Connect with us

Featured

Oakland Mayoral Candidates Address Black Issues

Published

on

The contest to become the next mayor of Oakland began to get more serious this week, as 10 candidates for the job faced some tough questions at the 100 Black Men of the Bay Area’s mayoral debate.

< p> Speaking at a packed meeting in Oakland City Hall chambers Wednesday evening, the candidates answered questions from representatives of African American organizations.

An immediate challenge confronting the candidates is to distinguish themselves from each other and from incumbent Jean Quan, who is standing on what she considers to be her accomplishments – creating affording housing, reducing violent crime and bringing economic development to the city.

City Auditor Courtney Ruby was asked a question about what she would do as mayor if there were a recurrence of a situation where Oakland’s Workforce Investment Board (WIB) administrators failed to utilize funds and therefore had to send back $650,000 to the state for job training for unemployed Oaklanders.

“This is absolutely unacceptable in our community – we need to be able to track every dollar that’s coming in,” said Ruby, who at the time did not use her elected position to investigate why the city lost the money.

“The Workforce Investment Board is a total travesty in my opinion,” said civil rights attorney Dan Siegel. “It sucks up too much of the job funds. The administration should be cut,” he said adding that anyone who gives back funds should be fired.

“It’s atrocious, but its goes beyond that. Oakland needs to get some skin in the game,” said Councilmember Libby Schaaf, pointing out that Oakland uses a significant part of its federal Workforce Investment Act funding for overhead rather than kicking in additional money for on-the-ground services.

The panel of questioners included Kimberley Mayfield Lynch of the Oakland Berkeley Chapter of Black Women Organized for Political Action (BWOPA), Merlin Edwards of the Oakland African American Chamber of Commerce, Diane Lewis of 100 Black Women, Pastor Gerald Agee of Pastors of Oakland and Paul Cobb publisher of the Post and El Mundo newspapers.

Civil rights attorney John Burris moderated the debate and asked some questions. Leaders of 100 Black Men of the Bay Area Frank Tucker and Derrick Bulls hosted the forum.

Celebrating the huge Oakland Army Base development that broke ground under her administration, Mayor Quan said, the project is reaching the city’s 50 percent local hiring goal. But finding people to fill these jobs is tough, she said, adding that she has to do outreach to churches to recruit workers.

However, according to the West Oakland Job Resource Center, there is a waiting list of construction workers seeking employment at the Army Base project.

Post publisher Cobb chimed in, saying that Quan was reluctant to advertise her message in the Black and Brown media. All the other candidates then said if they were mayor they would heartily advertise in the Black press to reach the voters who attend the city’s more than 500 Black houses of worship.

With the new development coming into the city, “we have to be sure people are not left behind,” said Quan, citing figures that place unemployment of 18-25 year olds at 35 percent in East Oakland and only 4 percent in Montclair.

Addressing the hot button issue of public safety, the candidates pledged to contribute resources to reduce recidivism and help unemployed and out-of-school youth.

Several candidates pledged to dramatically increase the number of police officers to 800 or more, though they did not say how they would pay for them.

Oakland had 654 sworn police officers as of the beginning of May, and public safety already consumes about 50 percent of the city’s annual budget. Potential new officers are currently attending a Police Academy at a cost of about $4 million.

“The minimum is 900 (officers),” said candidate Joe Tuman,

Bearing down on public safety, Port Commissioner Bryan Parker asked, “Do you feel safer than you did four years ago? People do not feel safe at home, at work and walking round in the streets. “

“We need a safe, educated, economically healthy Oakland,” he said.

Ruby ended her remarks with a call to action. “Imagine what we could do if we had City Hall on our side.”

Quan emphasized the progress that OPD has made during her administration. “Our police force is the most diverse (it has been) and more effective than it has been in more than a decade,” she said.

Candidates also opposed gentrification, comparing Oakland’s potential future to the negative example of the forcing out of African American and Latino residents of San Francisco.

The people who are forced to move out, said Tuman, are the most vulnerable residents with limited “social and economic capital.”

Siegel said he would work with organizations like Urban Strategies Council to use up to 1,200 acres of existing public land to build affordable housing for 5,000 Oakland residents. He also was interrupted with applause when he said he would help establish a minimum wage of $15 an hour and create an Oakland Bank to help with housing affordability issues.

The answer, said Parker, is training and better paying jobs for Oakland residents.

Other candidates who spoke at the forum were Jason Anderson, endorsed by the Green Party; Patrick McCullough; Sam Washington, business and technology solutions strategist; and Larry Lionel Young Jr., past candidate for City Council, District 3, and for mayor in 2010.

Anderson was warmly received over his plans on how to purchase and preserve historic housing in the Black community, such as the Marcus Garvey Building

Publisher Cobb said, “Based upon the candidates’ answers at this debate, I’d estimate that the attendees’ ranked choices would be Siegel, Parker and Schaaf. But Anderson is coming on strong.”

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Community

Gov. Newsom Signs New Affordable Housing Legislation

LOS ANGELES WAVE — The legislation introduces a new “One-Stop-Shop” financing system designed to reduce duplicative reviews and accelerate affordable housing projects. According to the governor’s office, the reforms are expected to lower construction costs by an estimated $60,000 to $70,000 per affordable housing unit, allowing existing state investments to finance more homes.

Published

on

California Governor Gavin Newsom stands with public officials after signing Assembly Bill 179 in Oakland, Calif., on July 13 2026. Assembly Bill 179 modernizes how California finances and delivers affordable housing. (Lloyd B Davis/Bay City News)

Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed new legislation aimed at expanding affordable housing, reducing construction costs and speeding up housing development across California as part of the state’s 2026-27 budget.

Assembly Bill (AB) 179, signed July 17, modernizes California’s affordable housing finance system by streamlining project approvals, expanding funding for housing programs and creating new financing tools for homeowners rebuilding after disasters. State officials said the measure is intended to help increase housing production while strengthening efforts to address the state’s housing affordability and homelessness challenges.

The legislation introduces a new “One-Stop-Shop” financing system designed to reduce duplicative reviews and accelerate affordable housing projects. According to the governor’s office, the reforms are expected to lower construction costs by an estimated $60,000 to $70,000 per affordable housing unit, allowing existing state investments to finance more homes.

“When I took office in 2019, my goal was clear: to reverse decades of inaction on housing and homelessness and ensure there was enough housing and care for people to leave the streets,” Newsom said in a statement. “I’m grateful for the Legislature’s partnership, as together we add to this proven foundation with new laws that cut red tape, expand financing opportunities, and help communities build housing faster.”

The measure also establishes a $100 million Disaster Rebuilding Fund to help homeowners repair or reconstruct homes damaged by disasters. In addition, the budget includes $900 million for another round of Housing, Homelessness Assistance and Prevention grants while adding new accountability requirements for certain cities and counties receiving state funding.

To support affordable housing development, the budget provides $500 million in enhanced state low-income housing tax credits and $200 million for the Multifamily Housing Program to build and preserve affordable rental housing for low-income Californians.

According to the governor’s office, California has made progress in increasing housing production since 2019. Annual residential construction has risen by 59%, from about 70,000 homes in 2018 to approximately 111,000 in 2024. The administration also reported that more than 682,000 homes have been built statewide during that period and that the average time from development application to entitlement has dropped from 160 days to 68 days.

State officials also highlighted recent declines in homelessness, including what they described as the state’s largest reduction in unsheltered homelessness in 16 years.



Continue Reading

#NNPA BlackPress

COMMENTARY: Jim Crow 2.0 at the Pentagon

BLACKPRESSUSA NEWSWIRE — The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

Published

on

Photo: iStockphoto / NNPA.

Pete Hegseth insists that he is restoring “merit” to the United States military. But after months of dismissals, blocked promotions, and ideological purges, the evidence tells a different story. His campaign against so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion” has become something far more dangerous: an assault on equal opportunity that falls with particular force on African Americans, while also targeting women, Latinos, gay Americans, and transgender service members.

The latest example is both troubling and infuriating.

Once again, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has reportedly blocked the promotion of an exceptionally qualified woman—Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt. Bauernschmidt is no ordinary officer. She became the Navy’s first woman to command a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, one of the most demanding leadership assignments in the world. Her career reflects decades of exemplary performance, operational excellence, and leadership under extraordinary pressure.

Yet once again, a distinguished military career appears to have been subordinated to an ideological agenda masquerading as “merit.”

I call BS!

The American people are expected to believe that one extraordinary officer after another suddenly fails to meet some undefined standard of excellence. We are expected to ignore impeccable service records while accepting that political appointees alone possess the wisdom to determine who is worthy of advancement.

The pattern has become impossible to ignore.

General Charles Q. Brown Jr., only the second African American to serve as Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was dismissed despite a career that placed him among the most accomplished military leaders of his generation.

Admiral Lisa Franchetti, the first woman ever to serve as Chief of Naval Operations, was removed despite decades of distinguished command experience.

Reports have documented interventions that blocked or delayed the promotions of Black officers and women selected through the military’s rigorous promotion system.

Now Rear Admiral Amy Bauernschmidt joins the growing list of highly accomplished officers whose careers have been derailed for reasons that have never been persuasively explained.

Where is Congress?

Its silence has become deafening.

Congress has an independent constitutional responsibility to oversee the armed forces. Instead, too many lawmakers have watched silently while one of the nation’s most respected institutions is subjected to ideological litmus tests and political interference.

This is not military reform.  It is testosterone-fueled performative masculinity disguised as a philosophy of military excellence.

The irony is impossible to miss. Hegseth repeatedly invokes “merit,” yet his rhetoric begins with the assumption that Black officers, women, and other historically excluded Americans must somehow justify their achievements in ways that white male officers are rarely required to do.

That is not meritocracy.  It is prejudice wrapped in patriotic language.

No one is asking that anyone be promoted because of race or gender. Americans simply expect that promotions be based on demonstrated competence, leadership, integrity, and service. The officers being targeted have already proven themselves repeatedly under one of the world’s most demanding evaluation systems.

Their records speak for themselves.

The attack on African American military leadership has been especially pernicious.

For generations, Black Americans fought in segregated units, earned decorations while denied equal treatment, and repeatedly demonstrated loyalty to a nation that often failed to extend them full citizenship. They broke barriers not because standards were lowered but because excellence finally overcame institutional discrimination.

Today’s campaign against “diversity” threatens to revive old assumptions under new slogans.

The implication that Black generals and admirals somehow owe their success to affirmative action rather than extraordinary performance echoes some of the ugliest stereotypes of the Jim Crow era. Yesterday’s segregationists claimed Black Americans were inherently less qualified. Today’s culture warriors simply employ more politically acceptable language while inviting the same suspicion about Black achievement.

That is why Hegseth’s campaign increasingly resembles Jim Crow 2.0.

The targets may now wear stars on their shoulders instead of military patches on segregated uniforms, but the underlying message is hauntingly familiar: Black excellence is presumed suspect, while white excellence is presumed earned.

America’s military became the finest fighting force in history because it opened its doors to talent wherever it could be found. It grew stronger after President Truman desegregated the armed forces. It became stronger when women assumed greater command responsibilities. It became stronger when every qualified American was given the opportunity to serve to the fullest extent of their abilities.

Diversity is not a concession.  It is a strategic advantage.

The nation’s adversaries do not fear an American military because it is racially homogeneous. They fear it because it draws upon the talents of more than 340 million Americans whose diverse experiences, perspectives, and abilities make our armed forces unmatched anywhere in the world.

Every politically motivated dismissal of a distinguished officer sends a chilling message throughout the ranks: excellence alone may no longer be enough if you belong to the wrong demographic group.

That weakens morale.  It weakens recruitment.  It weakens retention.

And ultimately, it weakens national security.

Pete Hegseth has every right to pursue military readiness. He has no right to redefine merit in ways that repeatedly cast suspicion upon the accomplishments of Black officers, women, and others who have devoted their lives to defending this nation.

America deserves better.  The men and women who wear the uniform deserve better.  The Constitution deserves better.

And unless Congress finds the courage to exercise meaningful oversight, history may well remember this period not as a restoration of military excellence, but as the moment political ideology attempted to resurrect, in modern form, the old poison of exclusion.

Jim Crow did not strengthen America.  Jim Crow 2.0 will not strengthen America’s military.  It will only diminish it

Wade Henderson
Strategic Advisor
Civil and Human Rights
wade@wadejhenderson.com

Continue Reading

Black History

Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Inc. Celebrates New North Atlantic Regional Director

WASHINGTON INFORMER — As the 36th Regional Director, Dr. Ringgold will serve on the Alpha Kappa Alpha 18-member Board of Directors and will assist in the implementation of policies and programs under the leadership of International President and Chief Executive Officer Charletta Wilson Jacks.

Published

on

Dr. Tonja L. Ringgold, an educator and Life Member of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Incorporated® (AKA), was installed as North Atlantic Regional Director during the organization’s 72nd Biennial International Convention on July 23 in Las Vegas.

Dr. Tonja L. Ringgold, an educator and Life Member of Alpha Kappa Alpha Sorority, Incorporated® (AKA), was installed as North Atlantic Regional Director during the organization’s 72nd Biennial International Convention on July 23 in Las Vegas.

Dr. Ringgold will serve a two-year term overseeing one of the Sorority’s largest and most historic regions. With more than 17,000 members, the Notable North Atlantic is the birthplace of the sorority, which was established on Jan. 15, 1908, at Howard University in Washington, D.C.

“I am excited and humbled by the faith placed in me to lead,” said Dr. Ringgold. “I welcome the opportunity to give back to this illustrious Sisterhood that has poured so much into me.”

The North Atlantic Region, one of the sorority’s 10 regions in the United States and abroad, comprises undergraduate and graduate chapters in Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, eastern New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

As the 36th Regional Director, Dr. Ringgold will serve on the Alpha Kappa Alpha  18-member Board of Directors and will assist in the implementation of policies and programs under the leadership of International President and Chief Executive Officer Charletta Wilson Jacks.

Her previous sorority leadership includes serving as the North Atlantic Regional Representative to the International Program Committee and as North Atlantic Region Program Chairman. She also served as president of Epsilon Omega Chapter in Baltimore, Maryland.

Dr. Ringgold represents four generations of Alpha Kappa Alpha women, all initiated into the Alpha Delta Chapter at Morgan State University. She was initiated in 1982, following in the footsteps of her cousin and Alpha Delta Charter member, Mary Anita Short Wheatley, and her mother, Mary Jane Briscoe Short, a life member of the Sorority with 67 years of service. Her daughter Ashley R. Davy was initiated into the Alpha Delta Chapter in 2011.

A nationally recognized educator, Dr. Ringgold has spent more than three decades in higher education. She is a retired Vice President of Academic Affairs within the Community College system and is a faculty member in the Morgan State University’s Community College Leadership Doctoral Program. She also serves as president and CEO of En-Sight Educational and Management Consultants.

She holds a doctorate degree in education, master’s degrees in Applied Psychology, Management, Business Administration, and a bachelor’s degree in Psychology.

In addition to her Alpha Kappa Alpha service, Dr. Ringgold is president of the Baltimore County Chapter of The Pierians, Incorporated; a member of the National Council on Black American Affairs; and a member of the Coalition of 100 Black Women.

She resides in Parkville, Maryland.



Continue Reading

Subscribe to receive news and updates from the Oakland Post

* indicates required

CHECK OUT THE LATEST ISSUE OF THE OAKLAND POST

ADVERTISEMENT

WORK FROM HOME

Home-based business with potential monthly income of $10K+ per month. A proven training system and website provided to maximize business effectiveness. Perfect job to earn side and primary income. Contact Lynne for more details: Lynne4npusa@gmail.com 800-334-0540

Facebook

Trending

Copyright ©2021 Post News Group, Inc. All Rights Reserved.