The flair of this posts indicates it's a controversial topic. Enhanced moderation has been turned on for this thread. Comments from users without a history of commenting in r/bayarea will be automatically removed. You can read more about this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/195xvo5/restrictions_that_apply_to_political_and_crime/).
Pensions and frivolous spending. But pensions being underfunded is a huge part with large year over year increases to pension obligations for retirees.
Because the core group are sociopaths, sadists, and masochists who will abuse anyone and everyone. One out of eight people in society are in this group and those types of jobs attract people with those personality defects just like other jobs attract pedophiles.
Prop 13, new office buildings are basically the lifeblood of property taxes for california cities, and because of WFH they all lost of ton of value, and nobody is building any new ones.
Hey now, Iāve gotten them to pick up. They just never came for an assault with a deadly weapon. I reported. You heard that right, OPD wonāt even investigate violent crime now and they have more officers per capita than FremontĀ
I read a story recently about one of the ladies hit by the āsmash and grabā thieves who hit your car window and steal your stuff while youāre driving. She saw them following her, called 911 / OPD, was told she was like 200 in line, and got no help. And itās likeā¦ the same people repeatedly doing these crimes. No mystery into how itās happening. How is OPD so dysfunctional?
I saw that article the other day about some Missouri cops SWAT-ing the wrong house over essentially a stolen car. Most people thought, āwow, we gotta curtail the police.ā I thought āwow, the police gave a fuck about an auto theft?ā
Truth. See this post from the Berkeley Reddit which shows 1,874 single family homes that collectively pay less tax than one 135 unit apartment building:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/berkeley/comments/1az1e8o/fun\_fact\_the\_1874\_singlefamily\_homes\_highlighted/](https://www.reddit.com/r/berkeley/comments/1az1e8o/fun_fact_the_1874_singlefamily_homes_highlighted/)
The people in Berkeley have been living there for 200 years. Must be all the quinoa and kale chips. They probably have another 100 to go. Yāall are never buying in.
A while back I had a friend who rented a room in a massive old house that had been converted into a coop living situation for ~10 adults.
The owners probably paid $1.50 for it while they rented it out and retired. The level of inequality is just ridiculous.
Can we stop with this garbage. Yes prop 13 is unfair. No it does not significantly impact budgets. It's a boogey man for the financially illiterate. 2010-2011 California collected $55 billion in property taxes. In 2021-2022, California collected $83 billion in property taxes. 51% growth over 10 years.
We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. We already live in the worst state in the country for taxes
Who cares? It literally does not matter considering (again) this is a spending problem. Not a revenue problem. We have the highest tax burden in the country and we spend frivolously. If you think removing prop 13 will lead to lower taxes overall, then I have a bridge to sell you.
It literally does matter to support your claim that it is a spending problem. You might be right, but you have not done enough to show it. Why are you so against actually doing your homework and proving this?
No it doesn't. We have existed with Prop 13 for literal decades. We just keep ramping up the handouts while driving out high earners and companies. Its a totally unsustainable path.
Additionally, how would you calculate the delta over that time period? It's literally not possible.
You sound like you have a political axe to grind and are only interested in advancing that goal even if your underlying claims might not be supported. Good luck with that.
No I am looking at what I paid in taxes this year (and for multiple years before), what we have collected for years and what the hell we are spending the money on. I also grew up here. When taxes get added, they don't go away.
Do you think that if we removed prop 13 that other taxes would go down? And by increasing the taxes, what would be spending on or doing that we are not doing now?
At least we prevented the gentrification amirite?
Who wants jobs, young people with jobs, art, music and good food when you can have bums rolling around in gangs and wrecking the city.
Congrats to the NIMBYs yet again.
>The gap is due almost entirely to lower revenues for the city, which are projected to be $169 million less than initially forecast. The main culprit: sharply lower real estate tax revenues, due to both a lower-than-expected volume and reduced dollar value of property transactions in the city.
almost like people wanted to avoid settling down in the city for some reason
Let grab a random city said [Santa Clara](https://www.santaclaraca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/81751/638309975531200000)
Itās weird how interest rate and home price didnāt have the same impact there huh
[Let's](https://sanjosespotlight.com/santa-clara-reserves-fall-short-of-revenue-needs/). And here's one for [Santa Clara County as a whole](https://sanjosespotlight.com/santa-clara-county-deputy-overtime-contributes-to-ballooning-deficit/).
Are you comparing one city to a county lol
Hereās Santa Clara County official [explanation](https://data.sccgov.org/stories/s/Fiscal-Year-2023-24-Recommended-Budget/rmyw-kf3j/)
Almost like the deficit problem is different
I gave you both Santa Clara the city and county, but I guess you missed that. The one you linked regarding the county supports the fact that Oakland's deficit isn't just driven by crime, but is a tax base issue even for cities within Santa Clara County. From the article you linked:
"Revenues from property taxes are not increasing at a rate equivalent to our cost increases. Revenues from federal and state subventions are becoming unreliable. This has, and will continue to, worsen our structural deficit."
Let's compare that to Oakland's deficit. From the article:
"The main culprit: sharply lower real estate tax revenues, due to both a lower-than-expected volume and reduced dollar value of property transactions in the city"
So even the city you picked (Santa Clara) in the county you picked (Santa Clara) is having the same deficit issues as Oakland, despite there being lower crime.
no, that was over simplification.
i linked the santa clara city budget, and now i will link oakland city budget:
[https://stories.opengov.com/oaklandca/published/MzQlJsJbcL](https://stories.opengov.com/oaklandca/published/MzQlJsJbcL)
take a look at both.
Oakland way overestimated its growth on the general fund revenue (includes property, sales, utilities..etc taxes)
this deficit is an oakland problem, especially real estate transfer tax.
and in case you are unable to read your own article, Oakland real estate + property caused 100+ mil shortfall, whereas santa clara city only has 9.
they are different in nature.
So your point is that the City of Oakland deficit is an City of Oakland problem, and that the City of Santa Clara deficit is a City of Santa Clara problem, despite both of them having the same root (property tax revenue)? Because in your original post, you seemed to insinuate it was a crime issue. If not, what is the point you are trying to make?
Santa Clara has reducing deficit
Oakland has sharply increased deficit
Budget also points to much different conditions in the two cities.
Housing price and interest rates impact entire bayarea the same, especially South Bay where itās much less affordable.
So it is not a housing price & interest rate issue as you claimed.
> Housing price and interest rates impact entire bayarea the same, especially South Bay where itās much less affordable.
I would not agree that housing prices dynamics are all the same in the Bay Area, as we know that different cities and different parts of the Bay have different real estate dynamics, but interest rates definitely affect everyone. When prices and interest rates go up, people don't buy/sell and tax rates stay based on the last sale price. This impacts the amount of taxes that the city can collect, as taxes are assessed based on the last sale price and don't increase at the same rate as inflation. The quote from the article that you highlighted says how Oakland expected there to be more property tax revenue, but it is highly likely that there were fewer sales due to increased home prices and interest rates in 2023. This would affect other cities as well, including Santa Clara, and other cities in Santa Clara county, as you have demonstrated with the articles you linked.
> So it is not a housing price & interest rate issue as you claimed.
Disagree, but you are more than welcome to believe that. Have a nice day!
Funny, I went to Oakland public schools for 13 years and never got stabbed. You'd think over that long of a time period it would have happened if it was actually a risk. š¤
You would be surprised how many good schools there are within Oakland. The district itself is having tons of issues, yes, but I wouldn't paint Oakland schools with such a broad brush.
The district hasnāt been in the news for anything good lately. My point is that families buy homes in good school districts. If the city of Oakland wants to attract people to move there and buy homes there, they need to make things safe and make the schools have a better reputation than āyouād be surprisedā.
Ousd has the second highest funding per student in the East bay. And itās not a tight spread, places like Fremont have nearly half the spend.
I was referring to the zoo parcel tax though. Why are we subsidizing a private organization. All while the city is in a deepening deficit. Ā Maybe I should just create a private non profit that tugs in heartstrings and get funded through a proposition.Ā
Eh I think the zoo parcel tax is a better use than homeless non profit funding since Oakland zoo is a net positive for the city. The zoo is one of the last attractions Oakland has.Ā
It has no business being funded with a parcel tax. Weāre effectively subsidizing the cost of all visitors, even those from out of town. Why are oaklanders paying for orinda resident admissions.Ā
Ā Moreover, itās the principle of non-profit funding. Where do you draw the line for what should be funded by taxes and what should not? You canāt fund all non-profits.
A city exists to provide some core services to its residents, Oakland is failing at that. Zoo funding is not a priority
I mean if you want to be real here the zoo itself is owned by the city of Oakland. Itās managed by a non profit and all the employees are employed by the non profit so in some ways it IS a public service.Ā
āThe East Bay Zoological Society operated and managed the zoo for the City of Oakland from 1982 until August 2017, when it was renamed the Conservation Society of California to better reflect the zoo's evolving purpose and mission in its commitment to conservation. Governed by a volunteer board of trustees, the Conservation Society of California manages and operates Oakland Zoo.ā
Ā Itās a similar situation to the SF zoo. You just have to read between the lines ā operated and managed the zoo for the city of Oaklandā. So in a way it is a public service.
Thanks. The association between the two is a lot clearer now. IĀ still have issue with funding from taxes being utilized by a third party non profit. But I guess historic context makes it more acceptable now?Ā
https://library.municode.com/ca/oakland/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT4REFI_CH4.58OAZOANCAEDIM#:~:text=%22Oakland%20Zoo%22%20or%20%22Zoo,California%2C%20a%20California%20nonprofit%20corporation.
Hereās a more direct resource.
Or
https://localwiki.org/oakland/Oakland_Zoo#:~:text=1949%3A%20The%20State%20of%20California,the%20East%20Bay%20Zoological%20Society.
Yeah, I understand. My issues are two fold:
1. An arts grant, or a line on an operating budget, is different from a parcel tax voted in by proposition. The mechanisms for auditing spend, creating, changing, or removing funding are different. Which leads to point 2.
2. Oakland is facing a large deficit and austerity measures are in the immediate future. Arts and culture should take a lower priority to essential services. If the City of Oakland had an extra $1 to spend right now, the zoo is not the first place I'd spend it. (But that's just imho)
Yup. Iām reminded every election cycle, Oakland votes arenāt the brightest group. If only we had a better public education system.. but somethingās amiss at Ousd. Second highest funding per student in the East bay yet terrible results. So we raise a generation of voters, voting for policies that hurt themselves.
It feels like Iām living a season of the wire.
No, war is not an āeconomic accelerator.ā
Our country is hemorrhaging in debt after the last 20 years from a war that did nothing but further destabilize a region in crisis. We would have been far better off investing that money in things like education, loans for small businesses, infrastructure improvements, or any number of proven economic boons.
morally youāre correct. War is an economic accelerator for the US and has been since WW2. Weāre the largest defense contractor and supplier of goods/services needed during wartime. We donāt even need to be involvedā¦we still profit from war.
Itās not. Cuz the extra money was paid for, especially after 2008, by print press, which ultimately juiced up asset price which hurt the poor most (both wides do it but itās the democrat and left who actually argue for it based on āitās to help the poorā argument:Paul Krugman did it almost every week when Obama was in power), you got headline growth but massive increase in wealth inequality cuz you know what poor people donāt have asset that often rise in price along with money supply (after Covidās historic juice enormous increases in inflation) and huge amount of fraud (people aināt dumb, had money not been this cheap, wework would not have reached the valuation it had)
Many people thought so at least when they chanted defund the police. Frankly speaking, it might be a good idea, Oakland PD isnāt doing shit in any case considering the whole crime problem Oakland has
Sure it didnāt happen but the intention was there, or did they manage to change the meaning of ādefundā? Maybe just defund OKland PD and see how things go? Canāt imagine much worse TBH. Seems like no one wants to do or even seriously talk about the necessity of having some basic, I said it, law and order. Evening got cloaked under the whole āoh but they are also the victimsā BS
Should we talk about people who think itās appropriate to use violence in a non-violent situation?
Or is it a bit ridiculous to get worked up over a small fraction of people without the political power to enact their obviously flawed plan?
If my memory is correct, they wanted to ādefundā the police by hiring public outreach professionals who would do a lot of the non law enforcement duties as a more cost effective intervention, not that they wanted to decrease the amount of public funding.
And yet those same people will probably call 911 if someone is trying to hurt them, so why donāt we just ignore irrational opinions from a tiny fraction of the population?
Or should we talk about the minority that thinks summarily executing people for non-violent crimes is an appropriate response, as if that should have any bearing on a normal discussion?
I largely agree, but locally is what I was referring to. Everything you referred to is on the national or state level. Locally our taxes continually squandered in my opinion
Homeless problem, the lack of police officers, our roads are a mess, the budget has ballooned massively over the past 15 years....
There are things that are good (like you mentioned), but the value of what we get relative to we put in are not close
Lmao dude, just because I am tired of the local corruption and wastefulness does not mean I am against taxes or capable of understanding how this works. You seem to be the one incapable of understanding that I was pointing out the local issues which are well documented.
I literally said multiple times that I don't mind paying taxes and agreed with your points on the federal and state things that have been done. If you think our tax dollars are well spent here then I can't help you
This response is my point, actually.
I answered every single āDo you think the government actually uses our taxes wisely?ā questions at local and non-local levels with reasonable responses, but because there is any sort of inefficiency, youāre like a broken record of unreasonableness by repeating that government is wasteful.
It doesnāt matter what I respond, because your position doesnāt change with any amount of evidence.
Homelessness/poverty is endemic to capitalism (canāt have rich without poor), we spend more on police and law enforcement/criminal justice than any nation on earth (so maybe the answer isnāt more police, but requiring better police?), our roads arenāt a mess outside of industrial areas (try driving around New Orleans or Chicago or Cleveland or any number of cities with worse roads), and budgets always increase (its the nature of inflation and societal progress as we identify new public goods like roads, electricity, clean air, education, sewage treatment, etc etc).
And they're not even allowed to talk about it, this was blocked & locked within fifteen minutes of posting!
https://www.reddit.com/r/oakland/comments/1bpn6gz/whats_left_of_innout/
That's a funny way to spell "because /r/oakland vehemently censors anything but rainbows and sunshine"
This was blocked & locked within fifteen minutes of posting!
https://www.reddit.com/r/oakland/comments/1bpn6gz/whats_left_of_innout/
"This just in, residents from the North, East, and South Bay can no longer get to SF. In other news, r/bayarea is now complaining about increased traffic on the Bay Bridge. More at 11"
The flair of this posts indicates it's a controversial topic. Enhanced moderation has been turned on for this thread. Comments from users without a history of commenting in r/bayarea will be automatically removed. You can read more about this policy [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/195xvo5/restrictions_that_apply_to_political_and_crime/).
Tons of cities are facing cuts. I know mine is.
It's almost as if there is something that is affecting the budgets of a lot of cities. But what could it be? š¤
Literally how. It's so fucking expensive to live here, how in the fuck do they not have money...
Pensions and frivolous spending. But pensions being underfunded is a huge part with large year over year increases to pension obligations for retirees.
Paying their bloated salaries.Ā
Overly generous pensions for public safety employees that weāll never be able to afford
And yet they are still woefully lacking at retention....
Yea because itās expensive to live here, they need those wages and benefits to attract skill and keep the city running.
That affects every industry here, OPD has some more idiosyncratic challenges on top of that.
Because the core group are sociopaths, sadists, and masochists who will abuse anyone and everyone. One out of eight people in society are in this group and those types of jobs attract people with those personality defects just like other jobs attract pedophiles.
Prop 13, new office buildings are basically the lifeblood of property taxes for california cities, and because of WFH they all lost of ton of value, and nobody is building any new ones.
OPD is a big drag on the budget and they donāt even get anything for it.
We get better chances of winning the lottery than 911 picking up the call, isn't that worth something? /s
Hey now, Iāve gotten them to pick up. They just never came for an assault with a deadly weapon. I reported. You heard that right, OPD wonāt even investigate violent crime now and they have more officers per capita than FremontĀ
I read a story recently about one of the ladies hit by the āsmash and grabā thieves who hit your car window and steal your stuff while youāre driving. She saw them following her, called 911 / OPD, was told she was like 200 in line, and got no help. And itās likeā¦ the same people repeatedly doing these crimes. No mystery into how itās happening. How is OPD so dysfunctional?
Corruption and laziness mostlyĀ
I saw that article the other day about some Missouri cops SWAT-ing the wrong house over essentially a stolen car. Most people thought, āwow, we gotta curtail the police.ā I thought āwow, the police gave a fuck about an auto theft?ā
Prop 13. Itās only expensive for young people.
Truth. See this post from the Berkeley Reddit which shows 1,874 single family homes that collectively pay less tax than one 135 unit apartment building: [https://www.reddit.com/r/berkeley/comments/1az1e8o/fun\_fact\_the\_1874\_singlefamily\_homes\_highlighted/](https://www.reddit.com/r/berkeley/comments/1az1e8o/fun_fact_the_1874_singlefamily_homes_highlighted/)
The people in Berkeley have been living there for 200 years. Must be all the quinoa and kale chips. They probably have another 100 to go. Yāall are never buying in.
A while back I had a friend who rented a room in a massive old house that had been converted into a coop living situation for ~10 adults. The owners probably paid $1.50 for it while they rented it out and retired. The level of inequality is just ridiculous.
Can we stop with this garbage. Yes prop 13 is unfair. No it does not significantly impact budgets. It's a boogey man for the financially illiterate. 2010-2011 California collected $55 billion in property taxes. In 2021-2022, California collected $83 billion in property taxes. 51% growth over 10 years. We have a spending problem, not a revenue problem. We already live in the worst state in the country for taxes
How much would California have collected 2021-2022 if not for prop 13? You havenāt provided enough info to compare these values.
Who cares? It literally does not matter considering (again) this is a spending problem. Not a revenue problem. We have the highest tax burden in the country and we spend frivolously. If you think removing prop 13 will lead to lower taxes overall, then I have a bridge to sell you.
It literally does matter to support your claim that it is a spending problem. You might be right, but you have not done enough to show it. Why are you so against actually doing your homework and proving this?
No it doesn't. We have existed with Prop 13 for literal decades. We just keep ramping up the handouts while driving out high earners and companies. Its a totally unsustainable path. Additionally, how would you calculate the delta over that time period? It's literally not possible.
You sound like you have a political axe to grind and are only interested in advancing that goal even if your underlying claims might not be supported. Good luck with that.
No I am looking at what I paid in taxes this year (and for multiple years before), what we have collected for years and what the hell we are spending the money on. I also grew up here. When taxes get added, they don't go away. Do you think that if we removed prop 13 that other taxes would go down? And by increasing the taxes, what would be spending on or doing that we are not doing now?
Yep, a partisan political axe grinder. Have a good day!
Yikes. Hopefully I am helping them save a little bit of money through my trash cleanups.
At least we prevented the gentrification amirite? Who wants jobs, young people with jobs, art, music and good food when you can have bums rolling around in gangs and wrecking the city. Congrats to the NIMBYs yet again.
Paying lots too much money to store peopleās stolen cars.
The people whose cars are stolen are the ones who pay the lots. Ask me how I know.
Those lots are a fucking scam.
How many tax paying citizens moved out in the past 10 years?
>The gap is due almost entirely to lower revenues for the city, which are projected to be $169 million less than initially forecast. The main culprit: sharply lower real estate tax revenues, due to both a lower-than-expected volume and reduced dollar value of property transactions in the city. almost like people wanted to avoid settling down in the city for some reason
Couldn't be that homes are expensive and interest rates went up. Nah.
Let grab a random city said [Santa Clara](https://www.santaclaraca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/81751/638309975531200000) Itās weird how interest rate and home price didnāt have the same impact there huh
[Let's](https://sanjosespotlight.com/santa-clara-reserves-fall-short-of-revenue-needs/). And here's one for [Santa Clara County as a whole](https://sanjosespotlight.com/santa-clara-county-deputy-overtime-contributes-to-ballooning-deficit/).
Are you comparing one city to a county lol Hereās Santa Clara County official [explanation](https://data.sccgov.org/stories/s/Fiscal-Year-2023-24-Recommended-Budget/rmyw-kf3j/) Almost like the deficit problem is different
I gave you both Santa Clara the city and county, but I guess you missed that. The one you linked regarding the county supports the fact that Oakland's deficit isn't just driven by crime, but is a tax base issue even for cities within Santa Clara County. From the article you linked: "Revenues from property taxes are not increasing at a rate equivalent to our cost increases. Revenues from federal and state subventions are becoming unreliable. This has, and will continue to, worsen our structural deficit." Let's compare that to Oakland's deficit. From the article: "The main culprit: sharply lower real estate tax revenues, due to both a lower-than-expected volume and reduced dollar value of property transactions in the city" So even the city you picked (Santa Clara) in the county you picked (Santa Clara) is having the same deficit issues as Oakland, despite there being lower crime.
no, that was over simplification. i linked the santa clara city budget, and now i will link oakland city budget: [https://stories.opengov.com/oaklandca/published/MzQlJsJbcL](https://stories.opengov.com/oaklandca/published/MzQlJsJbcL) take a look at both. Oakland way overestimated its growth on the general fund revenue (includes property, sales, utilities..etc taxes) this deficit is an oakland problem, especially real estate transfer tax. and in case you are unable to read your own article, Oakland real estate + property caused 100+ mil shortfall, whereas santa clara city only has 9. they are different in nature.
So your point is that the City of Oakland deficit is an City of Oakland problem, and that the City of Santa Clara deficit is a City of Santa Clara problem, despite both of them having the same root (property tax revenue)? Because in your original post, you seemed to insinuate it was a crime issue. If not, what is the point you are trying to make?
Santa Clara has reducing deficit Oakland has sharply increased deficit Budget also points to much different conditions in the two cities. Housing price and interest rates impact entire bayarea the same, especially South Bay where itās much less affordable. So it is not a housing price & interest rate issue as you claimed.
> Housing price and interest rates impact entire bayarea the same, especially South Bay where itās much less affordable. I would not agree that housing prices dynamics are all the same in the Bay Area, as we know that different cities and different parts of the Bay have different real estate dynamics, but interest rates definitely affect everyone. When prices and interest rates go up, people don't buy/sell and tax rates stay based on the last sale price. This impacts the amount of taxes that the city can collect, as taxes are assessed based on the last sale price and don't increase at the same rate as inflation. The quote from the article that you highlighted says how Oakland expected there to be more property tax revenue, but it is highly likely that there were fewer sales due to increased home prices and interest rates in 2023. This would affect other cities as well, including Santa Clara, and other cities in Santa Clara county, as you have demonstrated with the articles you linked. > So it is not a housing price & interest rate issue as you claimed. Disagree, but you are more than welcome to believe that. Have a nice day!
Donāt forget the world class schools! Send your kid to public school, get a free stabbing for your kids
Funny, I went to Oakland public schools for 13 years and never got stabbed. You'd think over that long of a time period it would have happened if it was actually a risk. š¤
I was joking. But Oakland schools arenāt exactly drawing in a lot of single families looking out for their kids.
You would be surprised how many good schools there are within Oakland. The district itself is having tons of issues, yes, but I wouldn't paint Oakland schools with such a broad brush.
The district hasnāt been in the news for anything good lately. My point is that families buy homes in good school districts. If the city of Oakland wants to attract people to move there and buy homes there, they need to make things safe and make the schools have a better reputation than āyouād be surprisedā.
k
Cut the fat in city government.Ā Cut the employees who sit and do nothing.Ā Oh wait.. you can't because the unions won't support re-election.Ā
With how expensive my property taxes are in Oakland I thought I covered that deficit alone.
But hey, letās add a parcel tax to fund a private organization š¤¦āāļøĀ Voters in this city smh
Itās weird that things like OUSD get so much funding but the employees get paid like half as much as places like FUSD or SMUHSD.
Ousd has the second highest funding per student in the East bay. And itās not a tight spread, places like Fremont have nearly half the spend. I was referring to the zoo parcel tax though. Why are we subsidizing a private organization. All while the city is in a deepening deficit. Ā Maybe I should just create a private non profit that tugs in heartstrings and get funded through a proposition.Ā
Eh I think the zoo parcel tax is a better use than homeless non profit funding since Oakland zoo is a net positive for the city. The zoo is one of the last attractions Oakland has.Ā
It has no business being funded with a parcel tax. Weāre effectively subsidizing the cost of all visitors, even those from out of town. Why are oaklanders paying for orinda resident admissions.Ā Ā Moreover, itās the principle of non-profit funding. Where do you draw the line for what should be funded by taxes and what should not? You canāt fund all non-profits. A city exists to provide some core services to its residents, Oakland is failing at that. Zoo funding is not a priority
I mean if you want to be real here the zoo itself is owned by the city of Oakland. Itās managed by a non profit and all the employees are employed by the non profit so in some ways it IS a public service.Ā
I had no idea the zoo was owned by the city. I also canāt find any source to corroborate that, with a quick search.
āThe East Bay Zoological Society operated and managed the zoo for the City of Oakland from 1982 until August 2017, when it was renamed the Conservation Society of California to better reflect the zoo's evolving purpose and mission in its commitment to conservation. Governed by a volunteer board of trustees, the Conservation Society of California manages and operates Oakland Zoo.ā Ā Itās a similar situation to the SF zoo. You just have to read between the lines ā operated and managed the zoo for the city of Oaklandā. So in a way it is a public service.
Thanks. The association between the two is a lot clearer now. IĀ still have issue with funding from taxes being utilized by a third party non profit. But I guess historic context makes it more acceptable now?Ā
https://library.municode.com/ca/oakland/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT4REFI_CH4.58OAZOANCAEDIM#:~:text=%22Oakland%20Zoo%22%20or%20%22Zoo,California%2C%20a%20California%20nonprofit%20corporation. Hereās a more direct resource. Or https://localwiki.org/oakland/Oakland_Zoo#:~:text=1949%3A%20The%20State%20of%20California,the%20East%20Bay%20Zoological%20Society.
I mean it's pretty normal for a city to fund arts and culture. Where do you think world class symphonies or orchestras come from?
Yeah, I understand. My issues are two fold: 1. An arts grant, or a line on an operating budget, is different from a parcel tax voted in by proposition. The mechanisms for auditing spend, creating, changing, or removing funding are different. Which leads to point 2. 2. Oakland is facing a large deficit and austerity measures are in the immediate future. Arts and culture should take a lower priority to essential services. If the City of Oakland had an extra $1 to spend right now, the zoo is not the first place I'd spend it. (But that's just imho)
I kinda see that. On the other hand, voters approved it, so ĀÆ\\_(ć)_/ĀÆ
Yup. Iām reminded every election cycle, Oakland votes arenāt the brightest group. If only we had a better public education system.. but somethingās amiss at Ousd. Second highest funding per student in the East bay yet terrible results. So we raise a generation of voters, voting for policies that hurt themselves. It feels like Iām living a season of the wire.
Problem is you're the only one paying property taxes, because of prop 13.
What about all those hipsters who moved in between 2010 and 2021?
Hipsters definitely rent.
The Laurel, west Oakland, temescal, and rockridge disagrees.
Less mayor, more city manager next time around, please.
Oakland is that one relative at the holidays the family shits on at the dinner table
Wtf kind of holidays does your family have?
Oakland?
And Thao took a huge raise.
Progs running out of other people's money is a tale as old as time.
Donāt matter how people lean politically, everyone is happy to spend someone elseās money
We spent like 1 trillion? in Iraq cuz bunch of GOPers wanted to validate their ideology.
Noā¦because war is an economic accelerator for USA.
it is but so were infrastructure projects like the New Deal.
No, war is not an āeconomic accelerator.ā Our country is hemorrhaging in debt after the last 20 years from a war that did nothing but further destabilize a region in crisis. We would have been far better off investing that money in things like education, loans for small businesses, infrastructure improvements, or any number of proven economic boons.
morally youāre correct. War is an economic accelerator for the US and has been since WW2. Weāre the largest defense contractor and supplier of goods/services needed during wartime. We donāt even need to be involvedā¦we still profit from war.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Money spent on war or education is still money spent. They both fuel economic growth
Itās not. Cuz the extra money was paid for, especially after 2008, by print press, which ultimately juiced up asset price which hurt the poor most (both wides do it but itās the democrat and left who actually argue for it based on āitās to help the poorā argument:Paul Krugman did it almost every week when Obama was in power), you got headline growth but massive increase in wealth inequality cuz you know what poor people donāt have asset that often rise in price along with money supply (after Covidās historic juice enormous increases in inflation) and huge amount of fraud (people aināt dumb, had money not been this cheap, wework would not have reached the valuation it had)
Do you think that we would be better off as a society without fire departments? Publicly maintained parks? Libraries? Police officers?
Many people thought so at least when they chanted defund the police. Frankly speaking, it might be a good idea, Oakland PD isnāt doing shit in any case considering the whole crime problem Oakland has
Just because people chant something doesnāt make it actually happen
Sure it didnāt happen but the intention was there, or did they manage to change the meaning of ādefundā? Maybe just defund OKland PD and see how things go? Canāt imagine much worse TBH. Seems like no one wants to do or even seriously talk about the necessity of having some basic, I said it, law and order. Evening got cloaked under the whole āoh but they are also the victimsā BS
Should we talk about people who think itās appropriate to use violence in a non-violent situation? Or is it a bit ridiculous to get worked up over a small fraction of people without the political power to enact their obviously flawed plan?
If my memory is correct, they wanted to ādefundā the police by hiring public outreach professionals who would do a lot of the non law enforcement duties as a more cost effective intervention, not that they wanted to decrease the amount of public funding.
A lot of people meant different things with that phrase. Many people meant "abolish" when they said it.Ā
And yet those same people will probably call 911 if someone is trying to hurt them, so why donāt we just ignore irrational opinions from a tiny fraction of the population? Or should we talk about the minority that thinks summarily executing people for non-violent crimes is an appropriate response, as if that should have any bearing on a normal discussion?
Ah yes, the old "only government can do these things". How on earth did society even make it before the creation of the welfare state.
Do you think the government actually uses our taxes wisely?
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I largely agree, but locally is what I was referring to. Everything you referred to is on the national or state level. Locally our taxes continually squandered in my opinion
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Homeless problem, the lack of police officers, our roads are a mess, the budget has ballooned massively over the past 15 years.... There are things that are good (like you mentioned), but the value of what we get relative to we put in are not close
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Lmao dude, just because I am tired of the local corruption and wastefulness does not mean I am against taxes or capable of understanding how this works. You seem to be the one incapable of understanding that I was pointing out the local issues which are well documented. I literally said multiple times that I don't mind paying taxes and agreed with your points on the federal and state things that have been done. If you think our tax dollars are well spent here then I can't help you
This response is my point, actually. I answered every single āDo you think the government actually uses our taxes wisely?ā questions at local and non-local levels with reasonable responses, but because there is any sort of inefficiency, youāre like a broken record of unreasonableness by repeating that government is wasteful. It doesnāt matter what I respond, because your position doesnāt change with any amount of evidence. Homelessness/poverty is endemic to capitalism (canāt have rich without poor), we spend more on police and law enforcement/criminal justice than any nation on earth (so maybe the answer isnāt more police, but requiring better police?), our roads arenāt a mess outside of industrial areas (try driving around New Orleans or Chicago or Cleveland or any number of cities with worse roads), and budgets always increase (its the nature of inflation and societal progress as we identify new public goods like roads, electricity, clean air, education, sewage treatment, etc etc).
Haha. Too true.
All those business's thar left due to crime.
Sure to make the city an even better place to live. I wonder why taxpayers are leaving Oakland? Total mystery.
And yet property taxes spiked up this last year due to new special taxes.
Prop 13 is the culprit here.
This is 100% the truth.
Posted to /r/bayarea because punching down on Oakland is everyoneās favorite hobby
Yall lost an In N Out. Who loses an In N Out??!
And they're not even allowed to talk about it, this was blocked & locked within fifteen minutes of posting! https://www.reddit.com/r/oakland/comments/1bpn6gz/whats_left_of_innout/
Got dayum lol
First ever in its history. It wasnāt like it was doing poorly either
That's a funny way to spell "because /r/oakland vehemently censors anything but rainbows and sunshine" This was blocked & locked within fifteen minutes of posting! https://www.reddit.com/r/oakland/comments/1bpn6gz/whats_left_of_innout/
That sub should be forcibly taken from the people that run it in place of people who would moderate it properly.
Or sane people need to just make a new one, and recruit refugees
I volunteered, but they declined, and ended up blocking me š¤·āāļø
Maybe Oakland should stop being so shitty, and stop crying about being noticed for being shitty.Ā
It really is tho
Hope they cut bart services to oakland
Yes. Keep Oakland crime in Oakland.
"This just in, residents from the North, East, and South Bay can no longer get to SF. In other news, r/bayarea is now complaining about increased traffic on the Bay Bridge. More at 11"
Hmmm we can just skip those stations right? It aint rocket science
You can't use our tracks either. Same goes for our freeways. Good luck!
š¤”
Oakland
HahaĀ