Oakland likes to dub itself, “The Bright Side of the Bay.” But, recent activities lead me to wonder exactly how bright Oakland’s government officials are. With former Oakland mayor and Attorney General Jerry Brown’s skewed view of the city’s rising crime rate, Oakland continues to be the home of political denial. Oakland City Attorney John Russo seems to have taken a trip down the same river of “denial” by giving himself a good-sized kickback.  

According to The San Francisco Chronicle (December 19, 2007), the City Attorney gave himself a significant raise without permission: “John Russo boosted his $207,000 salary by $28,000 this year by giving himself management leave and vacation pay typically reserved for non-elected department heads and managers, city records show.” 

The rules for vacation pay are simple: “Unelected Oakland department heads are entitled to three weeks or more of vacation a year but can roll over vacation time – or, if unused, cash it in.” On the other hand, the law states that “[e]lected officials such as Russo are usually paid a flat rate on the premise that as long as the voters are happy, the officials can work whatever schedule they please.”

This year’s $28,000 raise did not come in the form of a lump sum Publisher’s Clearinghouse-sized check. Russo was crafty and broke up his reward the same way he did two years before: “[He] has upped his gross pay nearly $12,000 by claiming three weeks’ worth of management pay for leave he didn’t take….” Additionally, he “cashed in 149 hours worth of vacation, or roughly $16,000.”  At least we know that he’s familiar with the all-important financial principle of diversification. 

It took this hefty raise to get the attention of the city council and management committee. They heard “that Russo was cashing in vacation and asserting his right to management leave [and]… hit the roof. They demanded evidence that the council had ever given authority to the city administrator to authorize [those] pay perks for elected officials.”  

Amazingly, Russo “said the council would be better off controlling runaway police overtime than going after his pay.” Russo further demonstrated how far he has strayed from the “bright side” by saying, "It's clear some council members are using this for their own petty, personal agendas." 

Clearly, council members challenging the misuse of public funds is far from petty or personal. But, maybe Russo was referring to his own actions. The very reason separate branches of government exist is to question the actions of another when wrongful use of public funds or misuse of powers occurs.  

If Oakland really wants to be the “Bright Side of the Bay,” it needs to support the city council and management committee in its censure of Russo. Of all officials, the city attorney must be held accountable under the same law he is paid to prosecute. Apparently, the “river of denial” is a long one in Oakland, but it’s time for the ‘Bright Side of the Bay” to become the right side of the bay and apply to the law to elected officials and citizens alike.