Where you stand, goes the old saying, depends on where you sit. A good example of this is the disparity or discrepancy between what Mayor Schaaf said about a federal judge’s recent statement on OPD, and how Oaklandside reported on the same thing.
On Jan. 5, the judge, William Orrick, had a hearing on the Negotiated Settlement Agreement (NSA), by which OPD has been under the authority of an independent monitor since 2003, due to the infamous Riders scandal. The current monitor is Robert Warshaw.
As is often the case with judicial hearings, Orrick opined across a broad range of topics, and so different people heard, and emphasized, different things. Schaaf sent out her Weekly Briefing email (no link available, sorry) in which she reported on the Orrick hearing with the headline Public Safety Update: OPD Continues Progress. The statement continued: “A federal judge commended OPD for making tremendous progress to build the most progressive, forward-thinking [police] department in the country.” The statement made no mention at all of the NSA, referring only obliquely to “much work to be done.”
In contrast is Oaklandside. Their headline was Federal judge: OPD Instagram case ‘spotlighted a number of troubling problems.’ The Instagram reference was about a former OPD officer, fired in 2018, whose account “spread anti police reform, misogynist, and racist content which was viewed by current OPD officers.” Schaaf herself had earlier referred to “the heat of my wrath” when she learned of the Instagram comments, which she called “ungodly, embarrassing, horrific.”
I cite this instance not to defend or attack the right of cops to make awful comments on social media (although they do have that right). My purpose is more of a media analysis: the difference between how Schaaf portrayed the hearing, as opposed to how Oaklandside played it, is stark and telling. Schaaf was trying to show the “glass half-full” side of the story: the federal judge indeed “commended OPD leadership for making strides to achieve court-mandated reforms during a challenging and violent year…”. But Oaklandside, which has always been mildly anti-cop, or at least has sympathized with police critics, chose to emphasize the Instagram scandal and the continuation of the NSA.
So we’re back to “where you stand depends on where you sit.” From my seat, the NSA has arrived at the end of its shelf life. After nearly two decades, some people are still making big salaries from it. As OPD’s former chief, Anne Kirkpatrick (who was fired by Libby Schaaf), wrote in an op-ed piece two years ago, “Warshaw, the monitor himself, who earns a million dollars a year from Oakland taxpayers, has no incentive to see those reforms succeed”; and this, too, is an example of “where you stand depends on where you sit.” Warshaw is sitting on a very lucrative chair (or throne), and we citizens have every right to question his motives and objectivity.
Warshaw’s continuation of the NSA is built on increasingly petty issues. For example, in his November, 2021 Compliance Update on the NSA, Warshaw found OPD “not in compliance” in completing investigations in a timely manner. Not considered or mentioned in the Update were OPD’s severe staffing problems, which have increased due to City Council underfunding of the department, leading to a shortage of employees in nearly all divisions of OPD.
Was Oaklandside prejudiced in their headline, with its “troubling problems” language? Yes: they chose to highlight something relatively trivial and minimize OPD’s achievements. Was Libby Schaaf overly cheerful about OPD? I don’t think she was. She was proud of her police department, and like a proud mamma, did a little bragging.
My own inclination is to give OPD a break. The department is making fantastic progress in all the NSA areas, even if the public doesn’t hear about it. Hopefully, if the NSA drags on into 2023 (which it appears likely to), Oakland’s new mayor will do whatever she or he has to, to end this foot on the neck of our police.
Steve Heimoff