Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-17-2016, 11:42 PM
 
28,111 posts, read 63,536,638 times
Reputation: 23240

Advertisements

I did a poor job of articulating my frustration...

Should have just asked why is it Oakland city leaders far too often react rather than act?

If it was time for the Chief to go because the buck stops with Whent... for pete sake know what your next step is instead of winging it.

Three Chiefs in a week speaks for itself...

Having Council members interviewed saying they are not in the loop bodes poorly for our leadership...

It is almost as if Oakland thrives in spite of the actions of those in charge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-18-2016, 12:06 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,783 posts, read 26,093,782 times
Reputation: 33927
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
I did a poor job of articulating my frustration...

Should have just asked why is it Oakland city leaders far too often react rather than act?

If it was time for the Chief to go because the buck stops with Whent... for pete sake know what your next step is instead of winging it.

Three Chiefs in a week speaks for itself...

Having Council members interviewed saying they are not in the loop bodes poorly for our leadership...

It is almost as if Oakland thrives in spite of the actions of those in charge.
yep, you pretty much nailed it there
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2016, 08:19 AM
 
758 posts, read 548,126 times
Reputation: 2292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
I did a poor job of articulating my frustration...

Should have just asked why is it Oakland city leaders far too often react rather than act?
Perhaps they do it because the city they run, my city, is full of people who react rather than wait for evidence.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
If it was time for the Chief to go because the buck stops with Whent... for pete sake know what your next step is instead of winging it.
Sometimes it is not possible to plan even one step ahead. How many days should you wait to remove a person who you've found is unfit to lead an organization whose personnel have the means and opportunity to kill innocent people and manufacture evidence anytime they want? I believe it is too dangerous to have such a person in office one minute after you've lost confidence in them. You should remove them immediately, even if that means no one has the title "Chief of Police" for some days afterward. There's a reason companies have security escort a person who has been fired back to their office so they can collect their stuff, and then escort them off the premises. Just remember, the sex scandal broke after an officer killed his wife and committed suicide. The bloodshed should sober us up enough to realize this is a dangerous situation and any involved have to be removed (e.g., at least put on leave) as soon as evidence suggests they may be involved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2016, 08:42 AM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
42,783 posts, read 26,093,782 times
Reputation: 33927
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocSciProf View Post
Perhaps they do it because the city they run, my city, is full of people who react rather than wait for evidence.

Sometimes it is not possible to plan even one step ahead. How many days should you wait to remove a person who you've found is unfit to lead an organization whose personnel have the means and opportunity to kill innocent people and manufacture evidence anytime they want? I believe it is too dangerous to have such a person in office one minute after you've lost confidence in them. You should remove them immediately, even if that means no one has the title "Chief of Police" for some days afterward. There's a reason companies have security escort a person who has been fired back to their office so they can collect their stuff, and then escort them off the premises. Just remember, the sex scandal broke after an officer killed his wife and committed suicide. The bloodshed should sober us up enough to realize this is a dangerous situation and any involved have to be removed (e.g., at least put on leave) as soon as evidence suggests they may be involved.
yep, and the situation is exacerbated by the fact that nearly all police administrators came up through the ranks, usually in the same department they are now in charge of and they have problems disciplining the people they formerly worked with so they tend to wait and hope the problem goes away before they have to intervene; but then it becomes public and heads roll and everyone is shocked.

And there's another reason that police administrators look the other way when cops bend or break the law, if they are too heavy handed the the cops will sabotage every single thing the chief does, if they really want to get at the chief they will just have a case of 'blue flu' and call in sick en masse.

I think the problem will persist as long as Police Chief's are promoted from the rank and file, there is nothing about being a cop that prepares you to manage a large organization any more than working on a GM assembly line prepares you to be the CEO. A Police Chief who never worked as a cop, but knows how to manage an organization would more than likely be able to stop illegal or unethical behavior far more quickly than a Chief who still considers himself "one of the boys".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2016, 10:25 AM
 
28,111 posts, read 63,536,638 times
Reputation: 23240
Quote:
Originally Posted by SocSciProf View Post
Perhaps they do it because the city they run, my city, is full of people who react rather than wait for evidence.



Sometimes it is not possible to plan even one step ahead. How many days should you wait to remove a person who you've found is unfit to lead an organization whose personnel have the means and opportunity to kill innocent people and manufacture evidence anytime they want? I believe it is too dangerous to have such a person in office one minute after you've lost confidence in them. You should remove them immediately, even if that means no one has the title "Chief of Police" for some days afterward. There's a reason companies have security escort a person who has been fired back to their office so they can collect their stuff, and then escort them off the premises. Just remember, the sex scandal broke after an officer killed his wife and committed suicide. The bloodshed should sober us up enough to realize this is a dangerous situation and any involved have to be removed (e.g., at least put on leave) as soon as evidence suggests they may be involved.
Proper organizational planning ensures the command structure is sufficient to backfill...

When the CEO of my company unexpectedly could no longer serve it was far from chaos... the administrator took over and that was that...

Departments I'm familiar with have assistant chiefs and deputy chiefs.

The last thing you do is appoint someone in a rush without vetting and if it takes a few days so be it.

I have seen nothing to indicate Whent is anything but honorable both personal and professional... there is a right way to handle transition.

The more I hear the more I believe Whent bowed out and wished the mayor and city well... I don't blame him.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2016, 10:30 AM
 
28,111 posts, read 63,536,638 times
Reputation: 23240
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2sleepy View Post
yep, and the situation is exacerbated by the fact that nearly all police administrators came up through the ranks, usually in the same department they are now in charge of and they have problems disciplining the people they formerly worked with so they tend to wait and hope the problem goes away before they have to intervene; but then it becomes public and heads roll and everyone is shocked.

And there's another reason that police administrators look the other way when cops bend or break the law, if they are too heavy handed the the cops will sabotage every single thing the chief does, if they really want to get at the chief they will just have a case of 'blue flu' and call in sick en masse.

I think the problem will persist as long as Police Chief's are promoted from the rank and file, there is nothing about being a cop that prepares you to manage a large organization any more than working on a GM assembly line prepares you to be the CEO. A Police Chief who never worked as a cop, but knows how to manage an organization would more than likely be able to stop illegal or unethical behavior far more quickly than a Chief who still considers himself "one of the boys".
It makes it interesting because the appointed administrator also has a city to run... the office of city administrator has not been problem free in the past and one of the issues with past administrators had been overstepping specifically directing the police department actions when she saw her nephew in custody...

So now Oakland has a top cop that has zero law enforcement background and couldn't respond to a call if her life depended on it...

I've worked for an organization where chaos ruled from the top down... no one really knew who was in charge and often directives were ignored based in the reasoning that person would be gone tomorrow... not pretty, efficient and could be down right dangerous.

Five generations of my family call Oakland home...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2016, 10:38 AM
 
758 posts, read 548,126 times
Reputation: 2292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
Proper organizational planning ensures the command structure is sufficient to backfill...

When the CEO of my company unexpectedly could no longer serve it was far from chaos... the administrator took over and that was that...

Departments I'm familiar with have assistant chiefs and deputy chiefs.

The last thing you do is appoint someone in a rush without vetting and if it takes a few days so be it.

I have seen nothing to indicate Whent is anything but honorable both personal and professional... there is a right way to handle transition.

The more I hear the more I believe Whent bowed out and wished the mayor and city well... I don't blame him.
I think 2sleepy has it right. If everyone in the chain of command is part of a culture of go along to get along, appointing from within that culture will not solve the problem. However, outsiders can easily make the mistake Schaaf made, because from the outside the second in command (or other members of the chain) may look clean. Further, how do you vet someone who is part of a culture of closing ranks? It is possible that one just cannot do it. Yet, a desire for continuity leads people to often appoint from within in response to scandal, in an effort to maintain confidence of the public and the personnel. Its funny, you yourself give evidence of the difficulty--you persist in claiming Whent is clean when you haven't seen anything like the evidence city officials have at hand, which shows just how easily outsiders can not know what is going on but believe they do know what is going on.

So, I think you're applying a mistaken analogy (CEO gets sick or something vs. Commander connected to scandal in their own unit) and holding the city to an impossible standard (fully vet everyone you plan to consider appointing, but don't remove the Chief in an emergency until you fully vet everyone you plan to consider--all the while ignoring the danger that can follow if public confidence plummets when the story inevitably leaks and you've been dawdling with letters of recommendation). Someone with that set of requirements is likely to be unhappy with things whatever those things prove to be.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2016, 10:59 AM
 
28,111 posts, read 63,536,638 times
Reputation: 23240
You have a point except the first replacement Chief did come from outside the ranks of OPD.

My only interaction with Whent has been in his capacity as Chief... he also enjoyed support from many in and out of government.

The problem I have is knee jerk moves leave the city vulnerable and often prove costly...

Maybe the Mayor should take over OPD operations?

Public and Department confidence has already plummeted and the city manager needs to run the city.

This weekend has the potential to test OPD with the Warriors game 7.

I've asked around in my circle of friends and neighbors and not a single person had lost confidence in Whent...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2016, 12:04 PM
 
Location: Oakland, CA
28,226 posts, read 36,788,401 times
Reputation: 28561
I listened to this podcast about Menlo Park PD trying to change the culture in the 60s. An outsider chief showed an made a ton of changes. It is really interesting what stuck and what didn't.
https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/...=2&i=370717332
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-18-2016, 02:50 PM
 
758 posts, read 548,126 times
Reputation: 2292
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ultrarunner View Post
I've asked around in my circle of friends and neighbors and not a single person had lost confidence in Whent...
Much of what you say (for example, Warriors Game 7) is insightful. But, let me take the opportunity your last post affords to make what I hope will be a lasting point about methods for understanding the social world. The point can be summarized directly--WHEN WE TAKE OUR EXPERIENCE, OUR FAMILIES' EXPERIENCE, OR OUR FRIENDS' EXPERIENCE AS SUFFICIENT FOR UNDERSTANDING THE SOCIAL WORLD WE ARE USING A METHOD THAT WILL MAKE US CONSISTENTLY MISUNDERSTAND THE SOCIAL WORLD.

The reason for this truism is that no matter how out-going or diverse-seeking any of us is, the people with whom we come into contact cannot be a true cross-section of society because we do NOT move randomly around the world, our movements are non-random (else, we'd never get to work or home in a timely manner). Thus, even if a professor hangs out with gangsters or (what is the same thing) banksters, the gangsters and banksters the prof associates with are those comfortable with or interested in or tolerant of associating with a professor. That's not every gangster/bankster. And, if a gangster/bankster associates with a professor, the gangster/bankster will make error after error if they generalize to professors on the basis of their interaction with the professor(s) who spend time with them, because the professor(s) comfortable with or interested in or tolerant of associating with a gangster/bankster does not and cannot represent other professors.

Our personal experience is edifying, (for example, teaching us to accept people who differ from us) so personal experience is NOT useless. But it is useless for determining such questions as "Have people in Oakland lost confidence in the Chief of Police?" or "How do people feel about law enforcement?"

Your statement about your circle of friends reminds me of the statement (incorrectly) attributed to Pauline Kael after the 1972 Nixon landslide: "Nixon couldn't have won. I don't know anybody who voted for him." Anytime one is inclined to claim that "X isn't how people feel (think, believe), I don't know anyone who feels (thinks, believes) that way" or "X is how people feel (think, believe), because everyone I know feels (thinks, believes) that way," remember what we can call the Kaelian error. And then? Just DON'T do it!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California > San Francisco - Oakland

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:32 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top