Oakland Focus News | Oakland News Online Blog

Look, I'm not writing this to defend fired Oakland City Administrator Deborah Edgerly' entire performance, but to act as a reasoned corrective. Phil Mattier and Andy Ross ' column today listed what Edgerly was entitled to in the way of monetary compensation: The bennies include: -- Nine weeks of vacation. -- Two weeks of management leave. -- Three weeks of executive leave. -- Ten weeks of sick leave (paid out at 33 cents on the dollar). It's a grand total payment of $90,024, city officials confirmed. Right. But what "city officials" forgot to tell Matier and Ross is that because Edgerly worked so many hours, she didn't take sick leave or management leave, or vacation pay. I like Phil and Andy, but I have to not only disagree with the way they present this information, but point an accusatory finger at the "city officials" who confirmed this information, because they could have took effort to tell Matier and Ross of the nature of the compensati

Nancy Nadel - Councilmember Releases Statement On Mayor Dellums / Deborah Edgerly Issue Oakland District Three Councilmember Nancy Nadel issued this statement on the City Hall circus that surrounded Deborah Edgerly's firing by Mayor Ron Dellums: Dear Oakland Resident, We are in the midst of troubled times in Oakland. I have been receiving many calls and emails about the issues surrounding the City Administrator and the Mayor’s response. As a scientist by training, I am intent on getting all the facts before rushing to judgment as I determine the best course for the city and continue my work to empower our residents to be active, productive and proud of their city. As I become aware of the need for deeper investigation, I will approach the appropriate level of government to provide it. I want to assure my constituents and all the residents of Oakland, that I will work diligently to expose and eliminate any corruption and just plain sloppy practices that diminish our city and dev

The call for a City of Oakland "hiring audit", given by both Council President Ignacio De La Fuente and Mayor Ron Dellums in the wake of the firing of Chief Administrative Officer Deborah Edgerly on Tuesday (and the focus of a July 15th City Council meeting), is a terrible, emotional, knee-jerk idea adopted by two elected officials who need to take three steps back and rethink their entire approach to this matter. They've already made a ton of errors. Dellums mistake is in appearing as if he has all of the managerial stability of a switch-hitter, changing from one way of dealing with Deborah Edgerly, then opting for a nuclear approach. Ignacio does, what he does all too well, pounce in to take advantage of a perceived weakness in his opponent. But his mistake is in his execution of this action. Remember that Dellums beat De La Fuente in the last Oakland Mayor's race, and now public perception of Dellums has reached rock-bottom, so low that Ignacio's playing

Yesterday, I was tipped off by an Oakland Resident that the Oakland Police have been wiretapping now-former Chief Administrative Officer Deborah Edgerly and say that the resulting evidence is incrminating. Now, I can't, as of this writing confirm this. It may be a couple of police officers trying to score points with an influential person, but I'm taking the claim seriously. Why? Well because it comes from people -- Oakland Police -- who can do it. I found this analysis of current California law, which reads: Both federal and California law enforcement officials may eavesdrop on and record telephone conversations without a court order under the so-called "one party consent provision" (18 USC 2511(2)(s); California Penal Code 633). In other words, if state or federal authorities have the consent of one party to a conversation (such as a government informant), the conversation may be monitored. This provision applies only to eavesdropping by law enforcement official

I want to be the first Oakland blogger to affirm Chip Johnson's article today charging favoritism in the City of Oakland. My response is that it doesn't start or stop at the CAO's office or with Deborah Edgerly herself, and a really complete look should go back 10 years, not just 2004. Look, I was treated so terribly by the City of Oakland when I was trying to bring the Super Bowl here , that my own mother -- who's still cancer-free by the way -- observed that "Between Blacks who are jealous of you and Whites who think someone White should be doing what you're doing, you're going through a terrible place." She was right. Oakland's government has a long history of hating well-educated Black men who don't follow the normal ethnic stereotypes. I remember 1998, when all of us from Elihu Harris' office -- I was economic advisor -- were being placed in various departments of the City of Oakland after Jerry Brown won a landslide victory to

Yesterday, I reported a rumor that Deborah Edgerly, Oakland's Chief Administrative Officer, was going to be placed on Administrative Leave . Today, that rumor has been confirmed by the Oakland Tribune and SFGate.com . From the Trib.. Mayor Ron Dellums sent Edgerly notice at 1:24 p.m. Friday that she had been placed on paid administrative leave until her July 31 retirement date amid allegations that Edgerly interfered with a police investigation. Dellums' move came just three days after he joined Edgerly at a City Hall news conference to announce that Edgerly would be allowed to serve through the end of July, as the two had previously agreed, even as Edgerly faced mounting criticism. My comments from before, stand. I feel the Mayor should have stuck to one decision -- the first one -- and not given in to pressure. I continue to feel sorry for what "MissE" is going through and feel that, while she's certainly made mistakes, her counterparts before her have as

I just came from a dinner and during that event, learned that Chief Administrative Officer (CAO) Deborah Edgerly may have been placed on administrative leave, but David Shea, Chief of Staff for Mayor Ron Delums would not confirm that a high-level meeting took place today or that the outcome was indeed to change the CAO's status from "retiring July 31st but still working" to "paid administrative leave." In my view, swaying from one decision to another is not a sign of good leadership. It's not the Mayor Dellums can't be a good leader, but I think what's happened is that Dellums made a bet that Senator Hillary Clinton would be the next step in his occupational life, lost that bet when he failed to back Senator Barack Obama, who's going to be the next president, and now is concerned about maintaining the job of Mayor. Thus, the back-and-forth indecision.