Oakland Tribune Outtakes

Notes from Oakland, Berkeley and in between

A baffling story about crime and Oakland nightlife

By awoodall
Wednesday, January 6th, 2010 at 8:34 pm in Night Owl, Oakland nightlife.

The Journal has to be kidding with this article: Oakland Tries to Stir Nightlife by Shaking Up Cabaret Laws
 “This city wants to heat up its nightclub and bar scene by relaxing local cabaret laws that govern its late-night venues. That’s raising safety concerns in a town that already has a reputation for crime,” according to the reporter. What? Since when?  
The reporter does not connect the crime rate to the nightlife except to say that the proposed changes intersect with Oakland’s “spotty safety record” and that “The city’s annual crime rate often places it among California’s most violent towns. While Oakland’s violent crime was down 13% for the first six months of 2009 compared with 2008, reported crime in the city still outpaces other Northern California cities of a similar size, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. For the first six months of 2009, Oakland reported 3,450 incidents of violent crime. In comparison, San Francisco reported 2,931 and Sacramento 2,046.” But the vast majority of those crimes — perhaps all but two or three cases — have NOTHING to do with entertainment. It may be premature to loosen up the cabaret laws but not because of Oaklan’d crime rate. PLLLEASE.

[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]

6 Responses to “A baffling story about crime and Oakland nightlife”

  1. Max Allstadt Says:

    Who the hell was behind this article?

    The violent crime in Oakland is rarely anywhere near the legal nightlife establishments.

    The WSJ also completely failed to acknowledge that most of the relaxations for live entertainment are actually repeals of archaic and puritanical anti-business laws. Not very WSJ of the WSJ.

  2. awoodall Says:

    Exactly. And the council is not likely to take up the issue this month despite what “city officials say” in the article. He didn’t actually say who those “city officials” were or qualify in any way why he didn’t name them. How sensitive could it be that the “city officials” didn’t want to be named?
    Evidently the national papers think stories that defy every standard taught in Journalism 101A are okay to run if they are about Oakland. If this is what we are going to get from the NYT and WSJ with their new “bureaus?”

  3. A baffling story about crime and Oakland nightlife « Oakland Grown.org Blog Says:

    […] more here   Leave a […]

  4. Max Allstadt Says:

    Nope. The council is too busy, yet again. But with a little luck, we’ll see it done before Mardi Gras.

  5. Nancy Nadel Says:

    There were many inaccuracies in the WSJ article. Our office is working with the police on the late night permit concept and there is no opposition on their part. They just wanted some language in case a business is consistently a problem.

    Making policy requires a lot of people’s input so that it has a good chance of passing. It’s not a matter of too busy but a being thorough and inclusive. Please be patient; it’s coming.

  6. David Says:

    even worse, the NYT and WSJ often state bad-rap Oakland info from SF Chronicle personnel and columnists. OUCH!
    The Tribune info is ignored, and they turn to the Contra Costa Times, if anything east-bay based.

Leave a Reply