An Oakland neighborhoods campaign against sideshows has become a fight with the city

Oakland, CALocal News

Residents in Oakland’s San Antonio neighborhood are engaged in a conflict with city officials over the removal of speed bumps meant to prevent sideshows. The Oakland Department of Transportation removed the bumps due to safety concerns, arguing they created hazards for drivers. However, residents, including software engineer Michael Andemeskel, reported that the bumps successfully eliminated sideshows and did not pose risks. Following their removal, sideshows reappeared within a day, prompting residents to voice their dissatisfaction with the city’s actions. Rowan acknowledged the significant issue of sideshows in the area, which attract large crowds and create safety risks.

The city plans to secure funding for permanent infrastructure improvements to address the problem. Residents are demanding that their voices be heard in the decision-making process regarding neighborhood safety. The ongoing struggle highlights the tension between community interventions and city regulations.

Related Articles

Transit funding bill passes California Senate, heads to Gov. Newsom

California lawmakers unanimously approved Senate Bill 105, securing hundreds of millions in funding for transit agencies on the last day of the legislative session. Governor Newsom emphasized the importance of transit for millions of Californians and pledged to align flexible financing tools to support local agencies.

Stopping gun violence in Oakland on the podcast

Gun violence in Oakland is decreasing but remains a significant issue. The city funds civilian-led prevention programs, including the Ceasefire strategy and conflict mediation by violence interrupters, to further reduce incidents. The article also highlights community initiatives and the ongoing challenges of funding these programs.

Oakland official loses restraining order case against activist

An Alameda County judge denied Assistant City Administrator Harold Duffey's request for a restraining order against activist Seneca Scott, ruling he failed to prove threats or harm. Duffey accused Scott of making false claims about bribery and immunity, which he argued damaged his reputation as he seeks employment. Scott plans to pursue a First Amendment lawsuit in response.