Oakland Building Inspectors have been colluding with property owners in tenant evictions
https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/Oakland-finds-likely-collusion-between-inspector-13040708.php
An Oakland building inspector likely colluded with a property owner in 2016 to evict tenants from a building by improperly declaring it unsafe, according to internal documents released by the city, which described its employee’s behavior as “a violation of the public trust.”
The six tenants moved out of the West Oakland building in April that year and have been out since. The city rescinded the red tags two weeks after they were posted and told the property owner he should let the tenants return — even though the building, a commercial property that had been used as a live-work space, did not have city permits for residency.
The episode occurred months before the deadly Ghost Ship fire at an artists’ collective drew attention to the dangers of unpermitted residences and the city’s lax oversight of such properties.
The inspector, Thomas Espinosa, who worked in the city’s Planning and Building Department for 11 years, resigned in November 2016 after Oakland officials moved to fire him. His bosses said he abused his authority that spring when he red-tagged the building at 661 27th St. and ordered the tenants to leave, according to a copy of the city’s “notice of intent to terminate” letter.
Attorneys for Espinosa and property owner Patrick MacIntyre said the men did not collude to evict tenants. Espinosa’s attorney, Quynh Chen, said her client was simply doing his job and did nothing wrong — with one exception, which she called an honest mistake. She said city officials “dramatized” the facts in the case.
“There was no bad intent,” she said. “Basically there was a misunderstanding between Mr. Espinosa and his supervisors, and he took the bullet for it.”
MacIntyre’s attorney, David Sternfeld, said the tenants should not have been living in the building in the first place.
The Chronicle obtained the ex-inspector’s personnel file under a public records request. A federal grand jury and the FBI subpoenaed the city last fall to get Espinosa’s files, too. Spokesmen for the FBI and the U.S. attorney’s office in San Francisco said they had no public information to disclose, and declined to comment.
The records include the intent-to-terminate letter written by Darin Ranelletti, the department head at the time who now works as Mayor Libby Schaaf’s policy director for housing security. Ranelletti said in the letter that Espinosa jeopardized public trust with a series of inconsistent statements and questionable behavior.
His letter said the ex-inspector displayed a “documented pattern of abusing city resources and authority,” but that one incident in particular — the suspected collusion that culminated in an April 7, 2016, eviction — amounted to “serious misconduct.” The letter describes the incident in detail.
For years, court records show, MacIntyre, the owner of the building on 27th Street, had been trying to evict the tenants. A group of mostly artists, they had been living at the two-story building under a live-work lease initially signed by a previous owner before the property went into foreclosure and was bought by MacIntyre.
His building was once home to a French bakery, and wasn’t authorized to be used as a residence.
Espinosa said that as he drove to the office on April 6, 2016, he happened upon trash and graffiti outside the building, according to statements he gave to his supervisors and in court. Even though it was outside the district he was assigned to inspect, Espinosa stopped to take pictures. He said he saw construction going on through the open door.
Espinosa said he went back to the office and found that there were no permits for construction, so he posted a number of stop-work notices and scheduled an inspection for the next day. After the inspection, Espinosa said in the statement, he found safety hazards, including a lack of fire escapes, and red-tagged the building.
Espinosa should not have done that without first getting approval from a supervisor, Ranelletti said. When his bosses questioned him about his actions, Espinosa told them he had no prior contact with MacIntyre, according to Ranelletti’s termination letter.
But city officials reviewed his work phone records and found Espinosa had called MacIntyre’s cell phone three times two days before his purportedly impromptu inspection. And on that morning, April 6, between 5 and 7 a.m., Espinosa called MacIntyre twice, and MacIntyre called him once, according to Ranelletti’s letter and a phone log included in the personnel file reviewed by The Chronicle.
Chen said Espinosa was likely “drowning in paperwork” and forgot about the calls.
Two days later, Espinosa helped MacIntyre fill out a form that would have given him a permit to do work on the building, according to Ranelletti.
Later that year, Espinosa provided a declaration for MacIntyre to use in his litigation against the tenants in which he stated that he came across “voluminous amounts of marijuana” during his walk-through of the building. Yet city officials said that observation did not comport with his inspection records.
“If it was true that there was cannabis on site, then you should have reported that to your superiors and/or zoning investigator ... immediately after your inspection,” Ranelletti wrote. “You did not do either. You also provided no photographs to substantiate your claim.
“These facts strongly suggest collusion with the owner and that your inspection of the 27th Street building was outside the scope of your job as a city employee and quite possibly for personal gain,” he continued. “Had your actions gone undiscovered, you would have caused the indefinite displacement of multiple families.”
The six tenants were indefinitely displaced.
One of them — Christine Shepherd, 43, an artist who specializes in 19th century photographic processing — couch-surfed for a few months and ultimately moved to Oregon because she couldn’t afford Bay Area rents. She had lived at the West Oakland building for seven years and her boyfriend for more than a decade. She said it was safe.
“We had no idea that that was coming,” she said of the inspection and eviction. “It was like absolute panic. Your stomach just goes into a knot and you can’t think straight and you don’t know what your next step is going to be.”
Another tenant, Michael Taylor, 46, has been staying with friends and sleeping in his camper van ever since.
Despite Espinosa’s bosses ordering the red tags to be removed and the tenants to be allowed to move back in two weeks later, Kevin Greenquist, the tenants’ attorney, said MacIntyre did not do so and changed the locks.
Chen said the one mistake Espinosa made was delegating the removal of the red tag notices to MacIntyre, rather than doing it himself. Other than that, she said, he was doing what his position required. Chen said the city exaggerated its claims against her client so it wouldn’t be sued for wrongful termination.
Had there been collusion, the city would have provided documentation in the termination letter, Chen said.
“He should’ve just not done his job and stayed silent and not returned phone calls out of fear of favoritism,” she said. “If I worked for the city of Oakland and I wanted to show evidence of collusion I would attach financial records, actual evidence.”
She said Espinosa was not responsible for the evictions.
It’s unclear whether the 2016 case was an isolated event. The city Public Ethics Commission has an open investigation to determine whether Espinosa violated policies covering conflicts of interest, misuse of city resources, misuse of city position and more.
Oakland officials did not answer The Chronicle’s repeated questions about whether they investigated other cases to see if there was a pattern of improper interactions with other property owners and tenants.
City records show that officials became aware of the employee’s misconduct only after tenants and their attorney complained to Espinosa’s supervisors about his actions, prompting the internal review that led to the termination letter.
“I called the city of Oakland because I wanted to know, can they just make me homeless?” Shepherd said. “I guess I sort of trusted in city officials and democracy working for us.”
Greenquist said he was “outraged” that the city didn’t tell him that it found Espinosa likely colluded with the property owner. Greenquist said he was concerned there could be other similar cases.
“The city knew all this and didn’t say a word about it,” he said. “If you have a rogue inspector and find out all this stuff, why do you bury it when it could just be the tip of the iceberg?”
Greenquist continues to represent the tenants in their court fight with MacIntyre over whether the tenants were wrongfully evicted and what, if anything, they are owed.
The lawyer, who was with the tenants when the building was red-tagged, remembered Espinosa telling them they could be arrested if they returned to the premises. He said they had three hours to collect their belongings.
MacIntyre’s attorney, Sternfeld, said the tenants left on their own accord and should never have been living there in the first place. Sternfeld said the city’s finding of coordination between his client and the inspector was wrong.
“I can guarantee to you that my client did not collude with Mr. Espinosa,” he said.
Despite city officials concluding that Espinosa made false statements, the written declaration in which he testified about coming across hazards such as the cannabis grow continue to be used in the civil litigation.
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Scott Patton relied on that statement — which the city implied might contain falsehoods — in deciding a recent motion filed by the tenants.
Showing posts with label #LibbySchaaf. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #LibbySchaaf. Show all posts
Thursday, November 1, 2018
156 - Oakland Police Dept - Oakland police officer Harry Hu had pleads guilty to taking bribes from a Chinese gang leader.
OAKLAND (KPIX 5) – Oakland city officials were still shocked Friday after learning that well-respected, retired Oakland police officer Harry Hu had pleaded guilty to taking bribes from a Chinese gang leader.
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/10/12/oakland-city-leaders-stunned-harry-hu-corruption-scandal-asian-gang-police/
It was a stunning fall from grace for a man fellow officers used to call “big brother.”
In his plea deal agreement that was released Thursday, Hu outlined the bribes he took after he retired from the police department. Some people are now questioning if he took money from criminals during his time in the department.
Hu was renowned for his part in dismantling powerful Asian gangs in Oakland. Now he admits to taking bribes from a Chinese mobster.
Lieutenant Harry Hu retired from the Oakland Police Department in 2007 to go work for the Alameda County District Attorney as an inspector.
He told a federal judge between 2008 and 2013, he took bribes from gang leader Wing Wo Ma in exchange for helping Ma avoid prosecution.
In the plea agreement, Hu said “Ma provided me with things of value that included at least three trips to Las Vegas and a trip to Reno. Ma provided my airfare, hotel accommodations, meals, alcohol, and entertainment that included hiring women.”
Hu said he was able to get Ma off of a marijuana grow house case in 2009.
Hu says in 2013, he knew Ma was suspected of killing two people, but did not say anything to investigators.
The guilty plea came as shock to those who knew Harry Hu as an upstanding officer, including former Oakland Police Chief Howard Jordan and Chinese community leader Carl Chan.
“He was helping us to dismantle the Asian gang, which came in to Chinatown as well as the East Lake area doing extortion,” said Chan.
“This isn’t something that happened overnight. It happened over a period of time. My question is what made him go to the dark side,” said Jordan.
Chan meet Hu when he was just a rookie in 1981 patrolling Oakland’s Chinatown.
Chan credited him with bridging the gap between the police department and Chinese business owners.
He said Hu also inspired many Chinese Americans to work as police officers.
In fact, Hu was known to many Asian officers as “dai lo,” which means “big brother” in Chinese.
Former Chief Jordan now questions if Hu might have gone rogue even before retiring from the department.
“Harry’s involvement, his selfishness, his desire to cross the line, is an embarrassment for all of us,” said Jordan.
Hu will be back in court next April for his sentencing hearing.
He is facing up to five years in prison.
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2018/10/12/oakland-city-leaders-stunned-harry-hu-corruption-scandal-asian-gang-police/
It was a stunning fall from grace for a man fellow officers used to call “big brother.”
In his plea deal agreement that was released Thursday, Hu outlined the bribes he took after he retired from the police department. Some people are now questioning if he took money from criminals during his time in the department.
Hu was renowned for his part in dismantling powerful Asian gangs in Oakland. Now he admits to taking bribes from a Chinese mobster.
Lieutenant Harry Hu retired from the Oakland Police Department in 2007 to go work for the Alameda County District Attorney as an inspector.
He told a federal judge between 2008 and 2013, he took bribes from gang leader Wing Wo Ma in exchange for helping Ma avoid prosecution.
In the plea agreement, Hu said “Ma provided me with things of value that included at least three trips to Las Vegas and a trip to Reno. Ma provided my airfare, hotel accommodations, meals, alcohol, and entertainment that included hiring women.”
Hu said he was able to get Ma off of a marijuana grow house case in 2009.
Hu says in 2013, he knew Ma was suspected of killing two people, but did not say anything to investigators.
The guilty plea came as shock to those who knew Harry Hu as an upstanding officer, including former Oakland Police Chief Howard Jordan and Chinese community leader Carl Chan.
“He was helping us to dismantle the Asian gang, which came in to Chinatown as well as the East Lake area doing extortion,” said Chan.
“This isn’t something that happened overnight. It happened over a period of time. My question is what made him go to the dark side,” said Jordan.
Chan meet Hu when he was just a rookie in 1981 patrolling Oakland’s Chinatown.
Chan credited him with bridging the gap between the police department and Chinese business owners.
He said Hu also inspired many Chinese Americans to work as police officers.
In fact, Hu was known to many Asian officers as “dai lo,” which means “big brother” in Chinese.
Former Chief Jordan now questions if Hu might have gone rogue even before retiring from the department.
“Harry’s involvement, his selfishness, his desire to cross the line, is an embarrassment for all of us,” said Jordan.
Hu will be back in court next April for his sentencing hearing.
He is facing up to five years in prison.
154 Oakland Bldg Department - Former Oakland Building Inspector Accused of Shakedowns, Bribery, and Colluding with Landlords to Displace Tenants
Former Oakland Building Inspector Accused of Shakedowns, Bribery, and Colluding with Landlords to Displace Tenants
Accused by department leaders in 2016 of colluding with a landlord to displace tenants, Thomas Espinosa now faces over $1 million in penalties for alleged corruption.
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2018/10/26/oakland-building-inspector-accused-of-shakedowns-bribery-and-colluding-with-landlords-to-displace-tenants
Oakland Public Ethics Commission investigators are accusing a former city building inspector of receiving several hundred thousand dollars in bribes and other illicit payments from landlords and hiding these illegal payments while he was employed by Oakland.
Thomas Espinosa, a specialty combination inspector employed by the city from 2005 to 2016 is being charged with 47 violations of Oakland's Government Ethics Act.
PEC staff are recommending he be ordered to pay $1,151,737 in penalties.
Espinosa resigned after department officials tried to fire him in 2016 for colluding with a landlord to push tenants out of a West Oakland building. He was suspected of taking kickbacks from the property owner for his assistance.
But according to PEC investigators, Espinosa's corrupt behavior was much more far-reaching than just a single building. He used his position as an inspector to shake down at least one property owner for money while he colluded with others in order to help them pass inspections, or dismiss code violation cases. He also illegally worked as a contractor on properties that he was also inspecting. He hid this illegal income from the city and never reported it on his conflict of interest disclosure forms.
In one case, Espinosa assisted landlord Elizabeth Williams in closing out complaints about dangerous and uninhabitable conditions at several of the 15 West Oakland apartments and houses she owns, according to PEC investigators.
In 2009, the city took legal action against Williams and made to enter into an injunction requiring that she maintain safe and sanitary rental housing. Espinosa was initially assigned as the official inspector for these properties to ensure Williams was complying with the injunction.
But by 2015, Espinosa was being paid personally by Williams while looking the other way regarding complaints, and helping her dismiss new complaints, according to PEC staff. Williams also hired him as a contractor to perform work on the properties, despite the obvious conflict of interest.
According to PEC inspectors, in 2014 other inspectors in the building department verified violations at one of Williams properties, located on 24th Street in West Oakland, and opened a code enforcement case against her.
But Espinosa intervened, accepted payments of $112,000 from Williams, and then in October 2015 he closed out the code enforcement case against her.
In another case, Espinosa coerced Alexandre Machado, the owner of a single family home on Valley View Road, by slapping a stop work order on Machado's property, which was being remodeled. Espinosa then personally asked Machado to pay him to lift the order.
In total, Espinosa made Machado pay him $12,850 to legalize building permits.
In yet another case, Espinosa had a real estate broker meet him outside of Oakland City Hall where the two discussed ways of addressing building code violations on a single family home that was listed for sale. According to PEC investigators, Espinosa asked the broker, Bill Charman, to write him a personal check for $1,500 to resolve the code violation case. Charman wrote the check, which Espinosa deposited in his personal bank account, PEC investigators wrote in their report. Espinosa then waived fees for Charman and changed the status of the code violation case to "abated" without inspecting the property.
Espinosa is also being charged with misusing city vehicles, a computer, printer, and cell phone to conduct personal business.
PEC investigators are requesting that Espinosa's case be referred to an administrative hearing comprised of three members of the Public Ethics Commission.
Espinosa could not be immediately reached for comment.
Accused by department leaders in 2016 of colluding with a landlord to displace tenants, Thomas Espinosa now faces over $1 million in penalties for alleged corruption.
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2018/10/26/oakland-building-inspector-accused-of-shakedowns-bribery-and-colluding-with-landlords-to-displace-tenants
Oakland Public Ethics Commission investigators are accusing a former city building inspector of receiving several hundred thousand dollars in bribes and other illicit payments from landlords and hiding these illegal payments while he was employed by Oakland.
Thomas Espinosa, a specialty combination inspector employed by the city from 2005 to 2016 is being charged with 47 violations of Oakland's Government Ethics Act.
PEC staff are recommending he be ordered to pay $1,151,737 in penalties.
Espinosa resigned after department officials tried to fire him in 2016 for colluding with a landlord to push tenants out of a West Oakland building. He was suspected of taking kickbacks from the property owner for his assistance.
But according to PEC investigators, Espinosa's corrupt behavior was much more far-reaching than just a single building. He used his position as an inspector to shake down at least one property owner for money while he colluded with others in order to help them pass inspections, or dismiss code violation cases. He also illegally worked as a contractor on properties that he was also inspecting. He hid this illegal income from the city and never reported it on his conflict of interest disclosure forms.
In one case, Espinosa assisted landlord Elizabeth Williams in closing out complaints about dangerous and uninhabitable conditions at several of the 15 West Oakland apartments and houses she owns, according to PEC investigators.
In 2009, the city took legal action against Williams and made to enter into an injunction requiring that she maintain safe and sanitary rental housing. Espinosa was initially assigned as the official inspector for these properties to ensure Williams was complying with the injunction.
But by 2015, Espinosa was being paid personally by Williams while looking the other way regarding complaints, and helping her dismiss new complaints, according to PEC staff. Williams also hired him as a contractor to perform work on the properties, despite the obvious conflict of interest.
According to PEC inspectors, in 2014 other inspectors in the building department verified violations at one of Williams properties, located on 24th Street in West Oakland, and opened a code enforcement case against her.
But Espinosa intervened, accepted payments of $112,000 from Williams, and then in October 2015 he closed out the code enforcement case against her.
In another case, Espinosa coerced Alexandre Machado, the owner of a single family home on Valley View Road, by slapping a stop work order on Machado's property, which was being remodeled. Espinosa then personally asked Machado to pay him to lift the order.
In total, Espinosa made Machado pay him $12,850 to legalize building permits.
In yet another case, Espinosa had a real estate broker meet him outside of Oakland City Hall where the two discussed ways of addressing building code violations on a single family home that was listed for sale. According to PEC investigators, Espinosa asked the broker, Bill Charman, to write him a personal check for $1,500 to resolve the code violation case. Charman wrote the check, which Espinosa deposited in his personal bank account, PEC investigators wrote in their report. Espinosa then waived fees for Charman and changed the status of the code violation case to "abated" without inspecting the property.
Espinosa is also being charged with misusing city vehicles, a computer, printer, and cell phone to conduct personal business.
PEC investigators are requesting that Espinosa's case be referred to an administrative hearing comprised of three members of the Public Ethics Commission.
Espinosa could not be immediately reached for comment.
153 Oakland Bldg Department - Building inspector took thousands of dollars in bribes, undisclosed payments
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2018/10/30/report-oakland-building-inspector-took-bribes-undisclosed-payments/
Report: Oakland building inspector took thousands of dollars in bribes, undisclosed payments
OAKLAND — A former city building inspector accused of taking thousands of dollars in bribes and other payments from people whose properties he was inspecting could get slapped with a million-dollar-plus fine.
Thomas Espinosa took $2,700 in bribes from people whose buildings he was inspecting and failed to disclose to the city that he received more than $300,000 for contracting work and other work from people whose properties he was inspecting, according to a report from investigators for the city’s Public Ethics Commission.
The report alleges Espinosa — who worked for the city from 2005 to 2016 — committed 47 ethics violations. The maximum penalty for all those violations — which include accepting bribes, misusing public money and using city authority to coerce — totals $1,151,737. Investigators will present their report Nov. 5 to the commission, which could decide then whether to pursue fining Espinosa.
This is the Public Ethics Commission’s largest case based on the number of alleged violations and penalty amount, executive director Whitney Barazoto told this news organization. She confirmed that the commission has passed along its findings to law enforcement.
Efforts to reach Espinosa were unsuccessful.
The investigation began in October 2016, after Espinosa stopped working for the city. Documents obtained through a public records request and posted on the city’s website show Espinosa resigned in August 2016 after being issued a notice of termination.
The report details his interactions with landlords, a real estate agent and property owners during his last few years on the job.
Espinosa was assigned to inspect properties owned by a landlord who was sued by the city for failing to take care of about a dozen properties and for housing tenants in dilapidated, unhealthy apartments. A judge ordered the landlord in 2009 to bring the properties up to code and Espinosa monitored the effort until 2015, the report says. At the same time, the landlord loaned Espinosa $100,000 and paid him $76,179 for contracting work and consulting services, the report says.
Although inspectors are required to file annual statements listing their economic interests, Espinosa didn’t disclose the contracting work for 2015 and 2016 and never told his superiors about the loan, according to the report. He also never repaid the loan and the landlord has not attempted to recover it, the report adds.
Espinosa also solicited a total of $1,200 from the landlord in return for passing inspections at four of the properties that previously had failed, according to the report.
In addition, the report says, Espinosa was assigned in 2013 to inspect a house on Rifle Lane where he found some code violations. A broker tried to sell the property a few years later, and in 2016 met with Espinosa in front of City Hall and gave him a personal check for $1,500 to resolve the outstanding permit issues, the report says.
That same day, the broker applied for building, electrical and plumbing permits for the property, and Espinosa waived the code violation fees, as well as other requirements, the report notes. Espinosa scheduled himself to inspect the property after that and marked the code violations as “abated” within two minutes of scheduling it, the report says. Espinosa never disclosed that the broker paid him.
Espinosa also received $12,800 from the owner of a house on Valley View Road. The owner bought the property as an investment with the intention of fixing and selling it. After the owner applied for building permits to replace the roof and repair rot — and paid Espinosa $1,900 — Espinosa issued a “stop-work” order.
The report didn’t say what the $1,900 was for, but noted the stop-work order was fictitious and never was recorded with the building department, the report says.
“Respondent used the stop-work order to coerce (the owner) into providing (Espinosa) with more payments,” the report states.
Espinosa also issued a stop-work order against a property on Lawlor Street for code violations involving a conversion of the building’s attic and basement. He passed the inspections a week after the owner agreed to pay him $21,500, the report states.
A similar scenario occurred with a house on Manila Avenue in 2014. Espinosa issued a stop-work order there, but a year later cleared the permits after the owner paid him $66,277 for “real estate services and general contracting work,” the report states.
Espinosa never disclosed that money, nor the fact that he was the president of One Development and Investment Corp., a real estate company owned by the Manila Avenue property owner, the report says. Espinosa received $19,770 from the company in 2015, the report adds.
Espinosa also received money for “consulting services” from a construction company and several businessmen in 2015 that he never disclosed. He also drove a city-owned vehicle to Orinda to conduct personal business, used a city-owned computer and printer to print hundreds of pages of “personal materials” and used a city-owned cell phone to make 587 minutes of personal calls while on vacation, the report says.
Report: Oakland building inspector took thousands of dollars in bribes, undisclosed payments
OAKLAND — A former city building inspector accused of taking thousands of dollars in bribes and other payments from people whose properties he was inspecting could get slapped with a million-dollar-plus fine.
Thomas Espinosa took $2,700 in bribes from people whose buildings he was inspecting and failed to disclose to the city that he received more than $300,000 for contracting work and other work from people whose properties he was inspecting, according to a report from investigators for the city’s Public Ethics Commission.
The report alleges Espinosa — who worked for the city from 2005 to 2016 — committed 47 ethics violations. The maximum penalty for all those violations — which include accepting bribes, misusing public money and using city authority to coerce — totals $1,151,737. Investigators will present their report Nov. 5 to the commission, which could decide then whether to pursue fining Espinosa.
This is the Public Ethics Commission’s largest case based on the number of alleged violations and penalty amount, executive director Whitney Barazoto told this news organization. She confirmed that the commission has passed along its findings to law enforcement.
Efforts to reach Espinosa were unsuccessful.
The investigation began in October 2016, after Espinosa stopped working for the city. Documents obtained through a public records request and posted on the city’s website show Espinosa resigned in August 2016 after being issued a notice of termination.
The report details his interactions with landlords, a real estate agent and property owners during his last few years on the job.
Espinosa was assigned to inspect properties owned by a landlord who was sued by the city for failing to take care of about a dozen properties and for housing tenants in dilapidated, unhealthy apartments. A judge ordered the landlord in 2009 to bring the properties up to code and Espinosa monitored the effort until 2015, the report says. At the same time, the landlord loaned Espinosa $100,000 and paid him $76,179 for contracting work and consulting services, the report says.
Although inspectors are required to file annual statements listing their economic interests, Espinosa didn’t disclose the contracting work for 2015 and 2016 and never told his superiors about the loan, according to the report. He also never repaid the loan and the landlord has not attempted to recover it, the report adds.
Espinosa also solicited a total of $1,200 from the landlord in return for passing inspections at four of the properties that previously had failed, according to the report.
In addition, the report says, Espinosa was assigned in 2013 to inspect a house on Rifle Lane where he found some code violations. A broker tried to sell the property a few years later, and in 2016 met with Espinosa in front of City Hall and gave him a personal check for $1,500 to resolve the outstanding permit issues, the report says.
That same day, the broker applied for building, electrical and plumbing permits for the property, and Espinosa waived the code violation fees, as well as other requirements, the report notes. Espinosa scheduled himself to inspect the property after that and marked the code violations as “abated” within two minutes of scheduling it, the report says. Espinosa never disclosed that the broker paid him.
Espinosa also received $12,800 from the owner of a house on Valley View Road. The owner bought the property as an investment with the intention of fixing and selling it. After the owner applied for building permits to replace the roof and repair rot — and paid Espinosa $1,900 — Espinosa issued a “stop-work” order.
The report didn’t say what the $1,900 was for, but noted the stop-work order was fictitious and never was recorded with the building department, the report says.
“Respondent used the stop-work order to coerce (the owner) into providing (Espinosa) with more payments,” the report states.
Espinosa also issued a stop-work order against a property on Lawlor Street for code violations involving a conversion of the building’s attic and basement. He passed the inspections a week after the owner agreed to pay him $21,500, the report states.
A similar scenario occurred with a house on Manila Avenue in 2014. Espinosa issued a stop-work order there, but a year later cleared the permits after the owner paid him $66,277 for “real estate services and general contracting work,” the report states.
Espinosa never disclosed that money, nor the fact that he was the president of One Development and Investment Corp., a real estate company owned by the Manila Avenue property owner, the report says. Espinosa received $19,770 from the company in 2015, the report adds.
Espinosa also received money for “consulting services” from a construction company and several businessmen in 2015 that he never disclosed. He also drove a city-owned vehicle to Orinda to conduct personal business, used a city-owned computer and printer to print hundreds of pages of “personal materials” and used a city-owned cell phone to make 587 minutes of personal calls while on vacation, the report says.
Tuesday, June 20, 2017
143 City of Oakland Bldg Inspector: I am surprised you are applying logics [sic] to the City Of Oakland.
Post-Ghost Ship: Despite mayor’s promises, Oakland city inspectors are telling residents to leave unpermitted spaces
June 12, 2017
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/06/18/in-post-ghost-ship-oakland-city-tells-artists-to-leave-livework-spaces-despite-mayors-promises/
OAKLAND — Just over a month after a horrific fire ripped through an East Oakland warehouse, killing 36 people, Mayor Libby Schaaf made a promise that city staff would work cooperatively with property owners to make their buildings safe without evicting the artists who live there.
The artists received an eviction notice in the immediate aftermath of the deadly Ghost Ship fire on December 2, 2016. Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group)
Instead, it appears city inspectors are doing just the opposite. In the months since the fire, they have issued inspection reports explicitly stating tenants cannot reside in the buildings, while offering only vague instructions on what violations the owners or tenants need to correct, or throwing up bureaucratic road blocks to getting work done. At the same time, tenants of cultural and entertainment venues have complained about a heavy-handed approach that has made it difficult to stay in business.
On Feb. 21, city staff identified 18 properties in a report to the City Council, saying it had already begun the process of reaching out to property owners to craft compliance plans — a list of work that needs to be done and a timeline in which to do — so the city could bring the spaces up to code. But Darin Ranelletti, the city’s interim director of planning and building, admitted this week that the city had not in fact entered into a compliance plan with the owners of any of those properties.
Schaaf said she was “disappointed” more property owners have decided not to cooperate with the city.
“The city can’t force that choice,” she said. “It can only make it easier.”
At the Castle Von Trapp, a live/work space in West Oakland identified in the February report, a city inspector wrote in an April 20 report: “Discontinue residential occupancy and obtain commercial tenant improvement zoning approval and permits.”
It was a de facto eviction order, although the building was not red-tagged as an immediate risk to the residents. The inspection report was a direct contradiction to Schaaf’s Jan. 11 order, which states city inspectors should “avoid displacement of any individuals residing or working in the property if that can be accomplished without imminent life safety risk.”
“They’ve done everything but make it easy,” said Tom Dolan, the architect who wrote the city’s live/work conversion ordinance in 1999 and who has been volunteering his time with Safer DIY Spaces. The nascent group emerged in the wake of the Dec. 2 fire to help people make immediate safety improvements to unpermitted live/work buildings.
“The city has not actually explicitly red-tagged spaces, they’ve just made it very difficult for them to be lived in,” Dolan said. “There really has been very little cooperation.”
frustrating for Chris Spiteri, one of the tenants in the Castle Von Trapp. Along with her housemates, Spiteri had been working for several months to assuage the fears of their landlords, who were waiting for guidance from the city. A building inspector walked through the space in January but didn’t send an official report back on the violations until April. In March, the tenants said their landlords gave them an ultimatum: Buy the building or leave. One of the landlords, Yeon Lee, did not respond to a request for comment.
“In that time, we very much tried to keep open communication with our landlords to figure out if there was a path for us to move forward that didn’t result in us vacating the building,” she said. “So, it was frustrating, I’m sure on their part as much as ours, to be waiting so long for direction from the city only to find out the result is, because it’s an unpermitted residence, they want us to leave.”
Ranelletti said the onus is on building owners to enter into a compliance plan with the city, and the delays in issuing an inspection report were not an excuse because the property owners were informed of the executive order at the time of the inspection, he said, and can get information on what needs to be done in other ways.
“The information is … often communicated at the site, in the office; they can come in, in person,” he said. “Ultimately, it’s the responsibility of the property owner.”
SiteA (Todd) redacted p2of13Since the council’s report, inspectors have visited other live/work spaces that aren’t on the list of 18. At one live/work space in the city’s Brooklyn Basin neighborhood that is home to about dozen people, an official inspection report read: “Improper occupancy — All residential and non-residential buildings or structure or portion thereof … shall be considered ‘Substandard and a Public Nuisance.'”
The report continues, “Obtain permits, inspections and approvals and restore to original usage.”
The last line is worrisome, said Todd, a tenant whose last name this newspaper is not using because it would identify the building and increase his risk of eviction. Reverting to the original usage would mean people can’t live there. Even if a change of use was granted, the building would have to be upgraded to comply with modern earthquake and building codes, which could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
“That’s a real problem,” Todd said. “That’s when things get expensive.”
When she went to the city to see what needed to be done, Sinuba said she felt as though she were talking to a wall.
“For people who are still grieving, just being given this paper that (says) everything is wrong and we won’t tell you what to do … it’s scary,” she said. “We don’t know what this means. We could be kicked out, but there is no where else to live anymore. Everything is too expensive.”
Schaaf admits the city’s work is not done. She meets with staff regularly to discuss ways to make the process better, she said.
“Every two weeks, we work on something new to make the spirit of this order more effective,” she said.
That includes providing inspection reports to tenants, when, in the past, they were only given to landlords. And, staff is working on ways to red tag only part of the building, if that can be done safely, where inspectors would have ordered the entire building shut down before the executive order was issued.
But the Ghost Ship fire’s fallout is affecting permitted spaces, too. At Qilombo, a legal community space in West Oakland, David Keenan, another member of the Safer DIY Spaces group, said he had to fight an invalid inspector’s report that said the space had people living in it, despite the fact there was no evidence of habitation. The inspector based his report on a complaint and verified it when he couldn’t access one room during an inspection.
After a lengthy email exchange, the inspector, Wing Loo, agreed to change the report, but he still cited them for a missing structural support pole for an interior loft structure, as well as problems with a rear staircase that was built before Qilombo occupied the space. When Keenan tried to pull a building permit to fix the staircase, he couldn’t, because of the existing violation.
“You admit that nobody lives there but verified (the habitability complaint) because of some other structural condition that needed to be repaired and because you did, you actually blocked me from fixing the thing you are citing,” Keenan said of his interaction with Loo. “I don’t know how much more Kafkaesque you can get.”
In an email, Loo wrote to Keenan, “I am surprised you are applying logics [sic] to the City Of Oakland. I will reply within the next day or so. Have a good evening and continue to dream.”
June 12, 2017
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/06/18/in-post-ghost-ship-oakland-city-tells-artists-to-leave-livework-spaces-despite-mayors-promises/
OAKLAND — Just over a month after a horrific fire ripped through an East Oakland warehouse, killing 36 people, Mayor Libby Schaaf made a promise that city staff would work cooperatively with property owners to make their buildings safe without evicting the artists who live there.
The artists received an eviction notice in the immediate aftermath of the deadly Ghost Ship fire on December 2, 2016. Aric Crabb/Bay Area News Group)
Instead, it appears city inspectors are doing just the opposite. In the months since the fire, they have issued inspection reports explicitly stating tenants cannot reside in the buildings, while offering only vague instructions on what violations the owners or tenants need to correct, or throwing up bureaucratic road blocks to getting work done. At the same time, tenants of cultural and entertainment venues have complained about a heavy-handed approach that has made it difficult to stay in business.
On Feb. 21, city staff identified 18 properties in a report to the City Council, saying it had already begun the process of reaching out to property owners to craft compliance plans — a list of work that needs to be done and a timeline in which to do — so the city could bring the spaces up to code. But Darin Ranelletti, the city’s interim director of planning and building, admitted this week that the city had not in fact entered into a compliance plan with the owners of any of those properties.
Schaaf said she was “disappointed” more property owners have decided not to cooperate with the city.
“The city can’t force that choice,” she said. “It can only make it easier.”
At the Castle Von Trapp, a live/work space in West Oakland identified in the February report, a city inspector wrote in an April 20 report: “Discontinue residential occupancy and obtain commercial tenant improvement zoning approval and permits.”
It was a de facto eviction order, although the building was not red-tagged as an immediate risk to the residents. The inspection report was a direct contradiction to Schaaf’s Jan. 11 order, which states city inspectors should “avoid displacement of any individuals residing or working in the property if that can be accomplished without imminent life safety risk.”
“They’ve done everything but make it easy,” said Tom Dolan, the architect who wrote the city’s live/work conversion ordinance in 1999 and who has been volunteering his time with Safer DIY Spaces. The nascent group emerged in the wake of the Dec. 2 fire to help people make immediate safety improvements to unpermitted live/work buildings.
“The city has not actually explicitly red-tagged spaces, they’ve just made it very difficult for them to be lived in,” Dolan said. “There really has been very little cooperation.”
frustrating for Chris Spiteri, one of the tenants in the Castle Von Trapp. Along with her housemates, Spiteri had been working for several months to assuage the fears of their landlords, who were waiting for guidance from the city. A building inspector walked through the space in January but didn’t send an official report back on the violations until April. In March, the tenants said their landlords gave them an ultimatum: Buy the building or leave. One of the landlords, Yeon Lee, did not respond to a request for comment.
“In that time, we very much tried to keep open communication with our landlords to figure out if there was a path for us to move forward that didn’t result in us vacating the building,” she said. “So, it was frustrating, I’m sure on their part as much as ours, to be waiting so long for direction from the city only to find out the result is, because it’s an unpermitted residence, they want us to leave.”
Ranelletti said the onus is on building owners to enter into a compliance plan with the city, and the delays in issuing an inspection report were not an excuse because the property owners were informed of the executive order at the time of the inspection, he said, and can get information on what needs to be done in other ways.
“The information is … often communicated at the site, in the office; they can come in, in person,” he said. “Ultimately, it’s the responsibility of the property owner.”
SiteA (Todd) redacted p2of13Since the council’s report, inspectors have visited other live/work spaces that aren’t on the list of 18. At one live/work space in the city’s Brooklyn Basin neighborhood that is home to about dozen people, an official inspection report read: “Improper occupancy — All residential and non-residential buildings or structure or portion thereof … shall be considered ‘Substandard and a Public Nuisance.'”
The report continues, “Obtain permits, inspections and approvals and restore to original usage.”
The last line is worrisome, said Todd, a tenant whose last name this newspaper is not using because it would identify the building and increase his risk of eviction. Reverting to the original usage would mean people can’t live there. Even if a change of use was granted, the building would have to be upgraded to comply with modern earthquake and building codes, which could cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.
“That’s a real problem,” Todd said. “That’s when things get expensive.”
When she went to the city to see what needed to be done, Sinuba said she felt as though she were talking to a wall.
“For people who are still grieving, just being given this paper that (says) everything is wrong and we won’t tell you what to do … it’s scary,” she said. “We don’t know what this means. We could be kicked out, but there is no where else to live anymore. Everything is too expensive.”
Schaaf admits the city’s work is not done. She meets with staff regularly to discuss ways to make the process better, she said.
“Every two weeks, we work on something new to make the spirit of this order more effective,” she said.
That includes providing inspection reports to tenants, when, in the past, they were only given to landlords. And, staff is working on ways to red tag only part of the building, if that can be done safely, where inspectors would have ordered the entire building shut down before the executive order was issued.
But the Ghost Ship fire’s fallout is affecting permitted spaces, too. At Qilombo, a legal community space in West Oakland, David Keenan, another member of the Safer DIY Spaces group, said he had to fight an invalid inspector’s report that said the space had people living in it, despite the fact there was no evidence of habitation. The inspector based his report on a complaint and verified it when he couldn’t access one room during an inspection.
After a lengthy email exchange, the inspector, Wing Loo, agreed to change the report, but he still cited them for a missing structural support pole for an interior loft structure, as well as problems with a rear staircase that was built before Qilombo occupied the space. When Keenan tried to pull a building permit to fix the staircase, he couldn’t, because of the existing violation.
“You admit that nobody lives there but verified (the habitability complaint) because of some other structural condition that needed to be repaired and because you did, you actually blocked me from fixing the thing you are citing,” Keenan said of his interaction with Loo. “I don’t know how much more Kafkaesque you can get.”
In an email, Loo wrote to Keenan, “I am surprised you are applying logics [sic] to the City Of Oakland. I will reply within the next day or so. Have a good evening and continue to dream.”
142 City of Oakland ‘Bulldozer’ Hit A Homeless Man While He Was Sleeping In A Tent Subhead”
City of Oakland ‘Bulldozer’ Hit A Homeless Man While He Was Sleeping In A Tent
June 1, 2017 - East Bay Express
Debris and garbage is increasingly an issue at homeless encampments. But homeless residents claim that the 'bulldozer' trashed and destroyed their personal belongings and valuables. 'It was horrible, just ridiculous.'
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/city-of-oakland-bulldozer-hit-a-homeless-man-while-he-was-sleeping-in-a-tent/Content?oid=7139007
A man says he was hit by what was a smaller, "Dingo" tractor-style vehicle during a clean-up at a different encampment in West Oakland on May 5.
Daryll Barker has lived for more than a year under a freeway overpass at 35th and Magnolia streets in West Oakland. Drugs, crime, pollution, extreme weather — it’s a rough life. But while asleep in his tent on the morning of May 5 shortly after 10 a.m., Barker says something happened that left him “scared as hell.”
Suddenly, Barker said he “was being dragged and pulled, the whole tent itself, everything in it. Just snatched and grabbed." The 51-year-old told the Express last week that he was thrown from his tent, after which he rolled across the asphalt for several feet.
When he looked up, Barker realized that he'd been hit by “a bulldozer.”
In recent weeks, the City of Oakland began using what is called a wheeled loader — a large, heavy-equipment bulldozer-like vehicle typically seen at construction sites — to help remove what officials say is an unprecedented amount of garbage and trash accumulating at several local homeless encampments.
“We want to clean up the garbage,” explained Joe DeVries, an assistant city administrator with the City of Oakland. “There’s so much debris, we want to get the stuff that people care about out of the way, so that we can” pick up the trash.
DeVries said he witnessed the incident on May 5, when he says a "Dingo" tractor ran into Barker's tent. "I don't know how he was in that tent," DeVries said. "I was scared for him."
ut many homeless residents called the bulldozer “overkill,” saying that they were stunned when the “aggressive” and “dangerous” vehicle showed up at the camps.
Before Barker was hit by the bulldozer on May 5, workers with Operation Dignity, a nonprofit that does homeless outreach as part of a contract with the city, allegedly told residents at the 35th and Magnolia site that Barker’s tent and others people’s belongings would be out of harms way, and that the wouldn’t need to move, according to Jeff Wozniak, an attorney representing Barker. “He was told his tent was safe where it was,” he explained.
“Then, he was woken up by a bulldozer literally crashing into his tent.”
Wozniak says his client was lucky. “Had that bulldozer approached his tent from the other side, it would have bulldozed his head. … There’s no question that this bulldozer could have killed him.”
After the incident, Barker says he was bleeding and in severe pain, so he was ambulanced to Highland Hospital, where he says he received X-rays and was treated for nearly 10 hours. Two weeks later, he says he’s still limping and sore.
Now, Barker is living with a neighbor, sharing a tent, near the encampment, which was formerly the site of Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney’s “Compassionate Communities” tent-city pilot program, which housed at least thirty people earlier this year.
Barker said his tent was completely destroyed, and that he lost all of his clothing, his phone — pretty much everything he owns. “I’m just happy to be alive,” he said this past Saturday.
Wozniak hasn’t filed a claim or lawsuit on behalf of Barker yet. However, he is asking that the City of Oakland and Operation Dignity compensate Barker for his pain, suffering, medical expenses, and losses. “Darryl’s tent is not trash. It is personal property. And they should not be using a bulldozer anywhere near these tents, or these homes,” he said.
Representatives with Operation Dignity were not immediately available to discuss the specific incident.
In the past two weeks, other homeless campers have told the Express that, despite the city’s efforts, they too have lost valuables during these city clean-ups, including family photos, laptops, bikes, and DVD players.
On May 25, the city’s “bulldozer” also made an appearance at one of Oakland’s largest homeless encampments, on Northgate Avenue.
Marcus Emery said he has been living at the Northgate site for nine months, after he was displaced from a nearby apartment, where the landlord raised the rent to $2,100 a month. On that Thursday morning, the 53-year-old said he "woke up hearing a bulldozer": Oakland police and public-works department employees had shown up to remove debris and trash.
The city had given notice that they planned to clean the site, posting fliers along Northgate. But some of those fliers were removed, Emery and others claimed. And none of them were expecting the bulldozer.
City workers told Emery to move his tent and belongings from the western sidewalk and to the other side of the road, so that trash could be removed. The city also said it would be cleaning the sidewalk and gutters. But the day after the clean-up, Emery complained that he’d "lost all kinds of stuff," because he couldn't move his tent and valuables out of the way fast enough.
Specifically, he said he lost family photos, a DVD player, old coins, clothes — "stuff that you can't replace.”
After sharing his story, Emery lifted up his shirt to reveal stitches, from a knife wound he’d suffered while sleeping in his tent on the same street earlier in May. “I just got stabbed the other day,” he told the Express. “I can’t be moving this heavy stuff.”
Also at the Northgate encampment, Tonnell Williams says he too was startled by the “big ass tractor thing” when it arrived that Thursday morning. He says he tried to move most of his stuff, but that he lost a tent full of his clothes, plus his girlfriend’s clothes, bike frames, and more, when the bulldozer snagged and dumped it in the trash.
“They let us move some" of his belongings, he said. "But they didn't let us move all of it."
When the Express spoke with DeVries the day of the Northgate clean-up, he insisted that the City of Oakland’s mission was to not harass or hurt homeless people, or displace them from these encampments. “We weren’t bulldozing tents,” he said, referring to a video of a wheeled loader picking up trash at the Northgate site (see video, below).
DeVries also said that, during a recent camp cleanup, the city removed some 160 cubic yards of debris and garbage. “We don’t want to criminalize the homeless,” he said.
"We've been painstakingly careful to be compassionate."
On Tuesday, Oakland city council voted in favor of spending nearly half-a-million dollars for a “safe haven” transitional camp for homeless residents. The sanctioned camps would offer 40 small sheds for individuals to live in, and also would provide security, water, toilets and more for residents. There is also a motion to provide sanitation to 10 encampments, and also to keep the door open for additional funding for homelessness programs.
A recent "point in time" count of Oakland's homeless residents tallied 2,761 homeless individuals in the city, nearly 70 percent unsheltered — a roughly 26 percent increase over the count from 2015.
The Express reported last week that Oakland spent some $210,638 in 2016 and during the first few weeks of 2017 on cleaning and dismantling homeless encampments. Records indicate that there were 279 cleanings in 2016, and 33 from January 1 to February 14 this year.
As the Express wrote: “The city’s data shows that 1,475 yards of trash — but possibly also tents, clothing, and other possessions — were thrown away during this period.” DeVries says he's seen an unprecedented amount of trash and garbage at homeless camps in the past months.
The abatement of homeless encampments has been controversial. In December of last year, civil-rights activists filed a class-action lawsuit in state court alleging that Caltrans violates the Constitutional rights of homeless people during encampment sweeps in Oakland, Emeryville, and Berkeley, where homeless residents regularly lost valuables and property. That suit is ongoing.
Shawn Moses, who's lived at Northgate camp for three years, conceded that a significant amount of garbage and debris had piled up at the location, he said in part due to a public works strike against cleaning at the sites, which lasted several months, but also because of illegal dumping.
Moses said that he thought most camp residents didn’t lose any belongings on May 25, and he observed city workers "bag and tag" items from one man’s tent and space, because the owner was in jail and unable to move his tent.
But Moses also says that he lost some “junk that he didn’t really want” during the clean-up, and that city workers weren’t terribly careful not to throw away belongings. “We just worked really fast” to get things out of the bulldozer’s way, he explained.
He added that he and his fellow residents had to sweep the sidewalk underneath their tents themselves, and that the city didn’t even wash the concrete.
Moses said the clean-up on May 25 was the first time the city had came to clear the site in a year and a half. And, like others, Moses argued that the use of the bulldozer was harassment and overkill.
“Everybody was shocked by that bulldozer,” he said. “It was horrible, just ridiculous."
June 1, 2017 - East Bay Express
Debris and garbage is increasingly an issue at homeless encampments. But homeless residents claim that the 'bulldozer' trashed and destroyed their personal belongings and valuables. 'It was horrible, just ridiculous.'
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/city-of-oakland-bulldozer-hit-a-homeless-man-while-he-was-sleeping-in-a-tent/Content?oid=7139007
A man says he was hit by what was a smaller, "Dingo" tractor-style vehicle during a clean-up at a different encampment in West Oakland on May 5.
Daryll Barker has lived for more than a year under a freeway overpass at 35th and Magnolia streets in West Oakland. Drugs, crime, pollution, extreme weather — it’s a rough life. But while asleep in his tent on the morning of May 5 shortly after 10 a.m., Barker says something happened that left him “scared as hell.”
Suddenly, Barker said he “was being dragged and pulled, the whole tent itself, everything in it. Just snatched and grabbed." The 51-year-old told the Express last week that he was thrown from his tent, after which he rolled across the asphalt for several feet.
When he looked up, Barker realized that he'd been hit by “a bulldozer.”
In recent weeks, the City of Oakland began using what is called a wheeled loader — a large, heavy-equipment bulldozer-like vehicle typically seen at construction sites — to help remove what officials say is an unprecedented amount of garbage and trash accumulating at several local homeless encampments.
“We want to clean up the garbage,” explained Joe DeVries, an assistant city administrator with the City of Oakland. “There’s so much debris, we want to get the stuff that people care about out of the way, so that we can” pick up the trash.
DeVries said he witnessed the incident on May 5, when he says a "Dingo" tractor ran into Barker's tent. "I don't know how he was in that tent," DeVries said. "I was scared for him."
ut many homeless residents called the bulldozer “overkill,” saying that they were stunned when the “aggressive” and “dangerous” vehicle showed up at the camps.
Before Barker was hit by the bulldozer on May 5, workers with Operation Dignity, a nonprofit that does homeless outreach as part of a contract with the city, allegedly told residents at the 35th and Magnolia site that Barker’s tent and others people’s belongings would be out of harms way, and that the wouldn’t need to move, according to Jeff Wozniak, an attorney representing Barker. “He was told his tent was safe where it was,” he explained.
“Then, he was woken up by a bulldozer literally crashing into his tent.”
Wozniak says his client was lucky. “Had that bulldozer approached his tent from the other side, it would have bulldozed his head. … There’s no question that this bulldozer could have killed him.”
After the incident, Barker says he was bleeding and in severe pain, so he was ambulanced to Highland Hospital, where he says he received X-rays and was treated for nearly 10 hours. Two weeks later, he says he’s still limping and sore.
Now, Barker is living with a neighbor, sharing a tent, near the encampment, which was formerly the site of Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney’s “Compassionate Communities” tent-city pilot program, which housed at least thirty people earlier this year.
Barker said his tent was completely destroyed, and that he lost all of his clothing, his phone — pretty much everything he owns. “I’m just happy to be alive,” he said this past Saturday.
Wozniak hasn’t filed a claim or lawsuit on behalf of Barker yet. However, he is asking that the City of Oakland and Operation Dignity compensate Barker for his pain, suffering, medical expenses, and losses. “Darryl’s tent is not trash. It is personal property. And they should not be using a bulldozer anywhere near these tents, or these homes,” he said.
Representatives with Operation Dignity were not immediately available to discuss the specific incident.
In the past two weeks, other homeless campers have told the Express that, despite the city’s efforts, they too have lost valuables during these city clean-ups, including family photos, laptops, bikes, and DVD players.
On May 25, the city’s “bulldozer” also made an appearance at one of Oakland’s largest homeless encampments, on Northgate Avenue.
Marcus Emery said he has been living at the Northgate site for nine months, after he was displaced from a nearby apartment, where the landlord raised the rent to $2,100 a month. On that Thursday morning, the 53-year-old said he "woke up hearing a bulldozer": Oakland police and public-works department employees had shown up to remove debris and trash.
The city had given notice that they planned to clean the site, posting fliers along Northgate. But some of those fliers were removed, Emery and others claimed. And none of them were expecting the bulldozer.
City workers told Emery to move his tent and belongings from the western sidewalk and to the other side of the road, so that trash could be removed. The city also said it would be cleaning the sidewalk and gutters. But the day after the clean-up, Emery complained that he’d "lost all kinds of stuff," because he couldn't move his tent and valuables out of the way fast enough.
Specifically, he said he lost family photos, a DVD player, old coins, clothes — "stuff that you can't replace.”
After sharing his story, Emery lifted up his shirt to reveal stitches, from a knife wound he’d suffered while sleeping in his tent on the same street earlier in May. “I just got stabbed the other day,” he told the Express. “I can’t be moving this heavy stuff.”
Also at the Northgate encampment, Tonnell Williams says he too was startled by the “big ass tractor thing” when it arrived that Thursday morning. He says he tried to move most of his stuff, but that he lost a tent full of his clothes, plus his girlfriend’s clothes, bike frames, and more, when the bulldozer snagged and dumped it in the trash.
“They let us move some" of his belongings, he said. "But they didn't let us move all of it."
When the Express spoke with DeVries the day of the Northgate clean-up, he insisted that the City of Oakland’s mission was to not harass or hurt homeless people, or displace them from these encampments. “We weren’t bulldozing tents,” he said, referring to a video of a wheeled loader picking up trash at the Northgate site (see video, below).
DeVries also said that, during a recent camp cleanup, the city removed some 160 cubic yards of debris and garbage. “We don’t want to criminalize the homeless,” he said.
"We've been painstakingly careful to be compassionate."
On Tuesday, Oakland city council voted in favor of spending nearly half-a-million dollars for a “safe haven” transitional camp for homeless residents. The sanctioned camps would offer 40 small sheds for individuals to live in, and also would provide security, water, toilets and more for residents. There is also a motion to provide sanitation to 10 encampments, and also to keep the door open for additional funding for homelessness programs.
A recent "point in time" count of Oakland's homeless residents tallied 2,761 homeless individuals in the city, nearly 70 percent unsheltered — a roughly 26 percent increase over the count from 2015.
The Express reported last week that Oakland spent some $210,638 in 2016 and during the first few weeks of 2017 on cleaning and dismantling homeless encampments. Records indicate that there were 279 cleanings in 2016, and 33 from January 1 to February 14 this year.
As the Express wrote: “The city’s data shows that 1,475 yards of trash — but possibly also tents, clothing, and other possessions — were thrown away during this period.” DeVries says he's seen an unprecedented amount of trash and garbage at homeless camps in the past months.
The abatement of homeless encampments has been controversial. In December of last year, civil-rights activists filed a class-action lawsuit in state court alleging that Caltrans violates the Constitutional rights of homeless people during encampment sweeps in Oakland, Emeryville, and Berkeley, where homeless residents regularly lost valuables and property. That suit is ongoing.
Shawn Moses, who's lived at Northgate camp for three years, conceded that a significant amount of garbage and debris had piled up at the location, he said in part due to a public works strike against cleaning at the sites, which lasted several months, but also because of illegal dumping.
Moses said that he thought most camp residents didn’t lose any belongings on May 25, and he observed city workers "bag and tag" items from one man’s tent and space, because the owner was in jail and unable to move his tent.
But Moses also says that he lost some “junk that he didn’t really want” during the clean-up, and that city workers weren’t terribly careful not to throw away belongings. “We just worked really fast” to get things out of the bulldozer’s way, he explained.
He added that he and his fellow residents had to sweep the sidewalk underneath their tents themselves, and that the city didn’t even wash the concrete.
Moses said the clean-up on May 25 was the first time the city had came to clear the site in a year and a half. And, like others, Moses argued that the use of the bulldozer was harassment and overkill.
“Everybody was shocked by that bulldozer,” he said. “It was horrible, just ridiculous."
140 City of Oakland violating state and city open meeting laws during real estate giveaway meetings
Oakland’s ‘Backroom Dealing’ to Sell City-Owned Land Is Systemic Problem ‘Vulnerable to Undue Influence’
June 19, 2017 - East Bay Express
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2017/06/19/grand-jury-oaklands-backroom-dealing-to-sell-city-owned-land-is-systemic-problem-vulnerable-to-undue-influence
An investigation by the Alameda County Grand Jury alleges that Oakland city officials routinely violate state and city open meetings laws by discussing multimillion-dollar real estate deals in closed session.
According to the Grand Jury, Oakland officials do not properly notify the public through city council agendas when they’re discussing the sale of a city-owned property, keeping the public in the dark about ongoing deliberations.
The Grand Jury concluded that "the city’s misuse of closed sessions in discussing development of city property is a systemic problem."
Furthermore, the councilmembers and city staff don’t report on the substance of their private conversation to the public, which frequently includes matters such as "project vision, project scope, feasibility issues, community benefits, and selection of a developer" — all of which should be discussed in a public meeting, according to the Grand Jury. Furthermore, opportunities for members of the public to provide input on the deals is extremely limited.
The Grand Jury also found that individual councilmembers frequently hold private, one-on-one talks with the same developers the city is negotiating with. The city has no rules prohibiting these discussions, nor any requirement the contacts be disclosed to the public. As a result, the Grand Jury wrote that it is "concerned that private discussions during the pendency of the selection process favor well-connected developers, and make the process vulnerable to undue influence, or at least the perception thereof."
The Grand Jury is recommending that Oakland update its practices to comply with the Brown Act (the state's open meetings law) and the city's Sunshine Ordinance, and also require councilmembers to disclose when they privately meet with developers who are seeking public real estate.
Oakland's City Attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Grand Jury Report. The city administrator's office replied to an email that the city council will be preparing a response to the Grand Jury report.
"Backroom deals that exclude our communities have resulted in land use decisions that don’t serve existing residents and negatively impact Oakland’s vulnerable residents," said Ernesto Arevalo, an East Oakland resident who is part of a coalition of community groups that have been asking the city to develop a comprehensive public lands policy for several years now.
"We need more community representation in development, not developer lobbyists and or backroom deal making," said Arevalo. "And by stripping the public of its rightful role in this process, the [city] has spawned lopsided deals which only accelerate the mass displacement of marginalized Oaklanders."
The deals investigated by the Grand Jury include city-owned land at 1911 Telegraph Avenue, 2100 Telegraph Avenue, and the E. 12th Street Remainder Parcel. Negotiations for the Telegraph Avenue lands began in 2014, while the E. 12th Remainder Parcel began in 2015.
The city has 90 days to respond to the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations.
June 19, 2017 - East Bay Express
https://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2017/06/19/grand-jury-oaklands-backroom-dealing-to-sell-city-owned-land-is-systemic-problem-vulnerable-to-undue-influence
An investigation by the Alameda County Grand Jury alleges that Oakland city officials routinely violate state and city open meetings laws by discussing multimillion-dollar real estate deals in closed session.
According to the Grand Jury, Oakland officials do not properly notify the public through city council agendas when they’re discussing the sale of a city-owned property, keeping the public in the dark about ongoing deliberations.
The Grand Jury concluded that "the city’s misuse of closed sessions in discussing development of city property is a systemic problem."
Furthermore, the councilmembers and city staff don’t report on the substance of their private conversation to the public, which frequently includes matters such as "project vision, project scope, feasibility issues, community benefits, and selection of a developer" — all of which should be discussed in a public meeting, according to the Grand Jury. Furthermore, opportunities for members of the public to provide input on the deals is extremely limited.
The Grand Jury also found that individual councilmembers frequently hold private, one-on-one talks with the same developers the city is negotiating with. The city has no rules prohibiting these discussions, nor any requirement the contacts be disclosed to the public. As a result, the Grand Jury wrote that it is "concerned that private discussions during the pendency of the selection process favor well-connected developers, and make the process vulnerable to undue influence, or at least the perception thereof."
The Grand Jury is recommending that Oakland update its practices to comply with the Brown Act (the state's open meetings law) and the city's Sunshine Ordinance, and also require councilmembers to disclose when they privately meet with developers who are seeking public real estate.
Oakland's City Attorney did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Grand Jury Report. The city administrator's office replied to an email that the city council will be preparing a response to the Grand Jury report.
"Backroom deals that exclude our communities have resulted in land use decisions that don’t serve existing residents and negatively impact Oakland’s vulnerable residents," said Ernesto Arevalo, an East Oakland resident who is part of a coalition of community groups that have been asking the city to develop a comprehensive public lands policy for several years now.
"We need more community representation in development, not developer lobbyists and or backroom deal making," said Arevalo. "And by stripping the public of its rightful role in this process, the [city] has spawned lopsided deals which only accelerate the mass displacement of marginalized Oaklanders."
The deals investigated by the Grand Jury include city-owned land at 1911 Telegraph Avenue, 2100 Telegraph Avenue, and the E. 12th Street Remainder Parcel. Negotiations for the Telegraph Avenue lands began in 2014, while the E. 12th Remainder Parcel began in 2015.
The city has 90 days to respond to the Grand Jury’s findings and recommendations.
Friday, April 28, 2017
135 City of Oakland - Condo Conversions are displacing renters and undermining affordability
April 26, 2017
Condominium Conversions in Oakland Displace Renters and Undermine Affordability, According to Tenants and Housing Experts
When Karen Dick signed her lease in 2012, she thought she was moving into an affordable, rent-controlled apartment. But last year, her landlord delivered surprising news: Her modest one-bedroom had been turned into a condominium while she was living in it.
Now she will either have to pay as much as $450,000 to buy the condo, or move out when someone else purchases it.
Dick says her options are all bad. She doesn’t have enough money to buy, and doesn’t think the converted condo is worth the price. She’ll have to find a new apartment.
But rents have shot dramatically upward since 2012, so there won’t be anything available for the roughly $1,200 a month she was paying, thanks to Oakland’s rent control. Living on a social worker’s salary, and having spent 32 years in the East Bay, she fears she’ll be displaced.
“If I had been told they purchased in 2007 and started to convert it to a condo, I never would have been stupid enough to sign a lease,” Dick told the Express
Oakland law requires landlords to notify tenants when they convert their apartments into condos. But in Dick’s case, she didn’t move in until five years after the conversion began in 2007. Her landlord, Mosswood Builders, paused the conversion during the recession and only completed it last year. Dick said she sought answers from city officials about the legality of the conversion without notification, and her rights, but according to emails she shared with the Express, various city officials didn’t respond.
Her apartment-turned-condo was one of 53 rental units affected by condominium conversion in 2016, according to Oakland’s department of planning and building. Another 46 apartments were converted to condos in 2015. Far more were converted in the early 1980s and again in the mid-2000s. Many worry conversions will spike again, and Oakland’s laws won’t protect tenants.
Housing-policy experts say the steady drip of conversions is eliminating affordable rental housing in Oakland. Most affected units are subject to rent control — but once they become condos they’re no longer covered, per the state’s Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. The new owners can rent them out at whatever prices they want, or move into them. Either way, cheap apartments permanently disappear.
“The city does need to take this up soon, since we need every tool possible to preserve the dwindling amount of relatively affordable rental housing still remaining in Oakland,” said Gloria Bruce, the executive director of East Bay Housing Organizations.
For years, Oakland officials have said they want to amend the city’s Condominium Conversion Ordinance, which was originally passed in 1981 in response to a spike in conversions that led to hundreds of residents losing their homes.
But in 2006, several councilmembers, with urging from the real estate industry, proposed easing conversion rules in the name of expanding homeownership opportunities. Others pointed out that the average Oakland renter simply can’t afford a mortgage. The proposed changes were scrapped.
Most recently, Mayor Libby Schaaf’s 2016 housing policy report, called “Oakland at Home,” proposed amending the condo-conversion ordinance to protect rental housing. And Councilmember Dan Kalb has reportedly been working on amendments to the law for several years now.
But it’s unclear when updates will be brought to a vote. Schaaf didn’t respond to questions from the Express and Kalb would only say, in an email message, that he’s hoping to bring amendments to the council in several months. He didn’t state specifically what his legislation would change, however.
Jeffrey Levin of East Bay Housing Organizations said there are major loopholes in the existing condo-conversion law. For instance, there’s a lack of concrete benefits for displaced tenants required under the law. And two-to-four unit buildings in most of the city are exempt from the law’s requirement that converted apartments be replaced with new rentals, a provision that’s designed to prevent a net loss of rental-housing stock.
“Many of the conversions in the past were in these smaller buildings,” Levin wrote in an email. “There are thousands of units that are potentially at risk.”
Oakland also doesn’t have a cap on the total number of apartments that can be converted in a given year in the entire city. Berkeley and San Francisco both have caps to prevent the sudden loss of apartments.
Another problem is that the city’s “conversion credit” system, which was designed as a market-based mechanism that replaces converted apartments with new rental units, has been criticized as a shell game.
Specifically, the existing law states landlords who convert apartments into condos, in what are called the “primary” and “secondary” impact areas — neighborhoods around Lake Merritt and Rockridge where higher property values make conversions more likely — have to either build an equivalent number of new rental-housing units, or buy conversion credits. For five-unit and larger buildings throughout the rest of the city, the same replacement requirement is in effect.
But landlords who convert their apartment buildings into condos rarely build new rental housing to fulfill these requirements. Most of the time, they purchase conversion credits.
The credits are generated by other landlords who build or preserve rental housing. Each credit therefore supposedly represents a new replacement rental unit, so that, in theory, there’s no net loss of rental housing.
But the current law allows developers who build condos to also sell conversion credits, so long as they operate their condos as rentals for seven years. After seven years, they can sell the units, leading to a loss of affordable apartments.
In a report issued last year, several Berkeley researchers with the Urban Displacement Project characterized this as a way to “get around” the intent of the regulations, resulting in “no permanent replacement housing.”
Another problem is that many of the landlords selling credits haven’t actually built new rental housing.
For example, in the case of Dick’s apartment, Mosswood Builders opted to purchase condo conversion credits. But the credits weren’t from a developer who recently built new rental housing. Rather, the seller was a landlord who owned a house that was built in 1915. The house was transformed into a seven-unit apartment building before 1967, according to city records.
In other words, the condo-conversion credits — which Mosswood Builders purchased for $30,000 — didn’t actually represent new rentals.
Dick also said Mosswood Builders ran some of the neighboring apartments in her building as Airbnb pads for several years, instead of putting them on the market for permanent residents. The building felt at times more like a hotel than her home, she said, with strangers constantly coming and going.
Josh Whitkin of Mosswood Builders didn’t respond to an interview request for this story.
Today, Dick is the last tenant in her building. The assistance plan written by her landlord and approved by the city in 2007 states that she has the right to purchase her apartment before it’s marketed to the general public. It also states that, if she voluntarily elects to vacate her apartment, she may qualify for $2,000 in relocation assistance, and that her landlord will provide a list of similar rentals nearby.
But for Dick, this amount of assistance doesn’t help.
After contacting her councilmember, Kalb, as well as Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney, Schaaf, the Oakland housing-assistance office, and numerous pro bono housing attorneys, she says no one has stepped forward to help her understand the law or advocate for her rights as a tenant.
“I could have saved myself a lot of problem from the start,” Dick said. “I should have never signed a lease.”
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/condominium-conversions-in-oakland-displace-renters-and-undermine-affordability-according-to-tenants-and-housing-experts/Content?oid=6482524
Condominium Conversions in Oakland Displace Renters and Undermine Affordability, According to Tenants and Housing Experts
When Karen Dick signed her lease in 2012, she thought she was moving into an affordable, rent-controlled apartment. But last year, her landlord delivered surprising news: Her modest one-bedroom had been turned into a condominium while she was living in it.
Now she will either have to pay as much as $450,000 to buy the condo, or move out when someone else purchases it.
Dick says her options are all bad. She doesn’t have enough money to buy, and doesn’t think the converted condo is worth the price. She’ll have to find a new apartment.
But rents have shot dramatically upward since 2012, so there won’t be anything available for the roughly $1,200 a month she was paying, thanks to Oakland’s rent control. Living on a social worker’s salary, and having spent 32 years in the East Bay, she fears she’ll be displaced.
“If I had been told they purchased in 2007 and started to convert it to a condo, I never would have been stupid enough to sign a lease,” Dick told the Express
Oakland law requires landlords to notify tenants when they convert their apartments into condos. But in Dick’s case, she didn’t move in until five years after the conversion began in 2007. Her landlord, Mosswood Builders, paused the conversion during the recession and only completed it last year. Dick said she sought answers from city officials about the legality of the conversion without notification, and her rights, but according to emails she shared with the Express, various city officials didn’t respond.
Her apartment-turned-condo was one of 53 rental units affected by condominium conversion in 2016, according to Oakland’s department of planning and building. Another 46 apartments were converted to condos in 2015. Far more were converted in the early 1980s and again in the mid-2000s. Many worry conversions will spike again, and Oakland’s laws won’t protect tenants.
Housing-policy experts say the steady drip of conversions is eliminating affordable rental housing in Oakland. Most affected units are subject to rent control — but once they become condos they’re no longer covered, per the state’s Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. The new owners can rent them out at whatever prices they want, or move into them. Either way, cheap apartments permanently disappear.
“The city does need to take this up soon, since we need every tool possible to preserve the dwindling amount of relatively affordable rental housing still remaining in Oakland,” said Gloria Bruce, the executive director of East Bay Housing Organizations.
For years, Oakland officials have said they want to amend the city’s Condominium Conversion Ordinance, which was originally passed in 1981 in response to a spike in conversions that led to hundreds of residents losing their homes.
But in 2006, several councilmembers, with urging from the real estate industry, proposed easing conversion rules in the name of expanding homeownership opportunities. Others pointed out that the average Oakland renter simply can’t afford a mortgage. The proposed changes were scrapped.
Most recently, Mayor Libby Schaaf’s 2016 housing policy report, called “Oakland at Home,” proposed amending the condo-conversion ordinance to protect rental housing. And Councilmember Dan Kalb has reportedly been working on amendments to the law for several years now.
But it’s unclear when updates will be brought to a vote. Schaaf didn’t respond to questions from the Express and Kalb would only say, in an email message, that he’s hoping to bring amendments to the council in several months. He didn’t state specifically what his legislation would change, however.
Jeffrey Levin of East Bay Housing Organizations said there are major loopholes in the existing condo-conversion law. For instance, there’s a lack of concrete benefits for displaced tenants required under the law. And two-to-four unit buildings in most of the city are exempt from the law’s requirement that converted apartments be replaced with new rentals, a provision that’s designed to prevent a net loss of rental-housing stock.
“Many of the conversions in the past were in these smaller buildings,” Levin wrote in an email. “There are thousands of units that are potentially at risk.”
Oakland also doesn’t have a cap on the total number of apartments that can be converted in a given year in the entire city. Berkeley and San Francisco both have caps to prevent the sudden loss of apartments.
Another problem is that the city’s “conversion credit” system, which was designed as a market-based mechanism that replaces converted apartments with new rental units, has been criticized as a shell game.
Specifically, the existing law states landlords who convert apartments into condos, in what are called the “primary” and “secondary” impact areas — neighborhoods around Lake Merritt and Rockridge where higher property values make conversions more likely — have to either build an equivalent number of new rental-housing units, or buy conversion credits. For five-unit and larger buildings throughout the rest of the city, the same replacement requirement is in effect.
But landlords who convert their apartment buildings into condos rarely build new rental housing to fulfill these requirements. Most of the time, they purchase conversion credits.
The credits are generated by other landlords who build or preserve rental housing. Each credit therefore supposedly represents a new replacement rental unit, so that, in theory, there’s no net loss of rental housing.
But the current law allows developers who build condos to also sell conversion credits, so long as they operate their condos as rentals for seven years. After seven years, they can sell the units, leading to a loss of affordable apartments.
In a report issued last year, several Berkeley researchers with the Urban Displacement Project characterized this as a way to “get around” the intent of the regulations, resulting in “no permanent replacement housing.”
Another problem is that many of the landlords selling credits haven’t actually built new rental housing.
For example, in the case of Dick’s apartment, Mosswood Builders opted to purchase condo conversion credits. But the credits weren’t from a developer who recently built new rental housing. Rather, the seller was a landlord who owned a house that was built in 1915. The house was transformed into a seven-unit apartment building before 1967, according to city records.
In other words, the condo-conversion credits — which Mosswood Builders purchased for $30,000 — didn’t actually represent new rentals.
Dick also said Mosswood Builders ran some of the neighboring apartments in her building as Airbnb pads for several years, instead of putting them on the market for permanent residents. The building felt at times more like a hotel than her home, she said, with strangers constantly coming and going.
Josh Whitkin of Mosswood Builders didn’t respond to an interview request for this story.
Today, Dick is the last tenant in her building. The assistance plan written by her landlord and approved by the city in 2007 states that she has the right to purchase her apartment before it’s marketed to the general public. It also states that, if she voluntarily elects to vacate her apartment, she may qualify for $2,000 in relocation assistance, and that her landlord will provide a list of similar rentals nearby.
But for Dick, this amount of assistance doesn’t help.
After contacting her councilmember, Kalb, as well as Councilmember Lynette Gibson McElhaney, Schaaf, the Oakland housing-assistance office, and numerous pro bono housing attorneys, she says no one has stepped forward to help her understand the law or advocate for her rights as a tenant.
“I could have saved myself a lot of problem from the start,” Dick said. “I should have never signed a lease.”
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/condominium-conversions-in-oakland-displace-renters-and-undermine-affordability-according-to-tenants-and-housing-experts/Content?oid=6482524
134 Oakland Bldg Dept - Code Enforcement strategies were adopted but never implemented.
April 24, 2017
Oakland Must Re-Imagine Code Enforcement As Advocate For Community Health and Safety
The recent fire tragedies in Oakland have shined the light on deplorable housing conditions in which many Oakland residents live. This problem is exacerbated with the growing diminishment of renters’ bargaining powers in a tightening housing market. To address Oakland’s housing habitability problems and prevent more tragedies require us to re-imagine Code Enforcement as an advocate for community health and safety. The City of Oakland and Code Enforcement had embraced such a vision several years ago, but the momentum stalled.
What happened and what can be done now?
Tasked by former Oakland City Administrators to lead Code Enforcement’s transformation in response to the 2011 Grand Jury Report, I had witnessed firsthand how Code Enforcement serves as an implementer for political values. The “get tough on blight” approach, highlighted in the Grand Jury Report, appeared rooted in former Mayor Brown’s vision of Oakland as a bedroom community for San Francisco. It was also driven by the City’s budget mandate that Code Enforcement operations be 100% revenue generating. The prior punitive rules resulted in quickly accruing expensive penalties for lower income homeowners who lacked the resources to fix up their blighted homes. Code Enforcement liens were then attached, transmitted over to the County Tax Collector for collection, and sometimes resulted in homes lost to investors at tax auctions. For example, the 2013 County tax auction included 75 vacant lots that had previous structures demolished by Code Enforcement.
The Grand Jury report served as an opportunity for Code Enforcement staff to be empowered to design a new vision. The staff, supported by a team that included the City Administration, City Attorney, City Council, County Health, and community groups, re-imagined Code Enforcement as a vehicle for community health and safety. To achieve this new vision required Code Enforcement to change its policies, create new partnerships, be less driven by revenue concerns, and allow its staff to operate as caring human beings.
The changes made meant that an elderly, low-income property owner with a damaged roof, rather than receiving a blight notice and subsequent fines, would instead receive referrals to rehab resources from Code Enforcement staff. It meant that Code Enforcement staff received trainings from County Health on health impacts from mold, were lent humidity reading new technology by San Francisco Health, and developed a case management team with County health workers.
However, sustaining the transformation of Code Enforcement required three strategies, two of which the City adopted in theory but never implemented.
First, Code Enforcement critically needs a full-time leader with expertise in health/community development and program/financial management. We had developed a job description for a new Code Enforcement Manager but the position was later eliminated.
Second, the City Council needs to adopt a Proactive Rental Inspection (PRI) ordinance that empowers Code Enforcement to proactively inspect rental units rather than the current flawed complaint system, target limited City resources towards the worst offenders, include anti-displacement strategies, and generate an ongoing new revenue source that’s spread broadly across rental units. Cities like Sacramento and Los Angeles have effectively implemented PRI programs, resulting in improvements to habitability and health.
Third, the City can use part of its new Infrastructure Bond $100 million for housing for a landlord rehabilitation fund in exchange for long-term affordable rents to counter the displacement crisis.
Councilmember Lynette McElhaney has been trying to advance a PRI policy. There’s an informational report from the City Administration headed to the Council CED Committee on April 25th. But there’s only so much the Administration can do—we need City Council action to pass a PRI ordinance, include a Code Enforcement Manager in its new budget, and create a Landlord Rehab/Anti-Displacement Fund. Without all three measures, Oakland’s housing habitability problems, as highlighted by the recent fire tragedies, will go unabated.
Margaretta Lin served as Deputy City Administrator for the City of Oakland and currently serves as Executive Director of the Dellums Institute for Social Justice.
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/oakland-must-re-imagine-code-enforcement-as-advocate-for-community-health-and-safety/Content?oid=6467985
Oakland Must Re-Imagine Code Enforcement As Advocate For Community Health and Safety
The recent fire tragedies in Oakland have shined the light on deplorable housing conditions in which many Oakland residents live. This problem is exacerbated with the growing diminishment of renters’ bargaining powers in a tightening housing market. To address Oakland’s housing habitability problems and prevent more tragedies require us to re-imagine Code Enforcement as an advocate for community health and safety. The City of Oakland and Code Enforcement had embraced such a vision several years ago, but the momentum stalled.
What happened and what can be done now?
Tasked by former Oakland City Administrators to lead Code Enforcement’s transformation in response to the 2011 Grand Jury Report, I had witnessed firsthand how Code Enforcement serves as an implementer for political values. The “get tough on blight” approach, highlighted in the Grand Jury Report, appeared rooted in former Mayor Brown’s vision of Oakland as a bedroom community for San Francisco. It was also driven by the City’s budget mandate that Code Enforcement operations be 100% revenue generating. The prior punitive rules resulted in quickly accruing expensive penalties for lower income homeowners who lacked the resources to fix up their blighted homes. Code Enforcement liens were then attached, transmitted over to the County Tax Collector for collection, and sometimes resulted in homes lost to investors at tax auctions. For example, the 2013 County tax auction included 75 vacant lots that had previous structures demolished by Code Enforcement.
The Grand Jury report served as an opportunity for Code Enforcement staff to be empowered to design a new vision. The staff, supported by a team that included the City Administration, City Attorney, City Council, County Health, and community groups, re-imagined Code Enforcement as a vehicle for community health and safety. To achieve this new vision required Code Enforcement to change its policies, create new partnerships, be less driven by revenue concerns, and allow its staff to operate as caring human beings.
The changes made meant that an elderly, low-income property owner with a damaged roof, rather than receiving a blight notice and subsequent fines, would instead receive referrals to rehab resources from Code Enforcement staff. It meant that Code Enforcement staff received trainings from County Health on health impacts from mold, were lent humidity reading new technology by San Francisco Health, and developed a case management team with County health workers.
However, sustaining the transformation of Code Enforcement required three strategies, two of which the City adopted in theory but never implemented.
First, Code Enforcement critically needs a full-time leader with expertise in health/community development and program/financial management. We had developed a job description for a new Code Enforcement Manager but the position was later eliminated.
Second, the City Council needs to adopt a Proactive Rental Inspection (PRI) ordinance that empowers Code Enforcement to proactively inspect rental units rather than the current flawed complaint system, target limited City resources towards the worst offenders, include anti-displacement strategies, and generate an ongoing new revenue source that’s spread broadly across rental units. Cities like Sacramento and Los Angeles have effectively implemented PRI programs, resulting in improvements to habitability and health.
Third, the City can use part of its new Infrastructure Bond $100 million for housing for a landlord rehabilitation fund in exchange for long-term affordable rents to counter the displacement crisis.
Councilmember Lynette McElhaney has been trying to advance a PRI policy. There’s an informational report from the City Administration headed to the Council CED Committee on April 25th. But there’s only so much the Administration can do—we need City Council action to pass a PRI ordinance, include a Code Enforcement Manager in its new budget, and create a Landlord Rehab/Anti-Displacement Fund. Without all three measures, Oakland’s housing habitability problems, as highlighted by the recent fire tragedies, will go unabated.
Margaretta Lin served as Deputy City Administrator for the City of Oakland and currently serves as Executive Director of the Dellums Institute for Social Justice.
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/oakland/oakland-must-re-imagine-code-enforcement-as-advocate-for-community-health-and-safety/Content?oid=6467985
132 Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf attempts to divert tax revenue from Measure HH away from the health programs
April 28, 2017
During last year's campaign for the sugar-sweetened beverage tax, city officials told voters that the money would only be used for health education programs and spent under the supervision of an appointed board.
That board hasn't been established yet.
In a Facebook post published last night, Councilmember Desley Brooks called the mayor's plan a "bait and switch."
Opponents of the soda tax, including the American Beverage Association, campaigned against it by warning voters that the money would be deposited in the general fund, and city officials could spend it on anything.
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2017/04/28/oakland-councilmembers-accuse-mayor-schaaf-of-bait-and-switch-with-soda-tax-revenue
During last year's campaign for the sugar-sweetened beverage tax, city officials told voters that the money would only be used for health education programs and spent under the supervision of an appointed board.
That board hasn't been established yet.
In a Facebook post published last night, Councilmember Desley Brooks called the mayor's plan a "bait and switch."
Opponents of the soda tax, including the American Beverage Association, campaigned against it by warning voters that the money would be deposited in the general fund, and city officials could spend it on anything.
http://www.eastbayexpress.com/SevenDays/archives/2017/04/28/oakland-councilmembers-accuse-mayor-schaaf-of-bait-and-switch-with-soda-tax-revenue
Wednesday, April 5, 2017
119 Oakland Fire Dept (OFD) Another fatal fire highlights Oakland inspection dysfunction
March 28, 2017 - East Bay Times
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/03/28/editorial-another-fatal-fire-highlights-oakland-inspection-dysfunction/
Forty deaths in four months. How many more people will die due to Oakland’s dysfunctional fire- and code-inspection system?
Thirty-six people were killed late last year in the Ghost Ship warehouse inferno in the Fruitvale District. Then on Monday, four perished and four were injured after an early morning blaze destroyed a West Oakland residential building that housed 80-100 people.
Both tragedies were preventable. If only Oakland’s inspection systems had worked the way they should have. If only warning signs had been heeded and aggressively responded to.
Start with Ghost Ship: At first, officials said that before the fire no city workers had been inside the warehouse, which was filled with furniture and turned out to have no sprinklers or fire alarms, only one obvious exit, cords strung to provide electricity and a makeshift stairwell built out of wood pallets.
But city records turned over last month after this newspaper’s threat of litigation revealed that police had visited the building and associated properties 35 times between mid-2014 and the Dec. 2 fire.
The records showed that at least two police officers who had been called to the site noticed problems, with one reporting an “illegal rave with drug and alcohol sales” and the other reporting that “this is a warehouse that is also an illegal shared housing.”
After Ghost Ship, we were told steps were taken to improve communications between departments and ensure such tragedies were avoided.
Then came Monday. As bad as it was, it could have been much worse. In addition to the fatalities, other residents were rescued from inside and from fire escapes of the three-story building on San Pablo Avenue.
This time, no one can claim city inspectors were unaware of the dangers. Planning and Building Department records show 20 code enforcement complaints for the residential building over the last 10 years.
Records show the building was unstable, had electrical issues, lacked hot water and heat, and had mold and rodent infestation and leaking roofs and pipes throughout the building.
Meanwhile, the fire department, which under state law should have inspected the building annually, apparently failed to do so. Records show fire inspectors visited the site in 2010 and 2012. But it took referrals from other city workers for them to visit again in 2015 and finally again last week. (To the extent there’s any good news, it’s that there was communication this time, unlike in the case of Ghost Ship.)
On last week’s visit, fire inspectors found inadequate fire alarms, smoke detectors and sprinkler systems; a lack of fire extinguishers; extension cords in lieu of electrical outlets; and a lack of adequate emergency lighting, exit signs and evacuation maps.
Three days later the building burned.
If only code enforcement officers had warned fire inspectors or, if they did, fire inspectors had heeded the warning. If only they had shown up sooner, as they should have.
If only.
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/03/28/editorial-another-fatal-fire-highlights-oakland-inspection-dysfunction/
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/03/28/editorial-another-fatal-fire-highlights-oakland-inspection-dysfunction/
Forty deaths in four months. How many more people will die due to Oakland’s dysfunctional fire- and code-inspection system?
Thirty-six people were killed late last year in the Ghost Ship warehouse inferno in the Fruitvale District. Then on Monday, four perished and four were injured after an early morning blaze destroyed a West Oakland residential building that housed 80-100 people.
Both tragedies were preventable. If only Oakland’s inspection systems had worked the way they should have. If only warning signs had been heeded and aggressively responded to.
Start with Ghost Ship: At first, officials said that before the fire no city workers had been inside the warehouse, which was filled with furniture and turned out to have no sprinklers or fire alarms, only one obvious exit, cords strung to provide electricity and a makeshift stairwell built out of wood pallets.
But city records turned over last month after this newspaper’s threat of litigation revealed that police had visited the building and associated properties 35 times between mid-2014 and the Dec. 2 fire.
The records showed that at least two police officers who had been called to the site noticed problems, with one reporting an “illegal rave with drug and alcohol sales” and the other reporting that “this is a warehouse that is also an illegal shared housing.”
After Ghost Ship, we were told steps were taken to improve communications between departments and ensure such tragedies were avoided.
Then came Monday. As bad as it was, it could have been much worse. In addition to the fatalities, other residents were rescued from inside and from fire escapes of the three-story building on San Pablo Avenue.
This time, no one can claim city inspectors were unaware of the dangers. Planning and Building Department records show 20 code enforcement complaints for the residential building over the last 10 years.
Records show the building was unstable, had electrical issues, lacked hot water and heat, and had mold and rodent infestation and leaking roofs and pipes throughout the building.
Meanwhile, the fire department, which under state law should have inspected the building annually, apparently failed to do so. Records show fire inspectors visited the site in 2010 and 2012. But it took referrals from other city workers for them to visit again in 2015 and finally again last week. (To the extent there’s any good news, it’s that there was communication this time, unlike in the case of Ghost Ship.)
On last week’s visit, fire inspectors found inadequate fire alarms, smoke detectors and sprinkler systems; a lack of fire extinguishers; extension cords in lieu of electrical outlets; and a lack of adequate emergency lighting, exit signs and evacuation maps.
Three days later the building burned.
If only code enforcement officers had warned fire inspectors or, if they did, fire inspectors had heeded the warning. If only they had shown up sooner, as they should have.
If only.
http://www.eastbaytimes.com/2017/03/28/editorial-another-fatal-fire-highlights-oakland-inspection-dysfunction/
Monday, March 27, 2017
116 Oakland Bldg Dept (OBD) - Inspections and some enforcement but no abatement 2551 San Pablo
Residents: No alarms or sprinklers worked during deadly Oakland fire
Days after the December warehouse fire, the owner of the building that burned Monday sent an eviction notice to Urojas Community Center, which occupies the first two floors of the building, said James Cook, an attorney for the center.
The center assists about 60 people with transitional housing and services, Cook said. He had complained to the city about clogged toilets and disgusting bathrooms, exposed wires and water an inch thick on the ground floor, he said.
“It’s like Ghost Ship, but worse,” Cook said.
Residents included a 9 year old boy who escaped in his underwear and socks.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fire-in-oakland-building/
Over the last decade, the city has received 20 complaints about pest infestation, electrical issues, mold, trash, graffiti, floors caving in, roof leaks and other blight issues.
Eighteen of those complaints occurred within the last five years, including the master tenant Urojas Community Services’ request on March 2 for an inspection of the facility by code enforcement for “alleged deferred maintenance by landlord.” The city verified the violation, according to city records.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/27/oakland-fire-landlord-moved-to-evict-tenants-after-ghost-ship-blaze/
There are items listed from 2014 that are still 'pending investigation'. How long does it take Oakland Building Inspectors to 'investigate' a substandard building?
"Hole in floor. Unable to lock door = unactionable" If the City won't take 'action' - who will?
'
Days after the December warehouse fire, the owner of the building that burned Monday sent an eviction notice to Urojas Community Center, which occupies the first two floors of the building, said James Cook, an attorney for the center.
The center assists about 60 people with transitional housing and services, Cook said. He had complained to the city about clogged toilets and disgusting bathrooms, exposed wires and water an inch thick on the ground floor, he said.
“It’s like Ghost Ship, but worse,” Cook said.
Residents included a 9 year old boy who escaped in his underwear and socks.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/fire-in-oakland-building/
Over the last decade, the city has received 20 complaints about pest infestation, electrical issues, mold, trash, graffiti, floors caving in, roof leaks and other blight issues.
Eighteen of those complaints occurred within the last five years, including the master tenant Urojas Community Services’ request on March 2 for an inspection of the facility by code enforcement for “alleged deferred maintenance by landlord.” The city verified the violation, according to city records.
http://www.mercurynews.com/2017/03/27/oakland-fire-landlord-moved-to-evict-tenants-after-ghost-ship-blaze/
Oakland Building Inspectors make REPEATED trips to the same building, but don't involve the Fire Inspectors to ensure other safety issues aren't being ignored?
There are items listed from 2014 that are still 'pending investigation'. How long does it take Oakland Building Inspectors to 'investigate' a substandard building?
"Hole in floor. Unable to lock door = unactionable" If the City won't take 'action' - who will?
03/02/2017
| 1700865 |
Housing Habitability Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
Master tenant Urojas request inspection of the facility; alleged deferred maintenance by landlord.
|
Violation Verified
| |||
02/23/2017
| 1700743 |
Blight - Facility Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
Large amount of trash and debris, building materials, furniture in back of property. Neighbor will provide access in order to verify.
|
Notice of Violation Sent
| |||
12/29/2016
| 1604844 |
Housing Habitability Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
No working heat throughout the building, electrical issues and a large pest infestation
|
Open
| |||
11/10/2016
| 1604339 |
Blight - Facility Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
Possible insufficient garbage service at property.
|
No Violation Found
| |||
09/07/2016
| 1603446 |
Housing Habitability Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
Unit 321: Pipe in the kitchen sink is missing causing water leakage and mold and the floor is caving in. The toilet is not working properly.
|
Re-Activated
| |||
05/16/2016
| 1601760 |
Housing Habitability Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, UNIT #117, Oakland CA 94612
|
UNIT #117: Lack of hot water
|
Violation Verified
| |||
04/11/2016
| 1601257 |
Blight - Facility Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
Bags of garbage and household items are piling up against side yard fencing and in rear yard also.
|
Abated
| |||
03/08/2016
| 1600785 |
Housing Habitability Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, UNIT 222, Oakland CA 94612
|
Hole in floor of kitchen, can't lock door
|
Non-Actionable
| |||
01/29/2016
| 1600358 |
Blight - Facility Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
NO ELECTRICITY IN UNIT, NO HOT WATER, MOLD IN UNIT #113
|
Closed
| |||
09/23/2015
| 1503413 |
Blight Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
Inadequate garbage service - Trash all over
| Abated |
04/15/2015
| 1501269 |
Housing Habitability Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
Unit #216: Holes in walls from rodent infestation; mold and mildew from water leak in shower.
|
Pending Investigation
|
Unit #216: Holes in walls from rodent infestation; mold and mildew from water leak in shower.
| ||
03/10/2014
| 1401080 |
Housing Habitability Complaint
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, Oakland CA 94612
|
roof leaking, ceiling has holes, mold & mildew
|
Pending Investigation
|
roof leaking, ceiling has holes, mold & mildew
| ||
06/10/2013
| 1303097 |
Enforcement/Private Property/Facility Complaint/Housing
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, OAKLAND CA
|
UNSANITARY CONDITIONS, FECES, URINE, MOLD WOMENS QUARTERS, KITCHENNO HANDICAP ACCESS, LEAKY PIPES THROUGHOUT BUILDING
|
Enforcement Record
|
Abated
|
UNSANITARY CONDITIONS, FECES, URINE, MOLD WOMENS QUARTERS, KITCHENNO HANDICAP ACCESS, LEAKY PIPES THROUGHOUT BUILDING
| |
05/01/2013
| 1302329 |
Enforcement/Private Property/Facility Complaint/Housing
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, 211, OAKLAND CA
|
CEILING LEAKING FROM PIPES (POSSILBY A SEWER LINE) OVER KITCHEN ANDOTHER SPOTS THRU OUT UNIT
|
Enforcement Record
|
Abated
|
CEILING LEAKING FROM PIPES (POSSILBY A SEWER LINE) OVER KITCHEN ANDOTHER SPOTS THRU OUT UNIT
| |
02/19/2013
| 1300990 |
Enforcement/Private Property/Facility Complaint/Housing
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, 223, OAKLAND CA
|
NO HOT WATER OR HEAT INSIDE UNIT
|
Enforcement Record
|
Abated
|
NO HOT WATER OR HEAT INSIDE UNIT
| |
01/28/2013
| 1300557 |
Enforcement/Private Property/Facility Complaint/Housing
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, 319, OAKLAND CA
|
LEFT BEDROOM DOOR JAMB DAMAGED.
|
Enforcement Record
|
Abated
|
LEFT BEDROOM DOOR JAMB DAMAGED.
| |
11/07/2012
| 1206002 |
Enforcement/Private Property/Facility Complaint/Housing
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, 317, OAKLAND CA
|
FLOOR IS SLATED AND BUILDING STRUCTURE IS UNSTABLE.
|
Enforcement Record
|
Abated
|
FLOOR IS SLATED AND BUILDING STRUCTURE IS UNSTABLE.
| |
04/04/2012
| 1201446 |
Enforcement/Private Property/Facility Complaint/Housing
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, OAKLAND CA
|
GRAFFITI ON STORE FRONT
|
Enforcement Record
|
Closed
|
GRAFFITI ON STORE FRONT
| |
11/01/2007
| 0708176 |
Enforcement/Private Property/Facility Complaint/Blight
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, LOWER, OAKLAND CA
|
EMPLOYEE COMPLAINT - MOLD AND MILDEW AND DUSTY VENT IN THE HOUE.
|
Enforcement Record
|
No Violation Found
|
EMPLOYEE COMPLAINT - MOLD AND MILDEW AND DUSTY VENT IN THE HOUE.
| |
10/31/2007
| 0708155 |
Enforcement/Private Property/Facility Complaint/Housing
|
2551 SAN PABLO AVE, LOWER, OAKLAND CA
|
TENANT COMPLAINT - MOLD AND MILDEW AND DUSTY VENTS IN THE HOUSE.
|
Enforcement Record
|
Closed
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)