Category: Police-Public Safety

Fired Police Chief Kirkpatrick Was “Backsliding” on OPD Reforms, Say Police Accountability Leaders

Anne Kirkpatrick

By Ken Epstein

The seemingly sudden firing of Oakland Police Dept. Chief Anne Kirkpatrick on Feb. 20, 2020, without a publicly stated reason initially left some Oaklanders wondering how and why it happened.

Though some of the news reports at first seemed confused, it has become clear that Mayor Libby Schaaf fired Kirkpatrick, that the Police Commisison concurred and tht there were specific reasons.

“My decision …was extremely personally difficult for me, but I made it because I believe it was in the best interest of Oakland,” said Schaaf in a televised interview, speaking at a Police Academy graduation ceremony on Feb. 21.

In an interview on KPIX after the firing, Commission Chair Regina Jackson said, “The commission voted unanimously to support the mayor’s termination of the chief, without cause … It was the mayor’s decision.”
Jackson said the commission originally talked to the mayor in the week before the decision was made to terminate the chief, “and we worked together on this final determination.”

Under the law, the commission does not have the authority to terminate the chief without telling the public why. Section 604 of the City Charter clearly states: “The Commission may remove the Chief of Police only after adopting a finding or findings of cause.”
While the mayor’s decision has kept the causes from being revealed, observers of the Police Commission’s work say that it has been meeting in closed session for months about its concerns about Kirkpatrick, which are serious and well known.

“There was nothing dramatic or sudden about this decision,” said Rashidah Grinage of the Coalition for Police Accountability. “Anyone paying attention would not have been surprised at this outcome. All of it was factually based and well documented,” including in reports by the federally appointed monitor and statements from plaintiff’s attorneys who are involved in the federal oversight of the Police Department.

Grinage suggested a reason why Schaaf fired Kirkpatrick without cause. “(Schaaf) did an end run around the commission’s decision because it reflects badly on the mayor,” said Grinage. “The record would have shown that her admiration for this chief was badly misplaced.”

The failure of the Oakland Police Department to comply with the reform tasks required by the federal court for 17 years was a major issue as well. When Kirkpatrick took over the helm at OPD, the department had three reforms left to complete. Under her watch, five additional tasks had gone out of compliance.

Civil rights attorney James Chanin, who is involved in monitoring the reforms, told KPIX: “This problem with the backsliding on tasks was very bad and ultimately unacceptable not only to me but more importantly to the Police Commission and the mayor.”
The Police Commission also disagreed with Kirkpatrick’s support of four officers who shot and killed Joshua Pawlik, a 32-year-old homeless man, in March 2018.

Pawlik was found asleep in an alley and was shot when he woke up.

Federal monitor Warshaw said OPD investigators took the officers words at face value, and he recommended more severe punishments for all but one of the officers. He said Kirkpatrick’s assessment of the event was “both disappointing and myopic,” according to a report on KTVU Channel 2.

In another scandal, it was revealed that while OPD was taking credit for a dramatic decline in officers’ use of force in recent years, an internal audit released in August 2019 found that in a number of cases officers failed to report drawing their firearms on someone or tackling them.

OPD’s Office of Inspector General examined 47 encounters in 2018. The report found that officers failed to fill out a use-of-force form when they should have for 17 incidents. Officers pointed a firearm in 12 of those cases and used techniques such as “leg sweeps,” “takedowns” and “control holds” in five cases.

Kirkpatrick, however, blamed the Police Commission for her termination, citing its attitude toward her.
“I was hired prior to the Police Commission’s start-up,” she told NBC-News Bay Area. “I’m not from Oakland. I think that is very important to them. And I’m not a person of color. And I think that has been very important to them.”

Since then, Kirkpatrick has hired high-powered public relations professional Sam Singer, who represented Wedgewood Inc. in the real estate giant’s fight with Moms 4 Housing and is calling for a Department of Justice investigation. She told KPIX that she felt blindsided.
Singer has released a statement on Kirkpatrick’s behalf saying she was fired because she had refused to fix tickets for a police commissioner.

However, observers note that at least four complaints had been filed against the police commissioner with the city’s Public Ethics Commission, which exonerated the commissioner in all the cases.

Said Post Publisher Paul Cobb, “Mayor Schaaf’s spasmodic vindictive firing of Kirkpatrick managed to mislead us again as she misled us on the OPD sex scandal by misdirectingour attention to a few black officers accused of ‘sexting.’ At some point community policing requires us to get along with our police. The Mayor’s missteps are misleading us.”

Chesa Boudin Runs for SF District Attorney


East Bay Civil Rights attorney Pamela Price introduces Chesa Boudin, who is running for district attorney of San Francisco, at a fundraiser in Oakland June 23. Photo by Ken Epstein.

By Ken Epstein

Running for San Francisco District Attorney to challenge the system of mass incar­ceration, SF Deputy Public Defender Chesa Boudin has gained the backing of civil rights attorney Pamela Price and other East Bay progres­sives.

“The system is broken,” Boudin said, speaking at a fun­draiser in Oakland on Sunday, June 23. ” If we can’t do bet­ter in San Francisco, in the Bay Area, where can we do better?”

Hosting the fundraiser were Price; civil rights icon Howard Moore Jr; Fania Davis, a lead­ing national voice on restor­ative justice; Allyssa Victory, Shirley Golub, Royl Roberts and Sheryl Walton. Boudin’s San Francisco endorsements include former Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, Democratic Party Chair David Cam­pos and Supervisors Hillary Ronen, Aaron Peskin and San­dra Fewer.

Boudin has served as Depu­ty Public Defender since 2015, handling over 300 felony cas­es. He is running against Suzy Loftus, Nancy Tung, and Leif Dautch – who hope to suc­ceed eight-year incumbent DA George Gascón, who is not running for reelection. The election takes place on Nov. 5.

A graduate of Yale Law School, Boudin earned a mas­ters’ degree in public policy and is a Rhodes Scholar. His campaign emphasizes that he knows “firsthand the de­structive impacts of mass in­carceration.” He was only 14 months old when his parents were incarcerated for driving the getaway car “in a robbery that tragically took the lives of three men.” His mother served 22 years, and his father may never get out.

Introducing Boudin at the fundraiser, Price said, “When I heard about this young man, I did my research. I was blown away immediately. We have a real warrior among us. We have someone who has over­come obstacles, whose life, profession and whose spirit epitomizes what we need in our district attorney.”

“We know that our criminal justice system has been com­pletely corrupted by injustice and racism,” she continued. “(The system) is upheld and sustained by people who prac­tice it and are committed to its perpetuation… Chesa is in so many ways our greatest hope.”

In his remarks, Boudin called for an end to criminal justice practices that are insti­tutionalized but have clearly failed.

“We know that we have 25 percent of the world’s prison population in the U.S., and 2.2 million people are behind bars on any single day,” he said.

“We’re promised equal jus­tice under the law, but instead we have discriminatory money bail,” he said. “We believe in treating the mentally ill and the drug addicted, but instead this system puts them in solitary confinement.”

Boudin’s program includes creation of a “Wrongful Con­viction Unit,” would decide whether to reopen the investi­gation of certain cases, elimi­nating cash bail, effectively prosecuting police misconduct and refocusing resources to work on serious and violent felonies.

“(Change) has to start with people who understand how profoundly broken the system is, not just because they read it in a book but because they ex­perienced it,” he said.

For more information about Chesa Boudin’s campaign, go to

Published July 3, 2019, courtesy of the Oakland Post

Council Adopts Kaplan’s $3.2 Billion Budget

Bas wins $12 million for Community Land Trust affordable housing fund


Hundreds of supporters of the City Council’s modifications to Mayor Schaaf’s proposed budget filled City Hall during the council’s budget deliberations over the past month. Photo by Ken Epstein.

By Ken Epstein

Voting Tuesday night, the Oakland City Council adopted a two-year, $3.2 billion budget, partially resolving the ongoing political fight with Mayor Libby Schaaf’s administration over how much of the city’s income will be directed toward services for residents  and wages for the city workers who deliver many of those services.

The new budget, named the “Oakland Together” budget, directs $87 million to priorities identified by council members and supported by community members and groups, including the ReFund Coalition, which represents a number of community organizations and city worker unions.

Rebecca Kaplan

Council President Rebecca Kaplan, who had faced attacks from Mayor Libby Schaaf and the media for her leadership in producing the Oakland Together budget, told the Oakland Post she was pleased with what was in the new spending package but that several key issues were still unresolved.

“Even though many, many great items were  included in the budget we passed (Tuesday) night, I’m not celebrating yet because we are still working to finish up some very important final items, specifically, resolving the (funding) situation with our workforce development funding and issues of our own city workers.”

In a statement to the Post, Mayor Schaaf said, “I’m grateful our City Council kept the administration’s proposal as the framework for the budget it unanimously adopted last night. The last-minute augmentations still warrant close review, yet I’m pleased the Council’s unified action will allow us to make unprecedented investments in homelessness and affordable housing and to start a historic road-paving plan on July 1.”

The City Council’s changes in the Schaaf administration budget included:

• A study of Cahoots, a program that would utilize mental  health workers to respond to mental health crises instead of police;

• Remove the Mayor’s proposal to cut parks maintenance workers, which would have primarily impacted parks in flatland neighborhoods;

• Conduct an audit of the Oakland Police Department, which would examine police overtime costs;

• Substantial increase of homeless services;

• Some additional funding for the Private Industry Council and other workforce development;

• East Oakland healthy corner store conversions;

• Public bathrooms;

• Evening hours for permits at Planning and Building so small property owners can get timely approval of projects.

Nikki Fortunato Bas

Councilmember Nikki Fortunato Bas said in a statement that she was pleased the council passed her proposal, the Preservation of Affordable Housing Fund (PAHF), to allocate $12 million to create a municipal fund for community land trusts and limited equity housing cooperatives to take housing off of the speculative market by acquiring and preserving rental properties with 25 or fewer units.

“This fund is a bold investment in a visionary solution that…puts (properties) permanently in the hands of Oaklanders,” said Fortunato Bas, who developed the proposal with local grassroots organizations Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) Action and Oakland Community Land Trust (OakCLT).

She emphasized that the new budget also includes programs to address Oakland’s housing, displacement, and homelessness crises, including hiring a mobile outreach team and full-time administrator focused on homelessness, creating homeless navigation centers, and expanding direct legal and emergency rent assistance for tenants.

“Our longtime neighbors are being pushed out while thousands of luxury housing units are being developed. This budget is a huge systemic opportunity to fix a crisis that is everywhere we look and only getting worse,” said Fortunato Bas. “We can’t solve it by tinkering at the margins, dedicating resources only a fraction the size of the challenges we face.”

Carroll Fife, director of Oakland ACCE and part  of the Refund Oakland Community and Labor Coalition, told the Post that the coalition had realized many of the demands they had sought to achieve this year, “from funds for affordable housing and anti-displacement to additional resources to address the city’s illegal dumping epidemic.”

However, she said “There is a great deal of work to do. One budget cycle will not rectify the years of disinvestment that have impacted our most disenfranchised residents.”

Fife also called on people to support city workers in their fight for a pay raise and the filling of vacant jobs. “Vacancies in Housing and Community Development, Public Works and the Sewer department, to name a few, have direct and immediate repercussions on the entire city,” she said.

Former mayoral candidate Cat Brooks told the Post, “This is the most progressive budget Oakland has ever passed. It’s a big step in the right direction.”

But “It still does not go far enough in terms of divesting some monies from the bloated police budget and redirecting those dollars to critical needs for Oakland that actually keep us safe,” she said.

Published June 28, 2019, courtesy of the Oakland Post

Schaaf Administration Accused of ‘Hamstringing’ Police Commission

Members of the Oakland Police Commission seek the City Council’s help to overcome obstacles that are keeping the commission from getting off the ground, speaking at Tuesday’s council meeting. Shown (L to R): Commission Vice Chair Ginale Harris, Commissioner Jose Dorado and Commission Chair Regina Jackson. Photo by Ken Epstein

By Ken Epstein

Members of the Oakland Police Commission seek the City Council’s help to overcome obstacles that are keeping the commission from getting off the ground, speaking at Tuesday’s council meeting. Shown (L to R): Commission Vice Chair Ginale Harris, Commissioner Jose Dorado and Commission Chair Regina Jackson. Photo by Ken Epstein

Members and supporters of the voter-created Oakland Police Commission went to City Council this week to seek support to end city administrators’ continuous foot dragging and blocking the commission from doing its job to provide independent oversight of the Oakland Police Department.

Reaffirming the need for an independent police commission, Council President Rebecca Kaplan and a majority of council members voted at Tuesday night’s meeting to require the City Administrator to hire commission staff, including an Inspector General, that are independent of the city administration.

City Attorney Barbara Parker and City Administrator Sabrina Landreth, who reports to Mayor Libby Schaaf, are taking the position that the council resolution is illegal, violating the City Charter, and the administration does not have to implement it.

The Police Commission was created in November 2016 by Measure LL, an amendment to the Oakland City Charter that was passed with the backing of 83 percent of the voters. The commission is made up of seven regular and two alternate members, who are all Oakland residents and serve in a volunteer capacity.

“It’s not enough that the community called for this in great, great numbers. But we have been hamstrung in every way possible. Talk about tools, talk about staff, we have none of them,” said Regina Jackson, chair of the commission, speaking at the council meeting.

“The City Administrator didn’t follow the vote or the direction of the City Council. The City Administrator acted as if the vote never happened,” said Jackson.

“The problem is that we’re here to do a job in a volunteer capacity. We’re spending hours upon hours. And everywhere we turn we’re stopped. It’s blatant obstructionism.”

Police Commissioner Edwin Prather asked the council to support the commission so that it could start doing its work, speaking at the April 9 Public Safety Committee meeting, a video of which was played at the council meeting.

“We are behind the eight ball – all the time … Whatever you can do to get us the help we need would be greatly appreciated,” he said.

He said that when he took the position on the commission 16 months ago, “I knew that getting the police department to accept oversight where none previously existed was going to be a difficult thing.

“(But) I don’t think I understood that there were going to be forces in the city that were going to be dilatory and obstructive towards our progress.”

The only position created so far has been an administrative analyst, but that person works in the City Administrator’s office and has been told not to attend Police Commission meetings, according to police commissioners speaking at the council meeting.

The central issue at the meeting was the refusal of City Administrator Landreth and City Attorney Parker to allow the police commission to create a staff job position for an Inspector General who would be supervised by the commission and not by the City Administrator.

Councilmembers voted 5-0 to back a resolution reaffirming a vote last year that required the City Administrator to create the independent Inspector General position that would report to the Police Commission. The resolution was submitted by Councilmembers Kaplan, Noel Gallo and Nikki Fortunato Bas.  Also backing the resolution were Councilmembers Sheng Thao and Loren Taylor. Dan Kalb abstained.

“There is no question that Oakland residents value the necessity of having a civilian police commission, and one of the first steps to ensure an effective oversight body meant hiring an Inspector General whose duties including conducting audits, review policing practices and procedures,” said Kaplan.

Over Landreth’s and Parker’s objections, the council last July passed an ordinance requiring all staff hired for the commission to be independent of the city administration. Such independence would be necessary for the commission to avoid undue influence by the Oakland Police Department chain of command, which includes the City Administrator as the supervisor of the Chief of Police, according to council members.

Landreth and Parker have taken the position that the ordinance violates the part of the City Charter, which says all staff are hired and supervised by the City Administrator.  Because they view the ordinance as illegal, they argue they do not have to implement it.

According to Karen Getman, an outside attorney brought in by City Attorney Parker to give a legal opinion on the matter, “The City Administrator is not bound by the council’s direction in that regard.”

“The City Administrator gets to make her own decision about whether something is or isn’t consistent with the charter. The council cannot tell her she has to violate the charter,” said Getman.

In a memo that the City Attorney distributed to the council, Getman argued that the councilmembers who supported the resolution in favor of the independent police commission could be criminally charged and face “forfeiture of office upon conviction.”

Underscoring the significance of the conflict between the council and the city administration over creating the Inspector General position, Police Commissioner Prather in his remarks to the Public Safety Committee said:

“This is a power grab, plain and simple…It is very clear that the City Administrator does not want this position to report to the Police Commission.”

Kaplan said she hoped the differences over the City Charter could be worked out in order for police commission to move forward. However, she indicated that the council may have to seek outside legal representation.

Published May 3, 2019, courtesy of the Oakland Post

Oakland May Name Road in Honor of Oscar Grant

Community leaders join together to endorse naming road next to the Fruitvale BART station as “Oscar Grant Way.” Shown (L to R) are: BART Board President Bevan Dufty, BART Director Lateefah Simon, Oscar Grant’s aunt Bernice Johnson, Council President Rebecca Kaplan, Oscar Grant’s mother Wanda Johnson and Cephus “Uncle Bobby” Johnson. Photo by Gene Hazzard.


By Post Staff

The Oakland City Coun­cil’s Life Enrichment Com­mittee passed a resolution this week to name the un­named road adjacent to the West side of the Fruitvale BART Station between 33rd to 35th Avenues as “Oscar Grant Way.”

The resolution was in­troduced last year by Coun­cilmember Desley Brooks in one of her last official acts and co-authored by Council President Rebecca Kaplan. At the Tuesday meeting, Councilmembers Loren Taylor and Lynette McElhaney were added as co-sponsors of the resolu­tion, which will be heard at the council meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 22.

It was determined the street was on BART prop­erty, and, BART Board Presi­dent Bevan Dufty and BART Director Lateefah Simon spoke at the committee meeting in fa­vor of the resolution.

“I want to thank Desley Brooks for putting in an effort to put this in today,” said Oscar Grant’s relative, Ceogus “Un­cle Bobby” Cephus Johnson.

“For 10 years I have been saying it is because of the com­munity and political figures and clergy and activists in the streets that prayed with and for us and speaking on behalf of us for Oscar’s name to never be forgotten. Thank you. We will do what we’ve got to do to name this street,” he said.

Said Oscar Grant’s mother Wanda Johnson, “I would first like to thank God and to the BART Directors for carrying this forward. I am so grateful today that you all see that Os­car’s life lost was not in vain.”

“His death has sparked a movement. One of the atone­ments is for BART to name the street after my son, Oscar Grant. Thank you for seeing this injustice and not ignoring it but acting,” she said.

Council President Kaplan said, “We are here…to honor a life that was tragically cut short at the Fruitvale BART station. The activism of the family and the community sparked an international move­ment. We need to honor the life of Oscar Grant, the activism his death has sparked, and we need to continue to fight for a world where Black men and boys are not targets of these types of killings.”

Said BART Board President Dufty: “I want to thank Oscar’s mother for working with me. I want to apologize to the com­munity, and to take account­ability for the delays that have occurred in naming this road. I am 100 percent in support and am committed to working with my colleague Lateefah Simon to correct this at the upcoming BART Board meeting on Feb. 14.”

In her remarks, Simon said, “We are 10 years too late. I apologize to the community. The BART Board will move mountains to name this street after Oscar Grant. We will or­ganize like Oscar’s mother has organized internationally. We will do this. We have no choice.”

Oscar Grant III was a 22-year-old African-American man who was fatally shot in the early morning hours of New Year’s Day 2009 by BART Po­lice Officer Johannes Mehserle in Oakland.

Responding to reports of a fight on a crowded Bay Area Rapid Transit train returning from San Francisco, BART Police officers detained Grant and several other passengers on the platform at the Fruitvale BART Station. Two officers, including Mehserle, forced the unarmed Grant to lie face down on the platform.

Mehserle drew his pistol and shot Grant in the back. Grant was rushed to Highland Hospi­tal in Oakland and pronounced dead later that day.

The events were captured on multiple official and pri­vate digital video and private­ly-owned cell phone cameras and went viral. Huge protests against police actions took place in the following days.

Published January 18, 2019, courtesy of the Oakland Post

Displaced Residents Seek Compensation After City Evicts Them, Tows Their RVs

Dayton Andrews, Kelly Thompson and Gary Rosenquist speak about the mass towing at a press conference for the United Front Against Displacement outside the County of Alameda Administrative Building at noon on Dec. 20.

By Zack Haber

At 8 a.m., Oct. 23, Auto Plus Towing & Auto Body and the Oakland Police De­partment collaborated to tow over 15 vehicles near 20th and Willow streets in West Oakland.

The vehicles were mostly homes to long-term Oakland residents who could no lon­ger afford to pay rent.

Emma Chum, an immi­grant from Guatemala who has lived in Oakland for 16 years, says that as police of­ficers towed her RV, “They were laughing like it was funny.”

Chum’s RV had a kitch­en, bed, solar power and a closet. She now lives in a tent and has trouble sleep­ing. Though she works six days a week at a beauty sup­ply store, she hasn’t found a room in Oakland she can af­ford to rent.

Chum’s missing papers relating to citizenship and employment have served as an additional roadblock to her securing indoor housing. Since these papers were in her vehicle when it got towed, she lost them.

Kelly Thompson and Gary Rosenquist, two Vietnam veterans who have lived in Oakland for decades, insist that the Police Department worked strategically to seize their vehicles and intimidate them. Both claim that after police towed their vehicles, officers tracked them down later in the day and told them to “get out of Oakland.”

Though police had given residents at 20th and Willow streets a three-day eviction notice, Rosenquist claims that in the past police would allow vehicular residents time to move during the day of an eviction. This time, there was no leniency. If a vehicle couldn’t be moved immediately, it was towed.

“It was heart-wrenching. They were acting like we were second-class people,” said Rosenquist.

Thompson thinks he was targeted. “They know my truck and what I’ve done in the past so they snagged mine first,” he said. Though his truck ran, it was past registration and he arrived a few minutes too late to move it. It was towed.

In the past, Thompson had used his truck to tow displaced people’s ve­hicles to new locations so that they could avoid hav­ing them seized by towing companies. He had planned to help people on the morn­ing of Oct. 23, but with his truck gone, his neighbors who couldn’t immediately start their vehicles were left helpless.

Thompson and Rosen­quist feel the City of Oakland has treated them unjustly and have connected with hous­ing activists like Dayton Andrews to form the United Front Against Displacement (UFAD).

UFAD meets at Raimondi Park every Friday at 4:30 p.m. and works to stop evic­tions, house all Bay Area res­idents, and hold city agen­cies financially accountable to the people they displace.

In the days immediately following Oct. 23, Thomp­son, Rosenquist, Andrews and other UFAD members attempted to talk with the city government about the mass towing and were di­rected to Michael Hunt, an aide to Mayor Libby Schaaf.

Hunt told them the police shouldn’t have towed their vehicles and that the city would help to retrieve them.

But the former 20th and Willow streets residents claim the city hasn’t helped as police have informed them that their vehicles would not be returned.

Hunt hasn’t responded to an Oakland Post email ask­ing him to comment.

The former residents agree with Andrews, who says “the City of Oakland owes people compensation for their lost property, their lost vehicles and ultimately should be held accountable for not pro­ducing spaces in Oakland for people to live in.”

Published January 2, 2019, courtesy of the Oakland Post


Council Rushes to Approve Five-Year Police Agreement

APTP activist James Burch tells City Council to stop putting the Oakland Police Officers Association’s needs above those of the community at Tuesday’s meeting. Photo by Zack Haber.

Zack Haber

 At a meeting that lasted over eight hours, continuing from Tuesday evening until 2 a.m. Wednesday morning, community members and activists from the Anti Police-Terror Project, the Coalition for Police Accountability, Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment (ACCE) and the First Congregational Church of Oakland criticized a proposed new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Oakland and the Oakland Police Officers Association.

The new MOU grants officers a 12.5 percent salary increase spread over five years.

All council members voted in favor of the MOU except Rebecca Kaplan, who voted no. Noel Gallo abstained, and Desley Brooks was absent.

James Burch, an activist with the Anti Police-Terror Project, wanted the council to delay the vote to seek input from the community.

“In crafting a new MOU, the City Council is more concerned with their relationship with the Oakland Police Officers Association than they are with the wants and needs of the people of Oakland,” he said.

Burch said the timing of the vote shows the council does not respect the will of Oakland residents. The current OPOA agreement does not expire for over six months, leaving plenty of time to seek the views of the police commission and other city residents.

By settling the agreement early, the council and the administration locked up wages and rules governing the police before recently elected City Councilmembers Nikki Fortunato Bas, Loren Taylor and Sheng Thao take office.

“Nikki Fortunato Bas was voted in over Abel Gullén because Gullén was being held accountable for his failure to work with community over the last several years,” Burch said. “Bas has promised to work with community, and I believe her.” But Oakland’s newly elected council members will not have a say in Oakland’s MOU with its police union.

Rashidah Grinage, a member of the Coalition for Police Accountability, was also concerned with the rush to vote on the agreement. “The whole thing was a stealth attack,” Grinage said. “We had no advance knowledge that this was on the agenda, so we had no time to organize around it.”

Grinage said parts of the MOU were overlooked like the overtime budget, how officers are promoted and oversight on police discipline is handled. She said the newly elected Council members might have wanted to work with Oakland residents to change the language in the MOU before voting on it.

Published December 15 2018, courtesy of the Oakland Post

City Awards Police 12.5 Percent Raise, Bypassing Public Input

Oakland police

By Ken Epstein

The Oakland City Council, bypassing opportunities for public input, rushed this week to approve a Schaaf administration agreement with the Oakland Police Officers Association (OPOA) that gives officers a 12.5 percent raise over the next five years and locks in controversial provisions that reform advocates say are hampering efforts to strengthen police accountability.

The only council member to vote against the new Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with OPOA was Rebecca Kaplan. Councilmember Desley Brooks did not attend the Tuesday night meeting.

The second and final vote on the approval of the MOU was scheduled for the Dec. 11 City Council meeting.

The agreement has already been ratified by OPOA members.

A huge windfall for the city, the agreement drastically reduces medical benefits for police retirees, saving the city an estimated $123 million over the life of the contract as much as $350 million over 25 years, according to city officials.

The average 2.5 percent a year raise does not start until 2020 and is not likely to keep up with the rate of inflation.

The agreement perpetuates other provisions of the current MOU, include those that establish police disciplinary procedures and grants the OPOA the right to a fairly unlimited right to “meet and confer” over policy changes affecting public safety, which has held up reforms for as long as a year on several occasions.

As a result, new City Council members who will be seated in January will not have an opportunity to review the MOU’s provisions during their four-year terms.

“Nobody knew they were negotiating,” said Rashidah Grinage of the Oakland Police Accountability Coalition, pointing out that the current MOU does not expire for another seven months and the firefighters are now in their second year of working without a contract.

The administration sent the agreement directly to the council, placing it on the consent calendar where it might receive minimal notice, bypassing public discussion at the Public Safety Committee and not even sending the proposal to the Rules and Legislation Committee for scheduling on a council agenda.

Nor was the Police Commission given an opportunity to express its opinion on the new MOU.

“This was definitely underhanded and intentional,” said Grinage. She noted the irony of giving the police a raise on the same day that an irate federal judge chastised the city and OPD for turning in reports that misrepresent the use of force and other requirements of the court-supervised Negotiated Settlement Agreement (NSA).

After 15 years, the city has not been able to fully comply with the NSA. In Tuesday’s court hearing, the judge added back to the noncompliant list three requirements that had formerly been listed as compliant.

“After all this time, they are going backwards,” said Grinage.

According to Grinage, members of the Coalition for Police Accountability met with Mayor Schaaf on Oct. 11, where the mayor said she was willing to discuss modifying the MOU, including a provision that says in disciplinary hearings an officer’s history of misbehavior can only be examined going back a maximum of five years.

However, Mayor Schaaf ignored what she said at that meeting when her administration sent the new MOU to the council. The representative of the City Attorney Barbara Parker’s office who attended Tuesday’s council meeting said the MOU was a labor agreement, and therefore the Police Commission has no right to express an opinion on it.

A local labor leader in the city told the Post why he thought the OPOA might be willing to settle for contract with only a modest raise and a huge cut in medical benefits.

“Everyone is expecting a recession in 2020.” He said. “Also making it a five-year deal means that they don’t have to deal with the incoming board where they think they won’t have a majority anymore.”

In addition, he said, the recent issues raised by the federal may have encouraged the OPOA to move quickly to settle the MOU, he said.

By the Oakland Post’s deadline, Mayor Schaaf did not respond to a request for comment.

Published November 28, 2018, courtesy of the Oakland Post

Oakland Race & Equity Dept. Report Calls for End to Systemic Racial Disparities

Affordable housing protest at Oakland City Hall

City Councilmembers  this week took the “first step” to implement the “2018 Oakland Equity Indicators Report,” a recent study that provides data on racial disparities experienced by African Americans and Latinos in nearly all areas of life in Oakland, including housing, health, public safety and education.

Darlene Flynn

The report, a joint project of the Resilient Oakland Office and the city’s Department of Race and Equity, was released in July. The plan now calls for the council and city departments to begin to examine policies and programs “through intentional focus on race and ethnic disparities and their root causes,” said Darlene Flynn, director of the Department of Race & Equity, speaking at Tuesday’s meeting of the council’s Life Enrichment Committee.

The report was funded by a $140,000 grant from the Rockefeller Foundation,

The ultimate goal is “fairness,” which means that “identity—such as race, ethnicity, gender, age, disability, sexual orientation or expression—has no detrimental effect on the distribution of resources, opportunities and outcomes for our city’s residents,” according to the report to the council submitted by Flynn.

The report will be updated each year, “measuring how much we have changed (in terms of) what our outcomes are,” because “if we keep doing things the same way we are doing them, we will keep getting the same outcomes,” Flynn said.

The report looked at Oaklanders’ quality of life based on 72 indicators in six areas: economy, education, public health, housing, public safety and neighborhood and civic life.

On a scale of 1 to 100, the report gave the city an overall average score of 33.5. The number 1 represents the highest possible inequity, while 100 represents the highest possible equity.

“This is not good news. It should also not be surprising news for people who are paying to attention to how people’s lives are going in (Oakland),” Flynn said.

“This (report) shows that race does matter. Every area that we looked showed some level of disparity by race and usually quite a bit of disparity,” she said.
One indicator, “Oakland Poverty Rate by Race/Ethnicity,” shows that 26.1 percent of African Americans live at or below the poverty line, while only 8.4 percent of whites are classified as poor.

In other words, “African Americans are three times more likely to live in poverty than whites,” she said.

In addition, one of five Latinos, 21.9 percent, live in poverty. Overall, the poverty rate in Oakland is 17 percent.

This pattern can be seen in nearly all of the 72 indicators: African Americans are the most “negatively impacted,” followed by Latinos, she said.

On 12 indicators, the city received a 1.0, the lowest possible score:

  • Education – student suspensions
  • Education – teaching staff representative of the student body
  • Public Health – child asthma emergency department visits
  • Public Health – substance abuse emergency department visits
  • Housing – homelessness
  • Public safety – adult felony arrests
  • Public safety – jail incarceration
  • Public safety – prison incarceration,
  • Public safety – use of force
  • Public safety – homicides
  • Public safety – juvenile felony arrests
  • Neighborhood and Civil Life – pedestrian safety

The five highest scoring indicators:

  • Equal Access Accommodations (language access) – 100
  • Adopt-a-Drain – 80
  • Homeownership with mortgage – 78
  • Life expectancy – 77
  • Labor force participation – 72
  • Participation in workforce development – 72

A high score does not necessarily mean that an outcome is good, but that is it more equal across different groups of residents.

Flynn, who has headed the Department of Race and Equity since it was formed two years ago through the efforts of Councilmember Desley Brooks, was cautiously optimistic about what the work around the new equity report can achieve.

“This is just the first step, not the end of the story,” said Flynn, pointing out that government played a role in creating the systemic inequities that exist, and it can play a role in reversing them. “I have some level of optimism that with public will, with leadership support, with changes in strategy, we can make a difference,” she said. “By leading with race, we can make a difference.”

To read the report, go to

Published November 15, 2018, courtesy of the Oakland Post

Opinion: Schaaf’s Leadership of OPD Compels Support of Cat Brooks for Mayor

Cat Brooks (right) speaks at mayoral debate.

By Dan Siegel

Dan Siegel

Mayor Libby Schaaf owns the multiple failings of the Oakland Police Department and must be held accountable for them. Her lack of leadership on the reforms needed in the OPD is one of the primary reasons I support Cat Brooks for Oakland Mayor.

OPD is the City’s largest, most expensive, and arguably most important department. It spends almost half of the City’s General Fund, twice as much as the Fire Department.

The Oakland Police Department has been under the supervision of the federal court since January 22, 2003 because of the City’s failure to remedy systemic police misconduct, including abusing members of the public and racial profiling during traffic stops.

Mayor Schaaf promised during the 2014 campaign that she would meet the court’s demands and end federal oversight but has failed to so. In his September 2018 report, the Court Monitor concluded that OPD’s claims of decreased use of force were flawed because of the Department’s failure to accurately document incidents where officers used force.

On September 25, 2015, Officer Brendan O’Brien committed suicide, leading to the investigation of the sexual exploitation by Oakland and other law enforcement officers of a minor known as Celeste Guap (Jasmine Abuslin). OPD officials downplayed the sexual abuse claims and failed to investigate them properly.

Mayor Schaaf claims that she was not advised about the abuse investigation until March 22, 2016, but her statement can be questioned in light of the routine practice of OPD Internal Affairs officials to advise the City Administrator – and through her the mayor – of much less serious claims of police misconduct.

Months later the mayor finally professed outrage at the officers’ actions. Worse still, Schaaf’s chosen Chief, Anne Kirpatrick, has promoted some of the key administrators found to have covered up the sex abuse scandal.

Schaaf’s pattern of hiding OPD problems continues. Last weekend, after the San Francisco Chronicle exposed OPD’s practice of asking police officer applicants if they had been victims of sexual abuse, Schaaf again expressed surprised outrage and ordered that the practice end.

But complaints about the improper questioning of applicants were raised at City Council meetings months ago. Schaaf is either asleep at the wheel or indifferent to OPD problems until they become public

OPD’s one area of improvement has been the reduction of civilian killings since 2015. Citizen outrage, organized and led by Cat Brooks’ Anti Police Terror Project, deserves more credit for stopping trigger happy officers than any changes made by Mayor Schaaf.

Published October 31, 2018