you.
And yet you pride yourself as a paragon of virtue because you have a mixed family? And you call for a forum on tolerance in Alameda? How about practicing some of the stuff yourself first? Can you spell HOGWASH?
Let’s see how long it takes for NIMBY to defend your stalker tendencies.
Comment by Chris — October 30, 2006 @ 8:39 am
Re 45
Mr. Biggs:
You are to be commended for the crime reduction at APC, it shows that your mission is succeeding.
But you come across as a bit evasive. For example, you didn’t refute Patricia’s allegations of children & needles. If it’s not true, or if it’s overblown, or if it was true but is no longer due to the success you mention in 45, say so. You can say that w/o compromising anyone’s safety.
And if crime has dropped sharply, it seems possible that Mr Howard’s figures are just out of date, rather tha slander they are described as here.
Alamedans are sensitive to crime. We live in a reasonably safe city that is tenuously close to a very dangerous one. It is quite understandable that we are concerned about the reports of crime at APC. Your apparent evasion does not allay that concern.
Comment by dave — October 30, 2006 @ 8:54 am
Wow, looks like the toilet backed up again.
For the record, Daivid keepmeasurea bewarethesilentslate Howard continues to misquote me. I was asked about housing at Alameda Point. The 39 units of housing he refers to as being built on contaminated land is not at Alameda Point. In addition to a calculator, I hope someone gets him a map for Christmas. As to his other mis-representations, I have offered him the same invitation I have offered others, to come out visit and learn first hand. Instead, he has googled APC and sent out an erroneous letter to anyone that comes up in a search connected to us. Think about the time and energy that went into that endeavor, and continues to go into that endeavor. Sad that so much energy has been put into that. Was it done in an honest attempt to improve our services, or to try and get the program defunded and families thrown out on the street again? It is a stark contrast between the vision of hope that Ruby Bridges provided on Friday, and the strong animosity towards the lest fortunate promoted by the likes of keepmeasurea, Pat Bail and NIMBY that we read about today.
For the other Dave, (the rational one), Lauren’s post about harm reduction is an excellent overview of the way we provide services, and I would encourage you to read it if you haven’t. No one immediatly “gets cured” just by moving into the housing, and so it is not unrealistic that problems such as Patricia cited happen, but when they do happen, we take immediate and comprehensive steps to correct them, that can take longer that people want though. Just because someone has become homeless, doesn’t mean they give up all their rights, and as you may know, in California tenant rights are very strong. An eviction process is complicated, lengthy and frustrating for everyone – the tenant, the landlord, and the neighbors, who though innocent, often bear the brunt of the misbehavior.
So yes, problems do still occur – sometimes serious problems, but that’s the nature of the work we are doing. And based on publicly available crime statistics (call you local police department), the number of problems are decreasing. We work very closely with the City and the Police Department (and again, I can’t speak highly enough of the command and beat officers who take a solutions oriented approach to policing) to continue to improve our services and response.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 30, 2006 @ 9:54 am
Doug Biggs, please keep my name out of your erroneous conclusions. What is your proof of my “strong animosity towards the less fortunate”?
I want to believe that I can respect you, but I won’t be able to do that if you engage in groundless slandering. I would prefer that we can dislike each other based on fact, not phantasy.
Comment by NIMBY — October 30, 2006 @ 11:23 am
NIMBY, the fact that you are yet to speak out against David “the stalker” Howard going after Lauren’s toddler and his stupid justification for doing so (see comment #57) shows your true colors!
I don’t believe I can ever respect you or the people you support!
Comment by Chris — October 30, 2006 @ 11:34 am
Can someone explain to me what all these “Lauren’s daughter” posts are about?
Comment by dave — October 30, 2006 @ 11:41 am
Dave, see #56 and #57
Comment by Richard — October 30, 2006 @ 11:45 am
NIMBY, with all due respect, while you have not been shy about posting in other threads, your silence on the topic of this thread has spoken loudly about your feelings, particularly given the role you have in the slate campaign. In the face of hatred, silence is not acceptable. In the words of Martin Niemoller:
When the Nazis arrested the Communists,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a Communist.
When they locked up the Social Democrats,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a Social Democrat.
When they arrested the trade unionists,
I said nothing; after all, I was not a trade unionist.
When they arrested the Jews, I said nothing; after all, I was not a Jew.
When they arrested me, there was no longer anyone who could protest.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 30, 2006 @ 12:34 pm
Mr. Howard. – I don’t believe I’ve ever used the term “confidential” so I have no idea what you’re on about.
The information I presented was gathered in a phone conversation with Lt. Landes at the APD.
In that conversation, he said that the information you have is correct data, but that your use of it and the conclusions you present are “completely erroneous.” His words, not mine.
Comment by John Knox White — October 30, 2006 @ 12:38 pm
Dave,
Mr. Howard did some digging into Lauren Do’s personal life and created an entire webpage about it, including links to photos of her baby girl.
All because she called him out on his nonsensical “analysis.”
Doug Biggs called him out on his “analysis” and the next thing you know, he’s sending out “completely erroneous” crime stats to APC funders.
Helen Sause had the audacity to differ with him on Measure A and he has been banned from wikipedia after posting a vitriolic hit-piece in the guise of a “biography.”
Comment by John Knox White — October 30, 2006 @ 12:53 pm
Joe, Sorry we got sidetracked before I could acknowledge your very generous offer. Please contact me at info@apcollaborative.org for information and directions on the community meal.
Comment by Doug Biggs — October 30, 2006 @ 12:53 pm
Come on, Chris, let’s not be stupid here. I’m sure there are a whole lot of people here that are quite annoyed with your constant insults but will not denounce them because you are “on their side.” For my part, I have stayed away from attacking people personally, unless they really get in my face. I have tried to discuss some issues instead, but since nobody here will admit they are wrong, most discussions have gotten nowhere. Like everybody else here, I choose what to comment on, and to be perfectly honest, I have no idea what that Lauren’s daughter thing is about, either.
I do want to point out your side’s (the anti-slate faction) ugly tactic, which is to paint Pat Bail with pitch, then announce that everybody who does not spit on her is a terrible person. Quite disgusting, because there are plenty of people like me who support her this time because they find the other choices either unacceptable or not viable. You have no problem dragging all these people’s names, including mine, in the dirt you’ve spread around, creating impressions that have nothing to do with their actual positions—but what’s new there? However, do you really expect that you can blackmail me by saying I either denounce the people you don’t like or I am like them? As in, I’m either with you or against you? I would like to think there is more intelligence out there to see through this. But don’t all go crazy now trying to prove that you are one of the inelligent people, or it may hurt your cause.
Comment by NIMBY — October 30, 2006 @ 12:57 pm
NIMBY see:
Howard’s meltdown response (57)
John’s comment (71)
Doug’s reply to you (69)
In this case, your silence is tantamount to acquiescence.
Why not address these issues headon if you are so principled, as you claim?
I rest my case.
Comment by Chris — October 30, 2006 @ 1:09 pm
Acquiescence to what, Chris?
Comment by NIMBY — October 30, 2006 @ 1:18 pm
Speaking of “creating impressions that have nothing to do with actual positions”, did NIMBY not write to Don Roberts saying Johnson was doing the job for us (where NIMBY implies “us” meant non-Alamedans)?
Talk about taking things out of context! Psst, you can run but can’t hide from your utterances!
Comment by Jamal — October 30, 2006 @ 1:22 pm
Awwwww, quit playing dumb NIMBY! Read the links I pointed to …
Comment by Chris — October 30, 2006 @ 1:27 pm
Thanks Doug for getting back to me as you can see I don’t want to leave my whole name or address on the site. I will send a check today…hopefull others may also as a lot of us have been blessed with more than others. It is not all about the election, measure A, or who said what to who but sometimes it is what we can do to help others.
Comment by Joe — October 30, 2006 @ 2:20 pm
Bless you, Joe. You are a hero.
Comment by Linda Hudson — October 30, 2006 @ 2:53 pm
Where did NIMBY disappear after being confronted with the facts?
Comment by Nathan — October 30, 2006 @ 4:53 pm
I share NIMBY’s annoyance with the insults that have been flying around in comments on this post. I may disagree with her on many things, but she has been a lot more willing — not to mention able! — to engage in a rational discussion than some others I could name. Let’s cut the taunting and name-calling before someone calls the Pokemon Police!
Having said that, I must take issue with NIMBY’s claim that the “ugly tactic” of “the anti-slate faction” is “to paint Pat Bail with pitch, then announce that everybody who does not spit on her is a terrible person.”
It is Ms. Bail who painted herself . . . into a corner. All “the anti-slate faction” did was bring her own ugly words to an audience broader than the cozy coterie of Don Roberts Show regulars. I haven’t heard any calls to spit on Ms. Bail; all I have heard are calls not to elect her and the rest of The Slate to represent Alameda.
Comment by Michael Krueger — October 30, 2006 @ 5:29 pm
Michael K has valid reasons to be annoyed at the way this thread has evolved. NIMBY has attempted (to some extent) to indulge in meaningful discourse. But restraint would only work if both parties abide by it. If NIMBY were to have yet another meltdown re: theater (as she does here, by comparing apples-oranges), then we’re back to square one again and have to begin at the beginning all over again!
I suppose this is the natural tension between a free and open forum such as this and the other extreme of moderating 100% of the posts and only approving those that the blogger sees fit!
Comment by Alameda — October 30, 2006 @ 11:18 pm
Doug Biggs:
As promised I took bike ride through what I think is APC. I entered the base from Main St onto Midway, and explored the area around there, both Noth and South of Midway.
Is this APC? If so, I have some observations. If not, pls give me directions & I’ll make sure to see it once the rain stops.
Comment by Dave — November 2, 2006 @ 1:39 pm
bump back to top
Comment by dave — November 3, 2006 @ 8:02 am
Dave:
Take a ride on Stardust Place-around the 300 block and then behind that is w.Midway I believe. There is a large grassy area and play area behind the units there-a great place to observe on weekend nights.
Comment by Patricia — November 3, 2006 @ 8:35 am
Well it seems I was in the right location. I was observing from a neighbor’s POV, as I said above that people might not want APC as a neighbor. So from that POV, here were my impressions:
Positive:
-Community gardens are great
-Community bulletin boards
-Lots of children – neighborhods w/ children are very pleasant to me
Negative:
-Generally unkempt appearance
-Loud profanity
-Smelled marijuana at least once
-Cadillacs, Mercedes and late model mini-vans — formerly homeless???
Comments re the negatives:
-Appearance. I know it’s old military housing, which is ugly on a good day, but the trash & unkempt lawns and peeling paint make the place look like particularly shabby. If APC is concerned about its image to the Alameda public, some simple pride & maintenace would go a long way.
-Loud profanity. I plead guilty to being a potty-mouth myself, but yelling B—H and Mother—— at the top of one’s lungs within earshot of children is not the sort of behavior that will endear you to the neighbors.
-Marijuana. I smelled strongly on one man as he walked near me. I thought I smelled again a few minutes later but it could have just been in my nostrils from the first encounter.
It’s no capital crime, and yes, I inhaled back in the day, but again, polite society frowns on walking around obviously stoned on a weekday afternoon. I also saw another, elderly, man stumbling about as if he was intoxicated but could not tell for sure.
-Cars — that was an eye opener.
Comment by dave — November 3, 2006 @ 9:30 am
Hi Dave,
Sorry it took a while to get back to you. I believe you were in the right neigbhorhood for the most part, although we are a checkerboard amongst market housing and abandoned housing.
I do appreciate your POV, and think you have some interesting points. I would really appreciate the opportunity to walk the neighborhood again with you to get your impressions. You can contact me through our website http://www.apcollaborative.org or if you are in the neighborhood on Saturday, (and since you are a bike rider) stop by our bike block party at 650 W. Ranger
Comment by Doug Biggs — November 3, 2006 @ 10:27 am
What time is party?
Comment by dave — November 3, 2006 @ 10:34 am
11:00am -1:30 pm. more details are on the city’s website http://www.ci.alameda.ca.us/ and on our website
In addition to free food, good used bikes at reasonable prices, workshops and music, world class BMX rider Pete Brandt will be performing some trick riding.
Comment by Doug Biggs — November 3, 2006 @ 2:33 pm
It was Doug Biggs that referred to Mark Landes reports as “confidential” – he couldn’t share them with me.
And, yes, I refused his ‘charm offensive’ invitiation to a controlled guided tour.
And my communication to funders of APC was back at the end of August – John Knox White, you’ve got your chronology mixed up.
Comment by keepmeasurea — November 4, 2006 @ 10:17 pm
I am a resident of APC and I am happy to say that I have never seen a roach or rodent. My children are clean, fed, and loved. I am employed. I am productive. I was uneasy of my neighborhood at first, but I have found a friend in many of them because I didn’t wear blinders. My case worker, Tony Ward, is the BOMB. My children and I have received the best resources APC, and other neighboring communities, have to offer because of our case worker. The biggest problem isn’t the people at APC, it’s the system. The “right kind” of people, those of us who have turned or misfortune into opportunity rather than succumbed to it, these are the people that are not allowed to stay. Regulations do not allow it. So you are left with the “Ghetto”, and all its glory, giving those of you with an ironing board for a soul something to complain about. Thanks to everone and their efforts at APC I have a chance, I have a voice, I am no longer a victim. The problems at the point are not what they were because of Doug Biggs and all of the other staff member that have done their best to change things. Landscape, training, the persistent non intrusive outreach and special activities are making an effective change for those ready to accept it. It takes support and time; More time then it takes to yap about confidential issues to the “roaches” of our society. I am angry and would be damned to just sit by and take the abuse orated by another about who I am and how I live. Been there, done that.
I would like to see more support for us “WHO’S” who are here. I am commeted to give back to my city and community. Visit APC as often as you can. Participate when possible. Drop in and knock on my door if you want a non controlled guided tour. Bad elements do not like to stay where they can be seen. But let APC do what it does best. If APC was not what it is, or where it is, I wouldn’t have had a chance.
Comment by Priscilla Kindley — December 4, 2006 @ 11:50 am
Priscilla, RIGHT ON!!!!!
Yes, there are gross dregs of society in APC there are some more in the Gold Coast. Every neighborhood has them, some are just better dressed and drive nicer cars.
As I wrote in my comments about Chipman Middle School, there are nice people everywhere, you just need to keep your “blinders” off.
Comment by Barbara M — December 4, 2006 @ 1:09 pm
It has been my good fortune to know some of the residents at APC, as well as Doug Biggs and I’d like to second Priscilla’s remarks. Those that I know are trying hard to bring their lives together, be productive and caring of each other and to learn new ways to do things.
Rather than being so quick to judge, it is incumbent on all of us to see how we might be helpful and good neighbors to these folks so they might make their transitions more smoothly.
We once did an experiment at church where a ratty looking fellow in a dirty coat came in and stood silently at the side in the front of the church. People were nervous and moving away and someone told an usher to get him out or call the police. He was making no noise – just standing there watching the altar. The usher approached him and asked him his name. He spoke loudly telling us simply his name was Jesus. Made us all think – would we see the God in the Man if the Man were not as we would like him to be?
Comment by Kate Quick — December 4, 2006 @ 2:30 pm
Doug:
I took another bike ride through APC yesterday, my 4th or 5th one since I posted above some months back. Perceptions and observances have been similar on each.
Yesterday, though, I noticed a group of young men smoking marijuana on the playground, yards away from kids.
Nice.
Comment by dave — January 9, 2007 @ 8:25 am
Doug:
Your post copied from the other thread:
—————————-
Dave,
What would you have me do to follow-up on what is in my view a fairly vague, unsubstantiated allegation? What would make the situation better in your mind? I’m really not trying to be flippant or anything. I’m just stumped as to what you hope would happen by making that post.
And if what you allegedly saw happened in any other park in Alameda what would you have done?
————————-
For starters I’d hope you actually gave a damn. Had you asked me for a date, time & description, and told me that you’d look into the matter, I’d probably think you did care.
But you slipped into politician denial mode, which makes me think you don’t. Remember, from many posts above, this all got started with a discussion of APC as a neighbor. From what I’ve seen on my afternoon bikerides, APC is not a particularly desirable neighbor.
I’d also appreciate more candor from you. Above in this thread, you deny that crime is a problem, while trumpeting its decline, then state that such problems are to be expected. IOW, Howard was right and you don’t want to admit it?
Tellingly you do not refute allegations of children exposed to needles. That is a pretty outrageous accusation, and had you denied it, most have believed you. But you didn’t, leaving readers to conclude that such an outrageous assertion was actually true.
So are drugs and related crime a problem at APC? They sure look to me to be so. If you admitted it plainly and then discussed how you are trying to rectify it, I’d believe you cared. If you admitted that homeowners with kids (a major portion of Alameda) wouldn’t want APC as a neighbor, then you’d gain much credibility.
Comment by dave — January 18, 2007 @ 12:16 pm
Dave, if you saw such activity you should have called the police.
Comment by Ben Kruger — January 18, 2007 @ 3:08 pm
Yes I should have. To be honest, I’m not sure why I didn’t.
Comment by dave — January 18, 2007 @ 3:25 pm
Dave, you chose to launch an attack and hijack a thread that was quite interesting and informative, and then get pissed when I chose not to play with you. That behavior reminds me of another dave that used to stalk these boards.
Ben’s question was right on, and your response was very telling. Why should APC residents be denied the same rights, or not be held to the same responsibility of any other citizen. In any other situation, you would have called the police, or just passed on. Why should this be any different?
Comment by Doug Biggs — January 18, 2007 @ 5:51 pm
Doug: I have walked through all area’s of the point at all hours of the day, and have never experienced any crime or other things that would make me feel unsafe. I walk every morning in the dark through the residential area’s and have just not seen the things that some other people may see. Also my adult son has lived at the Old officers housing for about three years and has never had any prolems at all. So I guess its all in the eye’s of the beholder. My own experince with Alameda Point is that it is a wonderful place to walk and be safe. John Piziali
Comment by John Piziali — January 18, 2007 @ 6:31 pm
I just went to the other thread on play structures and low and behold there is Dave going on about APC and someone smoking drugs, its kind of odd that I have walked everywhere on the old base well over 1,000 times in the past ten years and I always seem to miss those darn dope smokers. However I can drive by our highschools on any given day and see students walking down the street in broad daylight smoking what sure looks like anything but a cigarette. So let’s ease up on APC and the folks that live there, they are just like the rest of us. Doug Biggs does not need to be defending the folks that live there any more than anyone else in this fair city. me again John P.
Comment by John Piziali — January 18, 2007 @ 6:49 pm
My own experiences are a small sample size. But each time I go through APC, I experience things that are NOT what make good neighbors, as outlined in several posts above.
I didn’t “hijack” a thread, I asked Mr. Biggs to respond to a previous post which he has missed or ignored. He could have responded directly, he could have suggested another avenue; he evaded.
I’ll back off if this blog cannot collectively handle hard questions. I have made my point:
Mr Biggs postulated that APC does make a good neighbor and does not threaten others’ property values. At his suggestion, I explored the area several times and each time found evidence to the contrary. Mr Biggs parried and did not address my or others’ posts about the problems at APC.
Paint me hateful, go all Pat Bail on me, I can take it. Seems that others here, though, can’t take facts nor handle any examination of their opinions.
Point over.
Comment by dave — January 18, 2007 @ 7:15 pm
Dave, on the contrary … it appears that is you who is unable to handle the examination of your own opinions as witnessed by the double standards on why you didn’t call the cops!
Comment by alameda — January 18, 2007 @ 9:08 pm
When I first mentioned marijauna in post 86, no one railed on me for not dropping a dime. Now, I’m supposed to call the state militia. Can someone please clarify the circs under which I should call?
And WRT to double standard, I suggest you review the definition of the term, and re-read my posts. You’ll not find such in them.
(I thought back to that moment and the main reason was that I was on my bike and didn’t have a cell phone or a quarter, and by the time I found a phone, it would have been unlikely for the perps to be caught in flagrante.)
Comment by dave — January 19, 2007 @ 5:56 am
I hate that some people see people with obvious problems as “Dregs of Society”, as they are not. I would view someone filled with hate, judgmental or a superiority complex more of a “Dreg of Society” than some of these people. Some people just need a helping hand, or a second or third chance. Chances are someone on your block has problems with drugs, alcohol or various other problems.
I had a friend who lived in a Concord neighborhood and she said on the outside everyone had what looked like a nice house with a perfectly trimmed yard…but on the inside they were a mess (Figuratively). People suffered from abuse, were on drugs, alcohol, there was a high rate of divorce, but in public they had to act perfect and their children had to act perfect ect. What was important to them from the outside they looked perfect. (Sort of like “Desperate Housewives”).
We all have problems…where is the love.
Comment by Joaquin — January 19, 2007 @ 8:15 am
Dave, I like you. I really do. And so instead of posting some snide comment about what I thinkis some rather convoluted logic in your last post, I am going to give you my full perspective:
1. My initial response: This started off with a post by you in a thread about creative play. Your post stated in full “was this the same APC playground that I saw last week? The one where people were smoking marijuana in front of children?”. In evaluating your post I know that you are bringing your own agenda, and seem to have quite a bit of antagonism towards APC residents, which I am not at all interested in indulgin. I am also amazed that you are able to definitivly identify the use of marijuana as you are driving by at I would presume some distance on a bicycle. I’ll admit it, I sometimes like to watch cops, and on there, even when they catch someone “red handed” there is always the initial presumption of innocent until found guilty. But you, on your bike found definitive evidence.
But your post didn’t ask what should be done about it. You asked if the playground I was talking about was a playground you saw, and I gave you the answer.
Law enforcement: Contrary to some people’s belief, APC is not a law enforcement agency. We can not break down someones door and say “so and so saw you smoking marijuana a week ago and so we are going to arrest you or kick you out of here.” APD enforces the law out here just like they do everywhere else. As a landlord, APC has very limited authority, as a service agency, we have even less. Just because someone has become homeless, that does not diminish their rights, and in some cases, such as domestic violence, their rights to privacy and protection are increased.
Your response to seeing someone smoking marijuana here should be the same response to seeing them smoke marijuana under the bay farm bridge. If it bothers you, call the police(the whole issue about whether you support or oppose the criminalization of marijuana is for another thread). You are right in guessing they wouldn’t be caught “in flagrante” but there are all sorts of strategies the police can employ. They can increase the frequency of patrols, they can do a casual interaction that lets it be known additional scrutiny is being given. Having said all that, I don’t believe it is the best use of the police’s time to maintain survelance on a playground.
Drug use at APC: Know we get into the juicy stuff! APC is a harm reduction organization. Harm reduction is defined as “a set of practical strategies that reduce negative consequences of drug use, incorporating a spectrum of strategies from safer use, to managed use to abstinence. Harm reduction strategies meet drug users “where they’re at,” addressing conditions of use along with the use itself.” Harm reduction recognizes that just because someone finds housing, that doesn’t mean that all their other problems are going to magically disappear. Some places have a zero tolerance policy, and that is a good thing for those places and the people who live there who really can’t do well independently. APC is geared more to people who can live at least somewhat independently. Based on geography alone (we are spread out over 34 acres) it is impossible to have an effective zero tolerance policy, but more than that, based on philosphy harm reduction works better for us – it puts the responsibility on the resident to take control of their life, and moves them down the road towards self sufficiency. Here’s the other shocker. Relapse do occur, but instead of every month, now maybe it is once in 6 months. Next time maybe it wont happen for a year. Harm reduction provides the support needed for when mistakes happen. If some of this discussion sounds familiar, scroll back up to #41 and then follow the links from there.
APC and property values: APC is currently surrounded by abandoned, dillapidated, weed and vermin infested buildings. The vacant apartments across from us have been systematically hacked up over the last few years by various fire and police departments as part of practice exercises. It is interesting that those are not viewed as impacting neighboring property values even though they lay so much closer to new housing being developed at Bayport.
Having said that, I fully recognize that if and when the redevelopment of Alameda Point occurs, APC housing could have an impact on neighboring property values. We have applied for and secured funding to upgrade and improve the landscaping, and we are currently working on securing funding to rehab and upgrade many of the units. We are doing our part to keep up the neighborhood. We hope that if and when a new developer is selected, they will also want to work with us on this.
Comment by Doug Biggs — January 19, 2007 @ 9:08 am