EAST BAY CITIZEN. EVERYWHERE SINCE 2009

Tuesday, March 21, 2017

Oakland approves city ban on companies hoping to build Trump's wall

Oakland Councilmember Abel Guillen's
legislation rebuking the building of Trump's
wall was approved Tuesday night.
OAKLAND CITY COUNCIL
If a business specializing on a gamut of services from construction to internet services to public relations wants to help build President's Trump controversial southern border wall, they won't be able to enter into contracts with Oakland, the City Council unanimously declared Tuesday night.

Oakland becomes the second city in the East Bay and nationally to pass such a resolution viewed as a rebuke of Trump's policies against immigrants.

Last week, Berkeley passed its own resolution, while San Francisco introduced its own plan Tuesday afternoon. Los Angeles, San Diego and Watsonville are also reportedly contemplating their own resolutions.

"We know this is spreading," said Oakland Councilmember Abel Guillen, the author of the resolution against Trump's wall. "Stand with us on the right side of history."

The economic boycott of Trump's wall began in Oakland after Guillen introduced his legislation in early February. The resolution was also unanimously approved during last week's Oakland City Council Finance and Management Committee. Council President Larry Reid is a co-author.

Currently, three entities doing business with the city of Oakland have made initial inquiries into bidding for contracts on the wall, according to the East Bay Express. They are Oakland's Shimmick Construction, T.Y. Lin International in San Francisco, and American Steel Studios, also in Oakland.

Costs estimates for construction of a southern border wall covering roughly 1,300 miles range from $10 billion to $25 billion and cover roughly 1,300 miles. It's an expenditure Guillen said would be better spent on building roads and bridges. "Anybody who drives around our city knows we have major infrastructure problems," said Guillen.

Several public speakers noted the wielding of economic power is a major weapon for cities and individuals to protest Trump's wall.

Others advocated for supporting a similar statewide ban, in addition, to support for a bill in the state legislature making California a sanctuary state. "I hope this spreads like wild fire around the state," said Oakland resident Pamela Drake.

2 comments:

  1. By MW:

    While San Francisco's politicians made fashionable the idea that any business so "extremely evil" that it would even consider helping to build the wall should be punished, and now other politicians, and such as for instance Oakland's, are joining the parade, being realistic, in many cities, and such as for instance Oakland, and especially SF, when the decision is made as to which business will be awarded a contract, it is not awarded on the basis of merit or which business comes in with the lowest bid, but instead on the basis of which business is the most politically connected and/or provides the most in election campaign contributions and/or under the table bribes.

    In other words, this issue is merely an additional opportunity for some demagogue, charlatan, and blood sucking leech politicians to pretend that are great humanitarians.

    ReplyDelete
  2. By MW:

    It will be amusing to listen to the professional pathological liars with law licenses from such places as San Francisco and Oakland when they come up with some garbage and nonsense "proving" that it is "legal" for their cities to refuse to do business with any company that submitted a bid on building the wall.

    Of course Oakland's City Attorney is Barbara Parker, a graduate of Harvard Law School, and I dare you to find any institution of "higher learning" in the entire country more thoroughly dedicated than Harvard to producing phonies, parasites, scam artists, thieves, embezzlers, money launderers, self righteous windbags, white collar criminals, and crooked lawyers.

    For instance, and not surprisingly, Matthew Muller, the lawyer who arranged the Vallejo kidnapping, is a Harvard graduate.

    And then there was the graduate of Harvard Law School, and who was also the president of the California State Bar, who attempted to have enacted into law an "improved" form of "free speech" in which it would be illegal to make insulting remarks about lawyers.

    To summarize, a high percentage of lawyers, and in addition to being thieves, scumbags, parasites, scam artists, and white collar criminals, are also "sophisticated," fancy talking, and "highly educated" sub mental retards incapable of comprehending anything other than how to be white collar criminals, and who believe anything they say, and no matter how extremely stupid and totally ridiculous, is true since it was said by them and since they are lawyers. Ask Nadia Lockyer for details.

    ReplyDelete