Beyond Chron: Oakland, A tale of two cities (credit, buying)

[jade408]

Originally Posted by Malloric

It's pretty simple. When one looks at facts, Oakland is the worst city in the state. It's got the worst schools, the highest crime rate, abysmally high dropout rate. It's really just simple. It's the worst of the bunch. That doesn't mean for the "1%" who make up 20% of Oakland's population it's not a great place to live. By isolating yourself in enclaves of the wealthy as Montclair has done, you're not experiencing the crime. When you make $200-300k a year, you don't have to worry about the bad public schools as you can afford to pay the $35k for private schools. Hence why it's a "tale of two cities." The Oakland is great, look at the new Italian restaurant that just opened sentiment is testament to just how selective people can be in what facts they chose to look at and which they chose to sweep under the rug.

Actually you are mistaken here. In your opinion, Oakland is the worst city in the state. That's not a problem, all opinions are valid. (Including the positive opinions on Oakland, that are apparently not allowed.)

But in the end, when it is pointed out that Oakland is making significant improvements in every category of the past 10ish years, some how that is supposed to be refute by the fact there are still improvements that need to be made.

By many measures, Oakland has made huge strides since the turn of the century:
1. 20% improvement in API scores in the district
2. Visible increased economic development in downtown
3. Oakland's troubled areas of West and East Oakland are also seeing increased economic development, things like the new businesses opening to national acclaim in west Oakland (Brown Sugar Kitchen, Hodo Soy). New real estate development in West Oakland. New sports park in East Oakland. A new Safeway in East Oakland that represents the first new grocery store in that part of town for 50 years. A Walmrt store in East Oakland. Lots of positive news there.
4. Crime is decreasing (although has increased a bit this year)
5. Oakland is attracting new residents to downtown and in other parts (younger and in many cases wealthier. But most importantly optimistic about the future with plans to stick around. Most cities are getting older, and Oakland is getting younger, which bodes well for the future)
6. Oakland is getting increased national acclaim for amenities like bars, restaurants and activities
7. Oakland's cultural landmarks are expanding and improving: the Fox Theater, The Zoo, The Oakland Museum and the Paramount are top of mind.
8. Oakland residents are getting wealthier on the whole
9. Unemployment is decreasing
10. Tons of new businesses opening in the worst recession in decades

And somehow despite all of this, the only story about Oakland that is allowed to be told, is the one where the police force is declining and there is serious violent crime.

No one is denying problems exist. People are highlighting the bright spots all over town and the positive momentum that some people choose to ignore.

[Stephen1110]

Originally Posted by Malloric

It's pretty simple. When one looks at facts, Oakland is the worst city in the state. It's got the worst schools, the highest crime rate, abysmally high dropout rate. It's really just simple. It's the worst of the bunch.

Any other statistical facts about Oakland that would make the city the worst of the bunch?

Are there any that would place Oakland with the best of the bunch?

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by Malloric

It's pretty simple. When one looks at facts, Oakland is the worst city in the state.

Oakland is a city of extremes, its not mediocre like Sacramento or Fresno.

Next.

It's got the worst schools

Oakland has more high performing schools than Fresno, Long Beach and Sacramento etc.

Next.

the highest crime rate

Yeah, but this hasnt deterred Downtown, Uptown, Chinatown, the waterfront, Fruitvale and flatland/urban areas from flourishing. Not in the least.

No one is denying the crime rate, but it seems you are all in denial about the great things that are to be found in Oakland.

Next.

abysmally high dropout rate.

Yes, but this is due to socio-economic conditions and less to do with the schools being able to retain students--drop out rates depend more on home. Wouldnt you agree?
California, Oakland, S.F. dropout rates decline - SFGate

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by Stephen1110

Are there any that would place Oakland with the best of the bunch?

Oakland gets the kind of positive national attention that Sacramento, Long Beach and Fresno simply do NOT get. Especially by the NY Times. That paper 'hella' loves Oakland. LOL

Oakland Ranked Number Five In New York Times 45 Places To Go In 2012 (PHOTOS)

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/11/us...name.html?_r=0

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/05/ma...pagewanted=all

http://travel.nytimes.com/2011/11/27...od-blooms.html

And these articles illustrate perfectly what detractors who rely on stereotypes clearly do not understand nor wish to admit, that Oakland is a city of huge contrasts and cannot be defined only in negative terms.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by YongAe

Oakland worse than bakersfield, fresno, stockton, barstow etc? Dont think so.

Me neither.

Trulia Median Home Price $500,000+
Aug-Oct 2012

Oakland: 26 neighborhoods
Chinatown $5,350,000
Panoramic Hill $1,100,950
Upper Rockridge $848,500
Sheperd Canyon $809,500
Crocker Highlands $785,000
Hiller Highlands $751,000
Shafter $735,000
Woodminster $732,000
Trestle Glen $732,000
Fairview Park $731,000
Piedmont Pines $730,000
Montclair $729,000
Merriwood $727,500
Rockridge $705,000
Claremont Hills $690,000
Skyline-Hillcrest Estates $680,000
Forestland $673,750
Crestmont $649,000
Lakeshore $648,000
Oakmore $645,000
Glenview $607,000
Glen Highlands $589,000
Temescal $557,250
Paradise Park $526,000
Sequoyah $515,000
Lincoln Highlands $500,000

Long Beach: 5 neighbohoods
Belmont Shore $872,500
Park Estates $847,550
University Park Estates $747,500
Lakewood Village $585,000
El Dorado $512,000

Santa Ana: 4 neighborhoods
Henninger Park $1,164,000
West Floral Park $670,000
Floral Park $629,000
Riverglen $575,000

Sacramento: 1 neighborhood
Boulevard Park $500,000

Anaheim: 0
Bakersfield: 0
Fresno: 0
Stockton: 0

[DocGoldstein]

Why are we comparing Oakland to Fresno in terms of incomes? Fresno is in the central valley, Sacramento isn't even in the Bay Area.

The Bay Area is one of the wealthiest enclaves in the entire country. Oakland resides within that enclave. It SHOULD have higher incomes for households, and higher salaries overall than FRESNO in the central valley where the overall cost of living is much lower. Saying "Oakland households make more money than central valley households" is like saying "Oakland makes more money than Mogadishu households", there is a sub-context that you're not acknowledging and it's overall a very dishonest comparison.

Compared to San Jose and S.F though, Oakland has worse schools, higher crime, and more poverty overall.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by DocGoldstein

Why are we comparing Oakland to Fresno in terms of incomes? Fresno is in the central valley, Sacramento isn't even in the Bay Area.

Because the claim was made that Oakland is the 'worst' city in California.

And that is a joke.

[DocGoldstein]

I agree "worst" is a broad term. That definition is going to be more precise depending on the person.

Oakland has the worst violent crime rate. Oakland Unified has the worst graduation rate of all the major California metros. So for people who consider those the most important qualities of a city, then yes, Oakland will be the "worst city" for them.

But comparing Oakland incomes to Fresno, or Baksersfield, or places like those, doesn't really tell us anything because the sub-context is that the Central Valley and the Bay Area are completely different in terms of living cost.

Now if someone wanted to make the point that living cost in Oakland were bad, and you had a living cost index to compare to Fresno, or Long Beach, etc, that would be a fair comparison IMO.

[DocGoldstein]

Okay I actually found a COL comparison tool.

I compared Fresno vs Oakland.

Cost of Living Indexes
Oakland vs Fresno

Overall
135 101

Food
115 112

Housing
194 81

Utilities
92 119

Transportation
112 109

Health
111 103

Miscellaneous
118 105

Overall, Fresno is 25% cheaper than Oakland. For example, for someone making $50,000 in Fresno, for them to enjoy the same exact lifestyle in Oakland, they would need to make $63,000 (on average).

However, if someone from Fresno wanted to buy a house, then all bets would be off. Housing is the biggest factor in the cost of living difference. Housing is 58% cheaper in Fresno.

This is simply a COL index comparison, it doesn't take into account crime stats, school quality, or anything that granular.

[ssmaster]

crappy schools are a part of urban life.many people who live in urban areas accept they may send their children to private ,parochial charter or magnet schools. it's a price many are willing to pay to live in an interesting entertaining place.
not only is oaklands dining and entertainment scene nationally known but i am 17 minutes from san francisco's entertainmant and dining.


the wall street journal,forbes magazine,new yorktimes,boston globe la times,sunset magazine,travel & leisure and washington post advise people to visit oakland.

forbes ranked oakland as one of the USA coolest cities. the NYT really digs oakland. fresno and sacremento don't come close

Oakland's Temescal Goes From Rundown to Reborn - WSJ.com

Oakland Ranks #5 On New York Times’ List Of Places To Visit In 2012 « CBS San Francisco

A thoroughly modern Oakland - Los Angeles Times

Things to do in Oakland, California - Sunset.com

16. Oakland, CA - Morgan Brennan - Forbes

http://www.boston.com/lifestyle/food...oakland_calif/

http://travel.nytimes.com/2011/11/27...ooms.html?_r=0

Oakland California's Best Hot Spots - Articles | Travel + Leisure